Thread by @Orly_licious

⚖️ Oct 18 2023: Happy Wednesday everybody! Today, more testimony from John Eastman. 🧵
Around NOON EDT, the 23nd day of the #EastmanTrial, CA Bar Disbarment Trial of #JohnEastman resumes. Live watch link, trial is NOT archived: app.zoom.us/wc/97985435232…

Today's plan is more testimony from John Eastman himself. Here's the last #EastmanTrial date thread: Tue Oct 17 with Kurt Olsen & John Eastman.

https://twitter.com/Orly_licious/status/1714300908673155412

Here's the lengthy CA State Bar @StateBarCA
Docket for the John #EastmanTrial Disbarment case. Visit & enter Eastman, John Charles then click on the Case Number: SBC-23-O-30029. apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets.aspx

To catch up with coverage, #EastmanTrial livetweets 🧵
9/8 Michael Gableman
9/12 John Yoo
9/13 Garland Favorito
9/14 Garland
9/15 Garland Disastrous Cross threadreaderapp.com/thread/1700197…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1701642…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1702008…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1702387…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1702726…

9/26 John Yoo
9/27 John Yoo & Joseph Fried
9/28 John Droz
9/29 Kurt Olsen & Ray Blehar
10/3 Ray Blehar threadreaderapp.com/thread/1706716…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1707086…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1707441…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1707797…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709239…

10/4 Ray Blehar & Stan Young

10/6 Kurt Olsen & John Eastman
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709604…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1710319…

#EastmanTrial Abbreviation Key:
YR = Presiding Judge Yvette Roland
DC = California Bar's Duncan Carling
RM = Randall "Randy" Miller, Counsel for Eastman
JE = John Eastman
DF = Douglas Frank
CAB =California Bar
OCTC = CA Bar's Office of Chief Trial Counsel

While waiting for Judge Yvette Roland to begin today's trial, "House guy. DCoS/CD @RepDonBeyer" notes:
Aaron Fritschner @Fritschner 14m I did not expect Tom Cole's speech nominating Jim Jordan to talk about Jordan's support for cutting Social Security but he has just done so.

12:24pm EDT: We're on the record! Judge Roland gave a "homework assignment" yesterday about how long they need for closing arguments and post-trial briefs. CA Bar says 60 minutes is enough. Eastman 90 minutes. Judge will allow 75 pages max on briefs.

Direct continues with John Eastman, who takes the stand and is sworn. Randall "Randy" Miller will be leading the examination. Miller wants to return to yesterday's topics of 1/4-1/5.

John Eastman's 6-page memo was prepared 1/3/21 but Eastman didn't bring it with him and it wasn't discussed in the Oval Office meeting. The meeting premise was about the "illegal conduct of the election", "shared by everybody in the room". #EastmanTrial

They discussed the "Trump-nominated Republican Electors" (I'm using that expression vs "fake" or "alternative" electors; that was used by the federal judge who denied those folks & Mark Meadows' et al's motions to remove the Georgia RICO case to federal court.) #EastmanTrial

They discussed how VP Pence could resolve disputes over electoral votes under the Voting Rights Act (which has been changed since 2020 to prevent future attempts at subversion). Eastman said they discussed ministerial tasks. He brought up a) briefly, b) briefly and c) no.

Eastman: "Because there were still election challenges pending in swing states", in the Oval Office meeting 1/4/21 they discussed the "delay" or "recess" (written as adjournment) option since "state legislators asked for it" since they questioned validity. #EastmanTrial

Randy Miller leads the witness again and Judge Roland admonished him again. Judge: "This is an important point and you should not be leading here." Miller won't stop leading, it's been an issue throughout the #EastmanTrial. 🙄

RM: Any discussion in the 1/4 meeting about the Trump-nominated Republican Electors?
JE: Didn't get into the certificates of ascertainment re who had governor signoff as per the Electoral Count Act (section 15).
RM: How was that meaningful?
JE: That was the distinction drawn.

Eastman discusses the 12A and that the VP SHALL open all electoral vote envelopes. So what if there were 2 slates of electors? Who has the authority: VP or Congress or neither? Eastman believed it was the VP.
#EastmanTrial

Miller moves to the 1/5 follow-up meeting, it was in Marc Short's office in the Old Executive Office Building (actually known as the Eisenhower Exec Office Bldg). Eastman did a GA Zoom and then went to the meeting with Greg Jacob, VP Pence's general counsel (Short was in & out).

Eastman thinks that Greg Jacob agreed that the Electoral Count Act was unconstitutional. Eastman thought it was unconstitutional based on one Congress making rules for another Congress, and usurping power of the VP.

While the old Electoral Count Act relates to the ethics charges against John Eastman by the CA Bar, Congress passed in a bipartisan effort the "Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022", or ECRA. #EastmanTrial
ncsl.org/resources/deta…

Eastman's discussing how the Electoral Count Act and possible scenarios were discussed during the runup to the 2020 election in the event it was close. Eastman's testified several times (transcript links are above) and they've covered a lot of this material before.

Eastman & Jacob discussed if a "delay" would be a political (non-judiciable) question (something the Supreme Court wouldn't review). Eastman admitted SCOTUS would rule 9-0 (unanimous) against that position. Judge is interested in this point. Did Eastman know this was a loser?

Eastman discusses disputes in legal scholarship on what is or is not a non-judicable political question. In 1876, there was a delay of several months while they straightened out electoral votes. So Eastman thought he had a "fair chance" at SCOTUS if they'd consider it at all.

John Eastman is getting pretty cranky. Miller keeps leading (Judge Roland is very nice, this is sanctionable). As Lisabeth points out:
Lisbeth Ash @LisbethMA 5m
Ooh judge telling Eastman to simmer down ("take a deep breath")! 🔥🔥🔥

Eastman's partisan election subversion scheme: Have VP "delay", send electors back to states for 7-10 days, have them access the "impact of illegality" and "determine, based on investigation, what if only legal votes were counted", then send Trump electors back. #EastmanTrial

Opinion: As we now know, this was part of the well-planned plot to undermine 2020's election. Between Peter Navarro's "Green Bay" plan, Trump's efforts to bully, GOP-nominated Trump electors & GOP-only allies in swing states, John Eastman was a conductor of the illegal orchestra.

VP Pence (with advice of counsel) declined to take action & sent a "Dear Colleague" letter. Eastman was "surprised" Pence included in this letter the "significant allegations of voting irregularities". It was discussed on 1/4 & here "he agreed with the assessment". #EastmanTrial

John Eastman later learned of Greg Jacob, VP Pence's general counsel, testimony to #Jan6thCommittee. Eastman: "If I'd known, wouldn't have spent so much time in 1/5 meeting". Link: CTRL0000040479 - Deposition of Greg Jacob, (Feb. 1, 2022) #EastmanTrial
govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GP…

John Eastman says at the time he wasn't aware of Greg Jacob's Memo about the "#Jan6 Process for Electoral Vote Count". Opinion: Men like Jacob, @marctshort & White House Counsel were unsung heroes. Under incredible pressure from POTUS & guys like Eastman, they put country over politics. #EastmanTrial

John Eastman rails against the constitutionality of the old Electoral Count Act. He repeats it should be VP, not Congress. Just like when Kurt Olsen testified about what he *thought* of TX v PA & was wrong (SCOTUS dismissed), Eastman has been proven wrong (ECA was updated).

John Eastman concedes that Congress, in revising the Electoral Count Act, made it clear that the VP's role is simply ministerial. Eastman believes that shows it was unclear. Others believe it was to stop these types of shenanigans. #EastmanTrial

2pm EDT: Judge Roland calls for a 10-minute break in #EastmanTrial. Here's an overview of the ethics violations the California Bar has charged John Eastman with.
latimes.com/california/sto…

Always great background from @R5Philly. Thank you to everyone for great commentary and help.

https://twitter.com/R5Philly/status/1714708738496487632

Always great background from @R5Philly. Thank you to everyone for great commentary and help.

https://twitter.com/R5Philly/status/1714708738496487632

https://twitter.com/R5Philly/status/1714708562071388172

Randall Miller says, "there's a lot to unpack here". The 12th Amendment basically mirrors the original Article II of the Constitution. 12A came after the 1800 election, there was a dispute between Jefferson and Aaron Burr. Eastman is saying this was a basis for his advice.

John Eastman is testifying about well-covered ground. Prof. John Yoo explained a lot of this during his testimony (links to his threads above). Randall Miller is asking questions like, "What is a Teller"? This sort of super basic info is not giving #EastmanTrial any juice.

Randall Miller & John Eastman are discussing the Blizzard in Wisconsin again. Judge Roland asks how Greg Jacob's position relates to Eastman's. On "Tellers", he disagrees and thinks it's a "ministerial assistance role".

Miller is leading AGAIN. Judge Roland reminds him AGAIN.

Gosh, even Randall Miller admits that Eastman's testimony is "redundant".

Opinion: This from the lawyer who whined he didn't have enough time, yet kept unqualified, irrelevant witnesses on the stand for DAYS in the #EastmanTrial.

John Eastman testifies on mechanics of potential dispute resolutions. He objected to swing state "Republican-nominated Trump Elector" slates not being determined by the VP. He disagrees with Jacob (this is his memo) that only 1 slate was ascertained (Biden's). #EastmanTrial

#EastmanTrial: I respect that John Eastman has every right to present his case, but so much of this is duplicative of other witnesses and such basic information it's hard to see how it's helping him make his case to Judge Roland. However, she is paying close attention and as always taking comprehensive notes.

John Eastman is also relying on a fringe "plenary authority" argument about state legislatures. That theory was DENIED by the Supreme Court in June 2023. "Supreme Court rules against giving state legislatures unchecked control over federal elections": The justices rejected the “independent state legislature" theory, which Trump supporters cited during the 2020 election. The theory would have restricted the power of state courts to review certain election laws.

Tenth+ time discussing the Nixon electors from Hawaii in 1960 and 19th Century "historical precedents". Understand VP power is what Eastman believed, but having everyone, including the VP's counsel, rejecting his opinion should have been a clue to STOP IT. #EastmanTrial

🥳 4pm EDT: 🍝 #EastmanTrial LUNCH BREAK! 🧁 I promise, as always Duncan Carling's cross examination will be much more exciting. Hope Randall Miller lets him finally get to it... but after this break, more Randy.

☕️ I'm grateful to everybody joining me on #EastmanTrial. Since it isn't archived, it's important to have a record. Hope I've done you proud. 💙 Thanks so much to those who used Buy Me A Coffee to say they appreciate the coverage. Sending you a big hug. buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2

Hope everybody got refueled with coffee, here's a donut 🍩 Back on the record with Day 23 of the #EastmanTrial. Randall Miller will continue direct examination of Dr. Eastman. What a difference a bit of election subversion, ethics complaints and a criminal RICO indictment make.

James Lacy's @JamesVLacy1 post about #EastmanTrial on Sep 12 is as relevant today: "Trump would be better off if he had never met John Eastman". A Reagan Adm. General Counsel, Mr. Lacy's great analysis is at: ocregister.com/2023/08/29/tru…

#EastmanTrial witness memories: Doug Frank, Patrick Colbeck & Joe Oltmann withdrawn by Eastman or like Garland Favorito, John Droz, Joe Fried & Ray Blehar lacked the skills, education, background, training or experience to offer opinion or analysis re election subject matter.

Randall Miller, continuing direct exam of John Eastman, brings up the 1960 Hawaii electors. These were John F. Kennedy's electors. Governor had certified the Nixon electors. There was an election challenge, court-ordered recount & litigation. #EastmanTrial

Duncan Carling notes that a pending recount was stipulated.
JE: Nixon electors were certified.
RM: What happened after court order?
JE: New Governor certified Kennedy electors & immediately transmitted to Congress.
RM: How many slates?
JE: 3
JFK electors from 1960.

Congressional Record explaining what happened in 1960. The difference in 1960 is that a court ordered the change due to error. Also not determinative. It was not an attempt to subvert an election by sending electors just because some didn't like the result. #EastmanTrial

Background from POLITICO: See the 1960 Electoral College certificates that the false Trump electors say justify their gambit: Their explanation relied heavily on the 1960 election between John F. Kennedy & Richard Nixon, who was vice president at the time.
politico.com/news/2022/02/0…

Detail on the 1960 presidential electors and how VP Nixon in his capacity as president of the Senate accepted the third slate of electors.

VP Nixon's remarks on 1960 electors. In this case, Eastman said "he skipped the Electoral Count Act and acted". Eastman thinks Nixon's actions violated several provisions of the ECA.

RM: How did this procedure inform you on VP's role under 12A?
JE: Nixon still considered the electors (although he said it was NOT to be a precedent, though Eastman thinks it was) and he didn't ask for unanimous consent.
RM: How did this inform you for 2020?
JE: Confirmed the one example we have of multiple slates of electors violated the ECA.

https://twitter.com/R5Philly/status/1714760141923377548

https://twitter.com/R5Philly/status/1714755713346547900

Judge: Redaction gone wild? 😅
Eastman: Misprint.
Then Point of Order appears ... JE: Slow loading. (TRUE)
More on Eastman's research of the 1960 electors.

If you've had enough of 1960 Hawaii electors, here's a musical interlude. 🎶

The silver lining of this spellbinding Hawaii electors colloquy: They aren't talking about or being BIRTHERS! 🚀

https://twitter.com/JPDaltonAZ/status/1714767043575373910

John Eastman is now discussing his disagreements with Greg Jacob, VP Pence's general counsel.

Mr. Jacob testified in #EastmanTrial.

Greg Jacob: General Counsel to the Vice President of the United States
John Eastman: Using his college's email, Fashion Icon

Moving to the California Bar's NDC (Notice of Disciplinary Charges), the subject of the #EastmanTrial.
Randall Miller is asking John Eastman about his disputes with the charges in the ethics complaint.

RM: Did you make a unilateral plan for Pence?
JE: No, they were options...
RM: Back to 1/4/21 meeting, were you making a suggestion...
JE: He asked me if he had the authority to reject electors, it was an open question but better to accede to the wishes of the state legislators.

Eastman gets animated as he rebuts the NDC.
JE: Looked at vertical argument (Federal vs States) & horizontal (Which state body? State officials or legislatures?). Best remedy for dealing with these "illegalities" was to give them more time.

Eastman on "grossly negligent" mentioned in NDC: Does VP or Congress have authority? If VP, if he needs a short delay... I still believe it's authority he does possess.
He says he listed the 2 paths as "alternatives". If "illegality" was found in the states, send Trump electors.

Wanted states to investigate only legal votes, not illegal... I had some hope it would lead to Trump's victory.
Judge: Are you saying there were no illegal votes for Trump?
JE: No, no... but for mail-in votes, 2x as many for Biden. "Disproportionate benefit" to Biden.

JE: Extrapolation, assumption...
Judge: Which jurisdiction?
JE: PA. Like Marx case
Judge: Based on 1994 methodology, your presumption is mail-in ballots could have reflected illegality?
JE: Because of elimination of signature verification, if 2/3 were for Biden, extrapolation

Judge: PA didn't make that extrapolation in 2020?
JE: Issue never came up.
RM: If mail-in ballots were illegal, all would be removed?
JE: "Disparity would have affected the 'Democrat' ticket"
#EastmanTrial

Eastman admits that Jacob and Short testified differently, but says the highlighted below is wrong.
RM: Were states back in session 1/5?
JE: Recollection is they were coming back in session that week (so they could investigate). Don't recall if they were the new members.

RM: What about last sentence about "palatable"?
JE: I don't recall using that word... maybe... But acceding to legislatures was prudent with added level of authority under Article II.
RM: On last sentence, agree?
JE: DO NOT. There were historical practices (VP picked, delay). When ECA passed in 1870, it meant Congress was unsure if they or VP had the authority. And never conceded that SCOTUS would disapprove of the VP delay, thought there was a fair chance with SCOTUS (if they took it up).
#EastmanTrial

Randall Miller asks John Eastman if he disagrees with 21.
Eastman: Substantially. Trump never had the 2 or 6 page memos. In the memos I didn't "come down either way " on the result of the assessments by the legislatures. Trump anticipating/hoping for the result he'd win, but my memos didn't determine it.
RM: Did you discuss tweet with Trump for 1/6?
JE: No.
RM: Any tweets?
JE: No. I don't know how his tweeting works. The "we will win" was predictive but not from my memos/
RM: Did you tell him or any what to tweet?
JE: No I did not.
#EastmanTrial

Randall Miller and John Eastman transferred from Amtrak to an ACELA.
Miller moves to TX v PA. How did it come up?
JE: Trump called me directly.
RM: Did you take any action with respect to an original action to SCOTUS?
JE: Yes, others were working on it...
#EastmanTrial

RM: when did that effort move forward?
JE: TX Original Action filed on Mon Dec 7th 2021. In high gear the week before. (When its state vs state, the Supreme Court can have original jurisdiction, usually water rights & technical matters). A Bill of Complaint is based on allegations that are required to meet Rule 11. Unlike an appeal, it's a trial court pleading.

Eastman asked if he was involved in the drafting of the Bill of Complaint. "Complicated question"... "Attorney Client privilege"...
BOC was filed 1/7, JE brief 1/9
Judge: Let's move on, we've talked about this a lot and it's not relevant with time constraints. Miller sounds pouty.

Randall Miller has been leisurely strolling along all day. Now that it's close to the end of the day, he speeds up and rushes. Doubtful CA Bar gets a chance to cross today. Now Eastman discusses timing with his Motion to Intervene 1/9...
SCOTUS DENIED.

Miller starts...Judge Roland says we know what a Motion to Intervene is, move on.
Eastman discusses the Motions by other states.
RM: Why significant?
JE: Proud 6 other states agreed with me. Eventually 20+ states agreed with TX on illegality & importance of case.
(SCOTUS DENIED).

Eastman brings up the people he worked with, including John Droz. (See Droz transcript for how that went.) PA & MI "Spikes" Report...
JE: "Illegality was the heart of the Action", looked carefully.
Judge: YOU SHOULD STOP LEADING. YOU SHOULD STOP LEADING. EASTMAN IS CAPABLE.

Eastman is talking about the claims of illegality that ended up in the Bill of Complaint. He also wanted to focus on the GA Consent Decree (this has been discussed).
Good points on Hawaii.

https://twitter.com/EndureFlourish/status/1714776079511048701

https://twitter.com/EndureFlourish/status/1714772760457560092

Eastman is repeating in great detail the GA Consent Decree and is animated about this "significant impediment". You may remember reading @marceelias about the settlement, search his feed or @DemocracyDocket. Republicans find the fear of God when it comes to St. Marc.

Randall Miller and John Eastman are talking at length about Georgia, his testimony to GA legislative committees, and how it interacted with both the DENIED Supreme Court case including his Motion to Intervene. We've heard a lot of testimony (Gilles Report etc) about these issues.

7:50pm EDT: Last 10 minutes of #EastmanTrial for today.
Randall Miller moves back from Georgia to Texas v Pennsylvania.
JE: Everybody thought this would be the Bush v Gore of 2020, amicus briefs were flooding in. Also 2 Missouri briefs; an amicus & a full Motion to Intervene.

Judge: This is not relevant and a waste of time.
RM: Make a record.
Judge: You have.
RM: Offer of proof.
Judge: You have.
RM: Move amicus briefs in?
#EastmanTrial

Judge: Maybe you think I'm not paying attention. You've tried already & I've addressed it. If you think adding more makes a difference, it doesn't. This is about Eastman's conduct in the NDC. Denied these yesterday. We'll take another 15 mins since we've wasted time with this. 💥

All Drink: Eastman slips in another 1960 Hawaii reference 🪘

Eastman is discussing Dr. Cicchetti's "quadrillion" comment that we've heard about before. Repeats it was about "allegations of illegality".

RM: Did you read oppositions to Complaint?
JE: Started but denied by SCOTUS Fri PM.
RM: We're you seeking to mislead?
JE: Not at all, thought important to discuss illegality of changes made by non-legislative actors.
RM: Good break point...
Judge: Keep going. 🔥

Judge Roland isn't about to let Randall Miller dawdle all day with John Eastman, then speed up lightning fast, then break for the night, then whine he doesn't have enough time. Interesting legal strategy by Eastman's team.

Randall Miller moves to GA & Trump v Raffensperger case. Eastman says he had nothing to do with. Overlaps with Eastman's federal action (Trump v Kemp, assisted with drafting) filed New Year's Eve.
Eastman complains (many do) that a "judge was not appointed" until 1/4/21 on TvR.

"Confusion about filing... no fee paid... judge ineligible because same county... " Trump voluntarily dismissed as moot 1/7 because hearing would be 1/8. Federal case also voluntarily dismissed as moot (because of Congress 1/6).
Opinion: What a waste of a New Year's Eve 🎉

Judge: Now we'll stop for the day. Keep this moving.
Randall Miller: Dr. Young tomorrow, 3 character witnesses in the PM.
Judge: To RM: File Notice of Withdrawal of witnesses.
Duncan Carling asked for a day or aggravation & rebuttal witnesses. Needs 1/2 day for Prof. Grimmer.

More scheduling decisions tomorrow. They may need another day or 2 after this week. Eastman is not available all next week. Carling mentions if this goes past 11/3 there's conflicts. Judge says no way past 11/3. Finished for the day with NOON EDT Thu Oct 19th next.

Randall Miller has serious problems with time management as well as leading questions. Judge Roland was rightfully annoyed. Now Miller thinks he'll get Stan Young & 3 character witnesses tomorrow. Don't think he's ever gotten thru more than ONE in a day. We'll see. #EastmanTrial

Whew! Another big, long day of testimony in #EastmanTrial. Thanks for following along with me, you all are awesome! More tomorrow!

Folks are sending me bicep pix for the nightly SMOKING GUNS feature. Here are Abercrombie & Fitch models with SMOKING GUNS, the only ones today. 💪

@threadreaderapp unroll