The Claremont Institute and @DrJohnEastman are not merely complicit in an attempt to overthrow an election; they are also cowards who, having failed, lack the minimal moral integrity to stand up and acknowledge what they did.

The photo below demonstrates that quite clearly. Image
Unless, of course, Claremont and Eastman are advocating for some alternate definition of common words that would somehow mean that "announces that...there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed" does not "decide the validity" of those votes.
And let's be clear: Eastman based this on the legal theory that *checks notes* a group of losers who literally met around a flagpole, declared themselves to be electors, and sent in a piece of paper without either the legislature or governor's approval are an "alternate slate."
Even in an age of "alternative facts" that one is pretty amazing.
[deleted tweet; not confident in my math]
In any event, Eastman's memo was based on the legal theory that any group of randos who dislike the outcome of an election can call themselves an "alternate slate" of electors and the Vice President can use that as an excuse to disenfranchise an entire state.
And what Eastman claims they were asking for is little better:

Let's be clear. That would, indeed, be literally lawless. There is no mechanism in either the Constitution or in statute to "send the election back" because you don't like the result.

americanmind.org/memo/setting-t… Image
And let's be clear here:
No state's *LEGISLATURE* had asked to rescind anything. Some individual malcontents in the state legislatures might have made requests, but none had the state's authority.

The states asked nothing. Some losers in the states made baseless requests. Image
And, of course, Eastman ignores the fact that the state courts in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada had already assessed the legality of the things that he whines about here.

And they're the ones who get to decide if those elections were legal. Not Trump, Pence, or Eastman. Image
(The state courts in Georgia would have as well, had Trump's legal team there not bungled that one so badly as to deprive the court of the opportunity.)
No, Dr. Eastman. Your excuses for your sedition are unconvincing. Having attempted to aid in an autocoup, you are now indignant that we see you for who you are: A seditionist, a coward, and a disgrace to the legal profession and the nation.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Mike Dunford

Mike Dunford Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @questauthority

13 Oct
I'm not sure we have clarity on what the creator economy is or what it is intended to accomplish. This makes it very difficult to figure out whether these statistics are good or bad.

Remember - the "creator economy" almost by definition has to consist of more than just creators.
As a number of people (including some IP theorists like @LinfordInfo) have discussed, "attention scarcity" is a thing. People only have so much time to consume media, so, on a global basis, only so much media is going to be consumed.
The "creator economy" results in creators having more *potential* direct access to consumers. There is less of the kind of pre-filtering that you get with print publishers, record labels, tv networks, and film studios. Consumers can go look for what they want.
Read 8 tweets
12 Oct
So apparently cats continue to walk out of the woods and up to my son. Who then, well...... ImageImage
"So if anyone knows anyone who lost a middle-age, unneutered, unchipped male black cat recently in the vicinity of Ft. Rucker AL," he asked haplessly and hopelessly, "feel free to drop into my DMs. Please."
My wife *TOTALLY* had my back on this one. *TOTALLY.*

Told him to take the cat to the vet, get whatever tests and anti-parasite treatments it needs, and we'll reimburse him.
Read 8 tweets
11 Oct
OK. I've gone through the #BadArtFriend docket enough that I have a good feel for the copyright portion of the case.

tl:dr - The infringement claim is weak; there is little taking of protected elements. To the extent there's actionable copying the fair use defense is strong.
A few disclaimers:

1: I'm not talking about whether there was plagiarism. That's an artistic question, not a legal one.
2: I'm also not going into the question of who was good or bad. That's a moral question, not a legal one.
3: I'm also not going to dive into how things got to the point of litigation, although I might have some things to say on that on stream tonight.
4: None of this contradicts all the things about fair use that various copyright lawyers (including me) were saying over the weekend.
Read 37 tweets
7 Oct
Good evening, litigation disaster tourists - more action in Dominion v My Pillow.

The filing is a status update from My Pillow explaining why they're not going to participate in a discovery conference with Dominion, Rudy, and Sidney - not much there. The meat is in the exhibits.
The exhibits provide some insight into My Pillow's position on their appeal.

They are claiming that the Sullivan case created something like qualified immunity for defamation cases. This claim is...novel.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
And when I say "novel," I mean that in the legal sense. As in "give me a flipping break you weaponized bellends. That's a 1964 case; you're not going to invent a new qualified immunity doctrine around it over half a century later, stop being frivolous."
Read 5 tweets
24 Sep
Good afternoon, all -

Mike Lindell and his pillow company are continuing to litigate the Dominion lawsuit in approximately the manner one might expect from a group of creative buffoons who are engaged in an effort to invent new ways of irritating a federal judge.
Their latest innovation, which is radiating big "the appeal was accepted" energy, is styled as a "Defendant Michael J Lindell's Notice in Lieu of Filing Answer."

I'm not an expert on federal civil procedure, but I'm not positive that's a thing.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
By the way, I just went and checked. Today is their deadline for filing an answer. So this - whatever the hell this cockamamie thing is purporting to be and I'm still not totally clear on what that is - is apparently being filed instead of their answer.
Read 11 tweets
24 Sep
The audit would have been, but for the seditioneweaseling, entirely laughable. It is still mostly laughable.

That is worth remembering today, when they bring out their crowd of unserious hacks and crackpots - a list that includes the "I invented email" frootloop.
It is also worth remembering that their methodology, practices, and techniques were so awful that their results cannot be taken seriously.

"In other words," he added, knowing the plea to be futile, "let's not make 'it turned out Biden won with even more votes' a talking point."
For clarity, yes, the quote in the prior tweet comes from my inner monologue.

Seriously, the real number is about 8,675,309 times more likely to be the one @maricopacounty originally counted than anything CyberNitwits came up with.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(