Trevor Noah asks what’s the difference between ‘drunk and sober Rudy Giuliani’

• Trevor Noah mocks Rudy Giuliani for his role in promoting the election fraud conspiracy.
• The comedian asks how one can tell if Giuliani is drunk based on his usual behaviour.
• He also expresses shock that Trump managed his supporters because he can’t seem to plan anything in advance.

Trevor Noah comedian has mocked Rudy Giuliani for his apparent role in promoting the election fraud conspiracy. As the House select committee investigates the Capital insurrection that took place on 6 January last year.

Noah alluded to the inquiry of Trump’s former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, being “apparently inebriated,” “intoxicated,” and “had too much to drink” on the night of the inauguration.

Read more: Katie Price partner Carl Woods charge of threatening behaviour dropped

Before all of the votes had been counted, including key postal ballots, Giuliani is said to have assured President Trump that he had won the election and demanded that the counting be halted.

As a result of the Big Lie conspiracy, Trump’s supporters were whipped into a frenzy, believing the election had been rigged.

Noah mocked Giuliani’s “liquid courage” in advising Trump to falsely claim victory, and questioned how one can tell when the former New York mayor is inebriated based on his usual behaviour.

He said: “I’m just curious about how you even know when Rudy Giuliani is drunk? No, because when a normal person is drunk, they say crazy things, they yell, they sweat a lot.

“So how does that work for Rudy? Does it work in reverse? Like does he start talking normally? His hair dye sucks back in his hair?”

The host also expressed shock that Trump coordinated the mob comprised of his fans because he can’t seem to “coordinate anything in advance”.

Noah joked: “The man can’t even plan where a sentence should end.”

Read more: Justin Bieber provides an update on how he is managing his health issues

The inaugural hearing on the events of January 6th highlighted four important findings, including how far-right groups were heavily involved in the attack’s planning and execution.

According to a bipartisan Senate study, at least seven persons died as a result of the insurgency.