Hunter Biden Threatens to Make Robert Costello’s Dalliance with Rudy Giuliani Even More Costly

Last week, Robert Costello’s law firm sued Rudy Giuliani — as they earlier successfully sued Steve Bannon for a far smaller amount earlier this year — for stiffing them on payments amounting to almost $1.4 million.

In a statement provided by a spokesman, Mr. Giuliani lashed out at Mr. Costello and the lawsuit, portraying it as an overly aggressive attempt to collect.

“I can’t express how personally hurt I am by what Bob Costello has done,” Mr. Giuliani said. “It’s a real shame when lawyers do things like this, and all I will say is that their bill is way in excess to anything approaching legitimate fees.”

Reached by phone, Mr. Costello initially declined to comment but fired back after hearing Mr. Giuliani’s statement, asking, “How can he take a personal affront when he owes my firm nearly $1.4 million?”

Mr. Costello also disputed the claim that the bills were excessive, saying that he billed his regular hourly rate and that Mr. Giuliani never complained about the cost until Davidoff Hutcher & Citron warned that it had planned to sue.

“He’s a little late to that party,” Mr. Costello said, adding, “it’s too late for that frivolous claim as he will find out in court.”

Mr. Giuliani, he said, “took the low road here because he is feeling desperate.”

In all, Mr. Costello’s firm has billed Mr. Giuliani $1,574,196, according to the lawsuit. Of that, Mr. Giuliani has paid only $214,000, the lawsuit said, most recently handing over $10,000 last week.

Rudy doesn’t have the money to pay Costello. This lawsuit can only serve to pressure Rudy to get Trump to pay up, something he has thus far refused to do.

In any case, Costello’s costs for enabling Rudy’s shenanigans may well grow, now that Hunter Biden has sued both of them for hacking his personal data.

The lawsuit largely parallels the lawsuit filed earlier against Garrett Ziegler — though the evidence that first Costello and then Rudy hacked the data is based on a different access claim. Hunter alleges (with merit) that Ziegler unlawfully accessed encrypted data that had been saved to Hunter’s iTunes account.

In this suit, the hacking claim appears to be two-fold: first, Costello’s demonstration to Olivia Nuzzi of how he accessed Hunter’s email account using Hunter’s own credentials.

24. Plaintiff has discovered (and is continuing to discover) facts concerning Defendants’ hacking activities and the damages being caused by those activities through Defendants’ public statements in 2022 and 2023. During one interview, which was published on or about September 12, 2022, Defendant Costello demonstrated for a reporter precisely how Defendants had gone about illegally accessing, tampering with, manipulating and altering Plaintiff’s data:

“Sitting at a desk in the living room of his home in Manhasset, [Defendant Costello], who was dressed for golf, booted up his computer. ‘How do I do this again?’ he asked himself, as a login window popped up with [Plaintiff’s] username . . .”3

By booting up and logging into an “external drive” containing Plaintiff’s data and using Plaintiff’s username to gain access Plaintiff’s data, Defendant Costello unlawfully accessed, tampered with and manipulated Plaintiff’s data in violation of federal and state law. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants used similar means to unlawfully access Plaintiff’s data many times over many months and that their illegal hacking activities are continuing to this day.

3 Andrew Rice & Olivia Nuzzi, The Sordid Saga of Hunter Biden’s Laptop, N.Y. MAG. (Sept. 12, 2022), investigation.html.

I’ve been told that because of the way the data was stored, booting the hard drive up would update emails onto the hard drive, including any emails altered during the November 2019 Burisma hack. But using Hunter’s credentials — if that’s what Costello did — would be a CFAA violation unto itself.

Additionally, the complaint notes that both Costello and Rudy boasted about accessing Hunter’s camera roll.

26. For example, Defendant Costello has stated publicly that, after initially accessing the data, he “scrolled through the laptop’s [i.e., hard drive’s] email inbox” containing Plaintiff’s data reflecting thousands of emails, bank statements and other financial documents. Defendant Costello also has admitted publicly that he accessed and reviewed Plaintiff’s data reflecting what he claimed to be “the laptop’s photo roll,” including personal photos that, according to Defendant Costello himself, “made [him] feel like a voyeur” when he accessed and reviewed them.


31. By way of further example, in an episode of the podcast “Louder with Crowder” in late 2022, Defendant Giuliani held up a laptop computer on air and announced: “This is the hard drive they’re on,” referring to data (e.g., photographs) he apparently carries around with him on a daily basis, presumably so that he can continuously access, tamper with and manipulate the data whenever and wherever he desires.

Hunter’s team may know that these photos would not have been available without a password.

Note, the complaint makes some interesting allegations about John Paul Mac Isaac’s own actions; I would be unsurprised if Hunter sues him next.

23. Following these communications, Mac Isaac apparently sent via FedEx a copy of the data he claimed to have obtained from Plaintiff to Defendant Costello’s personal residence in New York on an “external drive.” Once the data was received by Defendants, Defendants repeatedly “booted up” the drive; they repeatedly accessed Plaintiff’s account to gain access to the drive; and they proceeded to tamper with, manipulate, alter, damage and create “bootable copies” of Plaintiff’s data over a period of many months, if not years.

2. Plaintiff’s investigation indicates that the data Defendant Costello initially received from Mac Isaac was incomplete, was not forensically preserved, and that it had been altered and tampered with before Mac Issac delivered it to Defendant Costello; Defendant Costello then engaged in forensically unsound hacking activities of his own that caused further alterations and additional damage to the data he had received. Discovery is needed to determine exactly what data of Plaintiff Defendants received, when they received it, and the extent to which it was altered, manipulated and damaged both before and after receipt.

Mac Isaac admits in his book that the copy he made of the laptop he received was not a forensic copy.

As with Costello’s suit, the lawsuit against Rudy is drilling a dry hole. Rudy is broke, and even if Hunter prevailed, he’d be at the back of a long line of creditors at some time Rudy declares bankruptcy.

But the discovery is something else.

So, too, is Costello’s role in all that, which he may or may not be claiming is part of attorney-client privileged activities, a claim that would he impossible to sustain in light of the Nuzzi profile.

And, in the shorter term, these lawsuits provide basis to claim that DE USAO is pursuing Hunter for misdemeanor tax charges, while ignoring the way the President’s son was and continues to be serially hacked by his father’s opponents.

Update: Politico includes this quote in their report on the lawsuit.

Giuliani and his allies have long argued that the purported laptop was fair game because it was allegedly abandoned. But at the heart of the lawsuit is the argument that regardless of where any piece of computer hardware was located, Hunter Biden’s data still belongs to him alone. A member of his legal team, granted anonymity to discuss his newly aggressive legal strategy, put it this way: “If you take your coat to the dry cleaner and leave your wallet in it, and you forget to pick it up, it doesn’t mean the dry cleaner gets the wallet and all your money. It’s just common sense.”

The member of his legal team hinted that more litigation could follow.

“Everyone involved in stealing and manipulating Hunter’s data should be hearing footsteps right about now,” that person said.

I don’t think people yet have considered the full scope of people this might include.

72 replies
    • Dmbeaster says:

      He was a fool to involve himself in the caper to begin with, so he may be enough of a fool to fail to take an opportunity to get out of it. Or he is just in too deep. He did sue Hunter first, only to be hit with what looks like a deadly counterclaim.

    • freebird says:

      In New York State, privacy laws would have prevented Mac Isaac from disseminating Biden’s personal information without his permission. When I purchased a new computer at Best Buy and asked about data transfer privacy they said that State laws prohibit them from looking into individual files.

      By the way, I had a tax return on my hard drive on someone who was indicted by the FBI. After that, l only saved sensitive stuff to a usb.

  1. Drew in Bronx says:

    This is a bit of a scorched earth strategy by Abbe Lowell, which Trumpworld could have avoided by sticking with the agreement that Hunter Biden orginally thought he had. It’s probably unlikely that the people Hunter is suing are going to be criminally charged, but it increases the likelihood that there won’t be a further felony indictment against him.

    • Peterr says:

      A “scorched earth strategy” is when I burn my fields, so that my invading enemy can’t use my crops to feed his army. “If I can’t feed my people with these crops, I sure as hell don’t want my enemy to feed his people with them.” From the enemy’s point of view, it’s better (goes the theory) to steal food from your enemy than to have to use what you packed into a huge baggage train in order to feed your army yourself.

      In this case, Lowell isn’t burning Hunter’s crops, but Rudy’s baggage train.

      • Ken Z says:

        Nope, scorched earth can also be used offensively if you don’t plan on holding territory. See Sherman’s March to the Sea where the intent was to destroy the Confederate ability to sustain the war.

        [Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • greengiant says:

      Hunter’s lawyers were already complaining to the DOJ about the leaks and the hacking earlier this year before the plea deal was blown up by the now special consul.
      They also sent letters to 11 individuals warning them not to delete anything to do with their mishandling of Hunter Biden’s data.
      This was already in play though even more so after the House hearings.

  2. David in NYC says:

    It can’t be said often enough. No one who follows the minimal fact checking standards of a high school newspaper would consider John Mac Isaac’s story, or the hard drive he disseminated, publishable.

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      And yet some version of this provided the basis of WaPo coverage rather breathlessly suggesting a cover-up–coverage that some of us at the time raised these exact questions about: how could the “laptop” as referenced in those articles be authenticated? WaPo included a couple computer forensic experts but treated their doubts as generic, granting authority to the “whistle blowers” who claimed the “laptop” contained explosive revelations.

      That coverage offended me. It insulted my intelligence; thank God I have EW to come to for a deeper and much more informed dive. Because of all that, I say more power to Abbe Lowell. Neither he nor Hunter Biden needs it, but this crap just shouldn’t stand. At least not forever.

  3. SaltinWound says:

    This seems worse than the dry cleaner taking money from a wallet left in an abandoned coat. It’s more like using the credit cards.

      • BirdGardener says:

        Using the credit cards themselves (say, for illegal forms of porn) but claiming the card-owner was the one who made their purchases, and should be prosecuted and persecuted for those purchases?—I cannot remember the ins-and-outs of this, so I don’t know if the analogy will extend that far.

    • jdmckay8 says:

      As with so many things, it is a little more complicated than that.

      How do you hack a wallet? Or insert data (or ???) that was not Hunter’s to begin with, into a wallet to make it more incriminating?

      I “get” what you are trying to say, but it doesn’t fit well with all the circumstances surrounding this saga. There are more then a few sloppy events along the way that (at least to me) points more to a Project Veritas type (eg. similar) fly-by-night operation than Russian ops. But now that I think about it, there’s not that big a difference between the 2 anymore.

      What’s the world coming to? /g-s

      I’m most interested to see if Hunter’s legal team has direct evidence (like IP addresses at minimum) of the hackers who inserted fake data. And it sure seems like there were way too many copied HD’s floating around to people who shouldn’t have had it.

      • SaltinWound says:

        All I said is it’s more like using credit cards than taking cash. You’re not disagreeing with that, are you?

        • jdmckay8 says:

          Not disagreeing, and not trying to be contrary either.

          Especially w/Marcy’s latest posts, there is abundant evidence of wrongdoing, my multiple people, in multiple ways. This latest Lowell filing starts to shed some light making it easier to separate fact from fiction. So that was just my effort to keep focus on what we know, what it would be illuminating to know, and make more order of things.

          Maybe about 1/2 into Trump’s presidency, his bull shit was getting almost saturating and there was little to counter it in political realm or media. I made a conscious decision to stop using metaphors in thinking/talking about all that, because for me it seemed that was a way to not get to the heart of things. Doing that hasn’t change anything out there, but has furthered clarity in my own mind.

      • Just Some Guy says:

        “There are more then a few sloppy events along the way that (at least to me) points more to a Project Veritas type (eg. similar) fly-by-night operation than Russian ops. But now that I think about it, there’s not that big a difference between the 2 anymore.”

        As the little girl says in the Ortega commercial, “why not both?”

        I think there’s good reason to believe that Project Veritas and other right-wing yet ostensibly “American”-staffed “operations” probably have ties to foreign intelligence services.

    • ItTollsForYou says:

      I think a more pertinent analogy would be taking the wallet from the unclaimed coat and stealing that person’s identity.

  4. RitaRita says:

    The wallet with credit cards analogy in a suit forgotten at the launderer’s is great.

    As alleged, it is identity theft and misappropriation of personal data, if not worse.

    Anyone victimized by hackers should applaud this lawsuit, whether or not Giuliani has $$.

    • Upisdown says:

      Taking the analogy a step further: If you left your house key in some dry cleaning, the cleaners would not be allowed to make copies of the key and give it to people who’d go into your house and take all of your stuff including your personal file cabinets and photo albums.

      That is pretty similar to what Mac Isaac did.

    • LeeNLP says:

      Regardless of whether Rudy has $$, this case could turn out be an embarrassment of riches of several distinct types for those seeking justice.

      [Welcome back to emptywheel. THIRD REQUEST: Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  5. BobBobCon says:

    All of these details are really interesting, and they illustrate how badly the establishment press is failing even their less exalted goals.

    Largely parroting right wing accusations makes the story less compelling for their audiences. Turning it into a real drama with legitimate counterattacks and having accusers scrambling and sputtering is far better for engagement than a stodgy stage show.

    But for the most part the establishment press has simply outsourced to the right what even counts as a story. Their source networks have become pitifully constricted, and their own ability to judge what makes a story interesting has completely atrophied.

    • sportingdog says:

      Re less compelling – the story as told my MSM is quite compelling as it presumes that most readers with laptops and phones will understand the privacy issues vis a vis personal data which exists on our devices and in our cloud accounts.
      By that reading the data on Hunters devices are Truth and Inviolate.
      Trying to show the *actual* ways in which cloud accounts can be compromised risks the audience glossing over.

      • RipNoLonger says:

        I’m sure you wouldn’t be surprised by how many intelligent people I know that think they don’t really have any sensitive information on their personal computers/phones/etc. I’ve walked several through items such as contact lists, emails with business/financial attachments, photos (of course). They widen their eyes a bit but still think they are safe.

        And backups? Hah!

      • Theodora30 says:

        I disagree. I kept wondering why the fact Rudy and his thugs got into Hunter’s laptop could possibly be legal but since the mainstream “liberal” media didn’t make an issue of it I assumed I just didn’t understand the law.
        I hope there is some way for Hunter to go after Marjorie Taylor Green for showing those photos on the floor of the House. High school kids have gotten into big trouble for that kind of thing. It’s illegal in most states.

    • ifthethunder says:

      “But for the most part the establishment press has simply outsourced to the right what even counts as a story.”

      This goes back a long ways. The Richard Mellon Scaife-financed Whitewater inquisition, for instance.

      Interesting reading here (I think I read that I can post a link if I tell people what it is).
      This is a Nieman Reports story about press coverage of that years-long obsession. Including an erroneous account of an FBI agent’s testimony that was passed on as gospel. A trick that keeps on succeeding.

  6. Peterr says:

    Discovery, discovery, discovery.

    Let’s explore the chain of custody with that laptop.
    Let’s see the emails received and sent out, seeking to exploit that laptop.
    Let’s see the expense records related to shopping the laptop around.
    Let’s see the text messaging with media outlets, campaign officials, and others about this laptop.

    And then let’s put it all together a timeline, laying all this next to the public activities and statements of Rudy et al.

    Rudy, Costello, and Co. need not worry about the money Hunter is asking for. They’ve got more than enough to be afraid of in the potential for discovery here. The question is not *whether* a ton of bricks is about to land on them, but *how many* tons of bricks will land on them.

      • jdmckay8 says:

        The closest thing we know of is Weiss’ activities. Marcy’s repeated, for months, pointing out this (eg. Weiss) in-the-absence of any other DOJ activity (at least that we know of) following the significant evidence this was a planned op to get at Joe, going back at least a few years.

        So Lowell’s recent lawsuits appear, at least in significant part, due to DOJ’s lack of effort following all the hacking and (???) evidence.

        • says:

          Adding to JDMcKay8’s answer — if, hypothetically, Weiss were to discover evidence of crimes committed by another (originally) non-investigated party, he’d be professionally obligated to investigate, or alert other investigating authorities, of that ‘new’ crime, as long as the evidence was reliable and credible. Though there’s no guarentee it would lead to indictments of other persons who were thought, prior, to only be witnesses or whistleblowers. And we may never find out about these other-party investigations (reason for JDMcKay8’s parathetical above).

          There are lots of investigations we never know about…like SDNY’S investigation of John Kerry until published in Geoffrey Berman’s book, with Kerry’s permission. Kerry himself didn’t know he was investigated criminally (alleged Logan Act violation) until Berman contacted him seeking permission to include the story in his book (about Trump weaponizing the DOJ against his political enemies — summed in Business Insider article below).

      • Dmbeaster says:

        The DOJ has no part in this as of now. The laptop has not figured in any criminal matters yet.

        This is a counterclaim by Hunter in a civil suit. Some GOP attorneys convinced the computer repairman to sue for slander. They are getting slammed with the response.

    • David F. Snyder says:

      Yep, Abbe’s got an excellent strategy — there’s enough ‘smoke’ here that discovery will dig out some illuminating facts and (possibly) some ‘proprietary methods’ of the Trump campaign.

  7. freebird says:

    John Mac Isaac wanted to hurt Hunter Biden in the most cruel and vicious way by disclosing his most private and initmate actions. This is ironic coming from a man who is legally blind who needs empathy and commpassion from society to survive. By delivering the hard drive to Guilani underscores a politcal motive and not a concern about a crime being committed.

    A used laptop is essentially worthless except for the data files. A smart businessman would have taken a deposit or a credit card upfront for any potential lapsed payments. Wary customers should be reluctant to use Isaac’s services lest they have their data files exposed.

    • Kope a Pia says:

      When I drop my desktop computer off at one of the best local PC repair shops they just take my name,phone number and what needs to be done with the presumption that I will pay on pick up.

      There are still many business’s everywhere that operate on a handshake, whether that is wise is a different discussion.

  8. AZ southpaw says:

    I wonder how Giuliani will even get a lawyer to defend this, let alone pay for the necessary costs of responding to discovery of electronic data. Seems like it could go the same time at as his Moss/Freeman suit, default judgement.

    • SAOmadelonger says:

      Where is Rudy living? What is he driving? What’s the evidence that he’s broke? I hear about all these guys (like Alex Jones) losing big bucks in lawsuits and want to know if it actually hurts, or if they just had to trade in their mega yacht/private plane for one that’s a bit smaller and their 10-car garage now has a few empty spaces

      • bloopie2 says:

        Good thought. After seeing the recent posts/comments on Menendez, including allegations as to cash supposedly being stashed away, I wonder how much money Rudy really has. Did he do all those years of politicking without any personal financial gain?

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          If he’s not under water now, he soon will be. The defamation suits alone could do that. And the nearly $1.4 million he already owes one lawyer will be a drop in the bucket before he’s done defending all these cases. The proceeds of that condo sale are already spoken for.

      • Just Some Guy says:

        No idea where he’s living (thankfully), but Rudy just put his co-op unit on the Upper East Side for sale for $6.5 million. It was well-covered in the press a couple of weeks ago.

      • Narpington says:

        “The rightwing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is continuing to live the high life while refusing to pay a cent of the $1.5bn damages he owes families of victims of the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting he called a hoax.”

        If you’re rich enough, as long as you can still pay an expensive lawyer you can probably persuade a judge that $10k a month on food, entertainment and groceries is reasonable for a person of your stature, as well as finding lawyers and accountants eager to help you hide your wealth.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Rudy G. is not Alex Jones. Rudy is much older and is apparently drinking heavily. He’s always nearly overspent his income. In his heyday, he claimed to spend $2.5 million a month.

          His law licenses have been suspended or revoked, and he hasn’t displayed other talents that might replace the lost income. He is preoccupied with multiple litigation. Trump is reluctant or refuses to back him, and the usual providers of wingnut welfare haven’t appeared. He’s playing an endgame, whether he knows it or not.

  9. Savage Librarian says:

    “I don’t think people yet have considered the full scope of people this might include.”

    Besides Costello, Giuliani, Garrett Ziegler, and John Paul Mac Isaac, how many of the following might be included on a list considering the full scope? And/or how many more than that?

    1. Bill Barr
    2. Steve Bannon
    3. John Durham
    4. Keith Ablow
    5. Yaacov Apelbaum
    6. Tucker Carlson
    7. Fox News
    8. Guo Wengui
    9. Sean Hannity
    10. Will Levi
    11. Jack Maxey
    12. Gary Shapley
    13. Roger Stone
    14. Donald Trump
    15. Joseph Ziegler

    • Upisdown says:

      Don’t forget Peter Schweizer. It sounds like Schweizer had access to a copy before the NY Post release word of its existence.

      • bmaz says:

        I do not understand the continued fascination with the “Hunter Laptop”. It is one of the most ridiculous and inadmissible items of evidence ever.

        • Savage Librarian says:

          Good morning, bmaz! Oh, glad to hear it’s inadmissible. That makes sense. But I worry about the whims and pranks of unpredictable people and events. Now that you stated that so clearly, I feel better. Thanks.

        • Troutwaxer says:

          Does it go as far as stuff derived from the laptop, but not on the laptop, is inadmissible? For example, if something from the laptop led to the tax investigation, is that ‘fruit of the poisonous tree?’

        • BRUCE F COLE says:

          If cops broke into someone’s house without a SW, looking for stolen art, say, and they found a parking ticket that indicated the suspect was at a location where an unrelated crime took place, they couldn’t use that item even to put the guy under caution, let alone to get a legitimate warrant to explore the issue further.

          The tainted laptop, it seems to me, is a get out of liability free card for everything it contained, though Weiss might well have come by the tax stuff outside of that device’s “fruits.”

        • Rayne says:

          Good question if the IRS predicated any part of their investigation on Mac Isaac poking around without adequate permission in a file labeled “income.pdf,” especially since the file wasn’t labeled “MyIllicitDrugsAndSexExpenditures” or “SketchyForeignMonetaryTransfers.”

          Isaac doesn’t appear to claim that any antivirus/anti-malware/disk check app flagged anything as problematic. What gave him permission to snoop for reasons unrelated to the work he was supposed to be doing? Has Isaac done this with any other clients’ devices and data because I’m telling you most business users’ devices have something innocuous like files labeled “income” or sketchy-without-context like “the good stuff.”

        • Savage Librarian says:

          So, it probably won’t be admissible in a criminal case against Hunter. I understand that now.

          But what about the civil cases Hunter has against various people? Wouldn’t it be admissible in those?

          And what about potential criminal cases DOJ might take against the people who violated Hunter’s rights?

          Aren’t these valid concerns?

    • harpie says:

      “Everyone involved in stealing and manipulating Hunter’s data should be hearing footsteps right about now,” that person said.

      People at that early October 2020 meeting in McLean, Va?

      – [Arthur] SCHWARTZ [advisor of > Junior DON]
      – [senior adviser to the president] Eric HERSCHMANN [friend of > KUSHNER]
      – [former deputy White House counsel, Lawyers for Trump co-chair] Stefan PASSANTINO
      – [Hunter Biden former business partner] Tony BOBULINSKI [> WSJ]
      – GIULIANI [> NYPost] working with BANNON

  10. Narpington says:

    “I’ve been told that because of the way the data was stored, booting the hard drive up would update emails onto the hard drive, including any emails altered during the November 2019 Burisma hack.”

    I assume this means it was a bootable copy of Hunter’s laptop drive so logging in would be the same as logging in to the laptop (except for any changes). I don’t think this would mean that altered emails would be replaced with originals from the server or vice versa, just that any new emails would be downloaded (presumably any fakes would also have had their modification dates reset by the fakers so they wouldn’t appear as new).

    • sunflore says:

      ” (presumably any fakes would also have had their modification dates reset by the fakers so they wouldn’t appear as new).”

      ahhhh Ty

    • bidrec-gap says:

      Actually, see, if you open an email that was written in Microsoft Word it is possible that the person who wrote that email used a Microsoft Word macro that saves the date as the last date that the email was saved on exit.

      I do not know how DRM (Digital Rights Management) works on a Mac but I know that it bothers Bill Gates that people use his software without paying for it. So, if you duped the drive and the software worked in a different machine that would bother the licensors.

  11. bidrec-gap says:

    Actor and comedian Stephen Fry has written that he spent time in prison for “wearing an overcoat with someone else’s wallet in it.”

    Later he turned his life around.

  12. zscoreUSA says:

    There appears to be a sort of scorpion’s dance by Hunter’s lawyers and overall strategy since his data became public.

    … the purported laptop was fair game because it was allegedly abandoned. But at the heart of the lawsuit is the argument that regardless of where any piece of computer hardware was located, … A member of his legal team, granted anonymity to discuss his newly aggressive legal strategy, put it this way: “If you take your coat to the dry cleaner and leave your wallet in it, and you forget to pick it up, …

    “Everyone involved in stealing and manipulating Hunter’s data should be hearing footsteps right about now,” that person said.

    From the complaint yesterday, dancing the issue of the original hacking of data as the allegations against Rudy and Costello are hacking/manipulating after already receiving it from Mac Isaac:

    This is not an admission by Plaintiff that John Paul Mac Isaac (or others) in fact possessed any particular laptop containing electronically stored data belonging to Plaintiff. Rather, Plaintiff simply acknowledges that at some point, Mac Isaac obtained electronically stored data, some of which belongs to Plaintiff.

    Interesting to see what Rudy will do. He seems unlikely to tell the full story of how he obtained the data, which appears to be beyond even Mac Isaac.

  13. Howard Appel says:

    It seems to me that Mr. Costello is likely to have a problem with the State Bar as a result of his activities here. The attorneys for Trump World really are having, and going to have, a lot of problems. That makes me so sad.

Comments are closed.