Lanny Davis: Rudy Must Be Replaced Because He’s Now Going To Be a Fact Witness

EXCERPT:

WALLACE: Joe, given the fact that this payment to Stormy Daniels was finalized 11 days before the election, isn’t it hard to argue that this wasn’t a campaign expenditure?

DIGENOVA: No, I don’t think it is. In fact, the law on this is pretty clear, that if it’s a purely personal matter, which this clearly has to be, it doesn’t matter what its relationship was to the timetable in a campaign. But let me just say as well to something Lanny said, a lawyer cannot waive attorney-client privilege. Only the client can waive the attorney-client privilege.

So, whatever Rudy may have said, he didn’t waive the attorney-client privilege for the president of the United States. But by that, I’m going to say —

WALLACE: Wait, let me ask, is he right?

DAVIS: He’s absolutely right. The client owns the privilege, but because Rudy Giuliani mentioned a conversation, he could be subpoenaed and forced to testify and he’s a fact witness and has to recuse himself. In fact, the only good news for Donald Trump is that by his words on television, I think Rudy Giuliani has to be replaced, because he is now going to be a fact witness and has to respond to a subpoena for what he said to the president on issue of factual dispute as to what the motive was of the loan.

WALLACE: Do you think Rudy Giuliani already is going to have to be replaced?

DAVIS: I think there’s at least an argument that by speaking publicly about a conversation with the president, he becomes a fact witness on a crucial question, was the personal loan that now President Trump admits that he gave to Michael Cohen, and was reimbursing Michael Cohen, is a word that Rudy Giuliani used, that’s a fact that needs to be questioned in front of a grand jury on the issue of whether it was a political —