Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
@Orly_licious
Oct 19, 2023 • 99 tweets • 27 min read • Read on X
⚖️ Oct 19 2023: Today's plan: More testimony from Dr. Stan Young, Eastman character witnesses & maybe Eastman. 🧵 At NOON EDT, the 24th day of the #EastmanTrial, CA Bar Disbarment Trial of #JohnEastman resumes. Live watch link, trial is NOT archived: app.zoom.us/wc/97985435232…
Major #ElectionDenier #Kraken News:
🦑 SIDNEY POWELL PLEADS GUILTY IN GEORGIA ELECTION CASE
MISDEMEANOR PLEA DEAL: NO TRIAL
WILL TESTIFY AS STATE WITNESS
Sidney accepts conditions - Probation - Apology letter to citizens of Georgia

What was Sidney's interaction with Eastman? Image
We met Dr. Stan Young back on October 4, he shared the stage with Blockin' Ray Blehar. Here's the thread from 10/4 with Young. Putting this thread up early for everybody so you can read back where we're at with Young:
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709604…
Dr. Stan Young was contacted by John Droz ("he's an interesting guy"). Randy Miller: Did you know the Election Integrity Group? SY: Didn't care about name, just the numbers. Droz thought election reports were suspect. We have Droz' testimony as well: threadreaderapp.com/thread/1707441…
To catch up with my 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

10/17 More Kurt Olsen & John Eastman

10/18 John Eastman
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709604…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1710319…

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1714668…
#EastmanTrial Abbreviation Key:
YR = Presiding Judge Yvette Roland
DC = California Bar's Duncan Carling
RM = Randall "Randy" Miller, Counsel for Eastman
SY = Dr. Stan Young
JD = John Droz
JE = John Eastman
CAB =California Bar
OCTC = CA Bar's Office of Chief Trial Counsel
#EastmanTrial: 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.

John Charles Eastman, Before and After: apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets.aspx

Image
Image
12:20pm EDT: The Court is in session! Housekeeping and scheduling before Dr. Stanley Young (remotely) begins. Eastman character witnesses:
2pm Eastman’s former law student Laurie Stewart
3:30pm Hon. Justice Judge Mautino (Ret.) Image
They are still working on dates beyond tomorrow, 10/20. Judge Roland wants Mon Oct 30 as the final day, it's the last day before a trial of Randall Miller & Judge Roland says he has 2 weeks to prepare witnesses etc. Eastman out all next week. They just got Stan Young on the Zoom.
Dr. Young sworn and Randall Miller is continuing with his direct examination (links to previous testimony above). Randall is going back to where they left off, the Contrast Report.
Image
Image
Young is identifying the states he selected for this Contrast Report, including California. "More votes for Biden than Trump vs. Hillary Clinton vs. Trump". Image
Graph of contrasts. Image
Top 10 Positive and Negative Contrasts. Image
CA Bar objects to any statements that conclusions were "unlikely", "unexpected". Judge Roland is allowing some conclusions based on statistical analyses. For example, that numbers for Biden in 2020 were more than Clinton in 2016. But if opinions reflect conclusions, no. Image
Judge: Not established you have the basis for an "unusual result". Sustaining objection.
RM: Did you find numbers "aberrational"
SY: Dots on graph away from red dotted line, CA and FL are away, "unusual results".
DC: SY is equating "unusual"& "aberrational"
Judge: Sustained.
SY: 2 steps from statistical point of view: 1) dot away from red line is "unusual" 2) when you see the dot is away from the red dotted line, ask an expert why it is so far away.
Judge: You analyzed numbers but no opinion on why such a contrast?
SY: Start with number looks unusual
Judge: Expert opinion for his results are results he isn't qualified to testify about. Isn't that the relevant question? How relevant to Eastman's conduct? To the 2020 election?
RM: Well, in many forms... disciplinary charges... info from others JE relied on...
Randy Miller is leading again. Now asking SY about this table, the black dots above and below were vs. 2016. Above, Biden, below Trump. SY: I'm saying the numbers are changing, I'm not saying why.
#EastmanTrial Image
Judge: Many other assumptions besides a voter voting one way in 2016, then another way in 2020 is "unusual" is troubling. This goes to weight of testimony & won't give much. Isn't it opinion to testify that analysis shows it's "unusual"?
RM: Not diff from other numerical data.
Judge: Let's move on.
RM: Did work include population analysis?
SY: Followed up, used Contrast Report as "roadmap"
RM: What does "unusual" mean in statistical analysis?
SY: Numbers "bounce around"... "outlier" doesn't mean necessarily wrong.
In a non-jury trial, judge is "trier of fact" & determines how much weight to give testimony. Judge Roland said it best: Most #EastmanTrial witnesses lack the skills, education, background, training or experience to offer opinion or analysis regarding election subject matter.
Opinion: While this population report may be interesting, it's not coming across as a valid basis for John Eastman to attempt to overturn the 2020 election. That's what #EastmanTrial is about: The Notice of Disciplinary Charges by the California Bar. Image
It's also important that these #EastmanTrial witnesses have ZERO election or election administration experience. This subject area is highly complex & people spend decades learning it. To download stuff & watch TV hearings doesn't qualify somebody, it makes them a Twitter user. Image
Judge Roland sustains multiple objections. As mentioned previously, it seems Dr. Stan Young is a kind man who has given his life to science & bettering the world. But he has no experience or basis to qualify as an expert on election matters. #EastmanTrial
Dr. Stan Young's #EastmanTrial testimony & the problems with it will be clear when Duncan Carling of the CA Bar is able to cross examine Young. The "Election Integrity Group" may be a fun hobby club, but any election deniers relying on the information are being misled at best.
Audio problems with Dr. Young again and he's going back to using a telephone. That's the delay. And true -- like Michael Gableman, they are COVID as well as election deniers.
It's angering how John Eastman and Randall Miller are using this nice, uninformed man. This "technical expert" doesn't know how to put an iPhone in speaker mode. He's having to start again, 20 min delay. Dr. Young deserves better at this time in his life. #EastmanTrial
Dr. Young got it working: "Marvels of ingenuity".
Unfortunately, for the first time Judge Roland is being made aware that witnesses on the phone have their numbers publicly on the screen. This happened with Kurt Olsen & others. Of course, this should never be disclosed. Fixed.
Sadly, yes. It really puts John Eastman's witnesses in perspective. #EastmanTrial
By the way, I'm reading your awesome replies & comments as best as I can. 💙 I have the best LukeCrew. 💪 Which trial should we do next? It's clear that Duncan Carling has thoroughly researched this area. Randall Miller is having trouble not asking leading questions.
Now Dr. Young is addressing his All States Contrast vs. Voter Registration Analysis, "a 2D chart for a 3 or 4 dimensional problem". Miller leading again. Sustained. How this relates to Eastman's NDC is unclear. Image
Dr. Stan Young gets to the bottom line: "These charts are to help experts decide where they want to spend their time... this is simple arithmetic." So after all this, it's just organized math for experts to "run to ground".
#EastmanTrial
Here it is, the same unqualified group of hobbyists:
RM: Who are the experts you worked with?
SY: Eric Quinnell, Ray Blehar, Russ Wilkiner, Matt Briggs, Anthony Cox...
Judge: None of these people have been designated as experts in #EastmanTrial & only Blehar has testified.
RM almost done with Young.
Judge will take information under submission as to calculations and potential outliers and make a determination. CA Bar is objecting just to Dr. Young claiming "unusual" or "unexpected" but the calculations are fine. (Carling also knows the weight.)
Judge will take information under submission as to calculations and potential outliers and make a determination. CA Bar is objecting just to Dr. Young claiming "unusual" or "unexpected" but the calculations are fine. (Carling also knows the weight.)
Election Deniers, grifters and scoundrels, beware of the #LukeCrew 💪
Stan Young disputes expert report of Stanford Dept of Political Science Prof Justin Grimmer: "He chose examples that didn't show problems with the 2020 elections." "Tour-de-force of arguments he can choose!" CA Bar moves to strike testimony not in depo. Sustained. #EastmanTrial
Image
Image
Awesome idea! It's a tremendous group of patriots and actual experts about government and elections. Election Deniers, grifters and scoundrels, beware of the #LukeCrew 💪
Dr. Justin Grimmer of Stanford will be back to testify as a rebuttal witness for the California Bar.
Background on Dr. Justin Grimmer:
politicalscience.stanford.edu/people/justin-…
Young says Grimmer makes statements that are "academic speak for 'it was a shambles" CA Bar moves to strike non depo testimony. Reviewing depo. Young complimented Grimmer at depo. Judge: Young can address "the O'Connell thing" and "Ellison" challenging Grimmer's article. Image
RM is saying Young felt that Grimmer "left out" information. Judge says ask. RM said question was what was left out. Judge repeats he can inquire about O'Connell & Ellison.
RM: Who is O'Connell?
DY: Lot of people running around... would have to dig out... I don't recall but major
Young thought Grimmer should state your good inclusive problem.
RM: Do you know Jeffrey O'Donnell (vs O'Connell)...
DC: Objection, leading. Sustained.
Judge: You ID'd Young as an expert, assume he can ID people. Isn't that why we have depos? Move on to Ellison.
RM: Who is Ellison?
SY: He doubted the veracity of electronic voting machines. Grimmer didn't use that info. Grimmer is assuming the votes in the NY Times are all correct.
RM: Do you know Jeffrey O'Donnell?
SY: There's a world of info... I don't recall.
Miller is done with Young. Cross next!
🌭 It's LUNCH TIME at #EastmanTrial until 4:15pm EDT! ☕️
After lunch, cross-examination with Dr. Stan Young by Duncan Carling of the California Bar. #SplashMountain Image
Didn't look at suspended attorney & nasty hack Rachel Alexander's lapping #EastmanTrial coverage. Thanks Philly. If #LukeCrew sees interesting updates please post. Let me guess: Rachel thinks Young was BOMBSHELL! We kinda agree: Thought he was a BOMB. 💣 Image
To cover #EastmanTrial & future events, bought a new laptop at Prime Day and it's great! Hasee TX (16'', i9-13900HX, RTX4060), Gaming Laptop, i9-13900HX 5.4GHz, 16G DDR5. Now if Elon Musk would stop being a right-wing troll and fix Twitter X... newegg.com/black-hasee-t8…
💙 I'm grateful to have you along for the ride and think #LukeCrew is a cool idea. Beware grifters & liars! If you're enjoying the #EastmanTrial livetweeting & want to say thanks for the coverage: buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2
🥤 During lunch, if you'd like to review Dr. Justin Grimmer's paper "No evidence for systematic voter fraud: A guide to statistical claims about the 2020 election | PNAS" which Dr. Stan Young had issues with: pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…
Great thread by David Meeks @MrTiggerGolf discussing the data Stan Young was using

#EastmanTrial Back on the record! Here we go, the cross-ex of Dr. Stan Young, member of John Droz' "Election Integrity Hobby Group". Duncan Carling goes quickly so buckle up 🚀 ☕️
#EastmanTrial DC begins with page 16 of the Contrast Report.
DC: Wouldn't you expect the biggest counties in CA would have the biggest contrast?
SY: Not necessarily. If it was zero in 2016, it would still be zero. Purpose of report was to standardize, if there was a dead heat in both, it would be zero. Having more votes total isn't determining factor.
Image
DC: Does this chart look "aberrational"? Are LA & San Diego counties "aberrational"?
SY: Yes.
DC: If all counties but 2 have 1,000 people, if Biden won by 5% wouldn't the counties with 1M people have a higher contrast? If vote share increases the same in all counties...
DC: Wouldn't it be much higher?
SY: If it was the same 5% rate, it would be a diagonal line, not J shaped. Pattern would be different.
DC: 5% increase in 1K county is 50, in 1M would be 50K, would that be aberrational?
SY: Your strawman is defeating the results
#EastmanTrial
DC: Did you base these on standard deviations?
SY: Sweep through the data to see where to look, not approved for fraud
DC: Outliers?
SY: Statistical
DC: Plot on a graph or use your eye?
SY: Most by eye and then math
DC: Mathematical definition?
SY: Uses a Marx Bros story: Who do you believe, this or your own eyes?
DC: With Georgia, are all 10 of those counties anomalous?
SY: Yes, 2016 & 2020 were very close. Then some counties off the bottom (many reasons) but Fulton is way off the line. Image
DC: Where's the cutoff of anomalous?
SY: You can split hairs, no precise cutoff, but Fulton visually...
DC: So no cutoff?
SY: No but you can go to ground. (Uses debunked story about Fulton votes being counted after people were told to go home... the Ruby Freeman lie that Rudy Giuliani is being bankrupted by)
DC: Here are the 4 biggest, right? If a county only had 4K people, would that be anomalous?
SY: If it's off the dotted line...
DC: 1K person county. What's the highest contrast a county could have?
SY: 1K DC: Not 2K? SY: OK
DC: Then the smallest counties can't have the highest contrast? Because you used VOTE COUNT instead of vote SHARE. 🎉
SY: They cannot.
#EastmanTrial
DC: Have you seen anyone else using contrast for election data?
SY: Looked at Google Scholar... no.
DC: "If applied to other pairs of elections, would those have the same anomalies?"
SY: Tried on 2008, 2004... same type did appear... went back to 1948... it started in 2004
[Whoa, OK Stan...]
DC: You compared results of 2020 to an AVERAGE of results in 2016, 2008?
SY: Don't remember exactly what I did (!), election trends...
DC: Did you compare to other pairs like 1996 to 1992
SY: At some point you have "good and fair elections". Using 2016 as a base year to evaluate what happened in 2020. Assumption is that 2016 was a "fair election" You'll remember HRC told everyone who would listen that the election was not fair.
DC: Have you done it with 2 elections you thought were reliable?
SY: Went back to 1948 voter participation rate... up to 2000, no aberrations (on the edge)... but starting in 2004, many serious aberrations. It's a good suggestion... we're not saying it's certain for fraud but points to where fraud may have occurred.
#EastmanTrial
CA Bar: Doesn't sound like you've done a contrast analysis in any other years. Isn't it possible all elections back to 1948 have the same anomalies?
Stan Young: Anything's possible
DC: But you've never checked?
SY: No, but we've seen this kind of pattern...
#EastmanTrial
DC: If you've never checked to see if the patterns are the same, how would you know?
SY: "Difference of difference used" over 7M times, medicine, etc. Very little historical records but if you go to France with their rules, you'd find pristine examples...
#EastmanTrial
DC: Did you look at France?
SY: No but have looked at Switzerland (known for their honesty)...looked at Michigan and anomalies in 2008 & 2012.
DC: Non-responsive objection. Judge strikes from France.
DC: Did you follow up on accuracy?
SY: No.
#EastmanTrial
DC: In your depo, asked: You can't say how accurate for fraud contrast reports are, right? You said "Sure."
SY: That was after a long series & said we can not prove fraud, points to. I HAVE NO PROOF THAT THE CONTRAST REPORT WILL SHOW FRAUD MAY HAVE OCCURRED.
#EastmanTrial
Stanley Young: 6-10 people reviewed to find ways outliers could occur
Duncan Carling, CA Bar: Here are just illegal or fraudulent ways.
SY: Yes. DC: Any possible non fraud reasons for outliers? SY: Maybe...
DC: Why did you use only illegal ways?
SY: Veracity of 2020 election. Image
DC: Determined causal effect?
SY: No... Hillary Clinton said there was cheating in 2016.
DC: Asking if standard methodology for changes
SY: I don't think there's any standard way to do it.
DC: In your depo, did you say Grimmer's paper is the only peer reviewed paper on elections you read?
SY: Yes
DC: This morning, you said top of the ticket usually gets more votes than down ticket. Right? At depo I asked and you said the basis was "old wives talking over the fence"
SY: In addition to the "old wives talking over the fence", I looked at PA and...
DC: But at the depo, you didn't have a reason except wives?
SY: Common sense.
DC: When you talked about voter populations...
SY: Common sense. "Experts aren't supposed to be devoid of common sense"
DC: You talked about estimates from the US Census? They have estimates?
SY: Guess they do
DC: On the PA downvoting, I asked at depo if you were aware of ticket splitting.
SY: Yes
DC: You testified you didn't know if PA allowed ticket splitting, right?
SY: Yes
Stan Young keeps going off on tangents when discussing his issues with the Grimmer Report.
Judge: Let's focus. What are your concerns about the way Grimmer addresses Cicchetti's analysis?
SY: I'm not objecting to his arithmetic, might be fine Image
DC: Can you summarize Grimmer's critique of Cicchetti?
SY: Looking at 3rd page, 1st sentence, Grimmer says if you have a large sample size... Image
DC: When did you 1st speak with Dr. Eastman?
SY: Got a call asking if I would testify in this case
DC: Sometime this year?
SY: I don't recall but this case
DC: Did he ask if you had experience analyzing election data?
SY: No. He was aware of Contrast Report & my credentials.
DC: How did he know?
SY: (changes answer) Don't know
DC: Did he ask about your methodology on the Contrast Report?
SY: No.
DC: Were you a Trump Admin appointee to EPA board in 2017? Then removed by Biden Admin?
SY: Yes
DC: Any reason you left it off your bio?
SY: ...
RM: Were you hiding it? (Miller didn't bring on SY's 1st day).
SY: No, it's subject of a lawsuit.. firing of scientific advisory board was not legal. Federal district level
Judge: Ruling?
SY: Court ruled against me, denied, appealed but not ruled on: Young v EPA
[Stan Young said made no difference to his analysis.]
Judge: Did you have an objection to Grimmer's methodology?
SY: Not particularly.
RM: Grimmer & Cicchetti had different conclusions about datasets?
SY: Yes
RM: (Leading again) DC: Moves to strike, offers info not from depo, asked if you had more info, said no
RM: DC asked about your review of peer reviewed articles, you talked about footnotes, what about it?
SY: Footnote crisis from 2011-2012. Claims didn't replicate.... doesn't mean accurate... (Judge: Move on)
RM: How did you come up with these 12 examples of contrast outliers?
SY: This was an offering to experts of things to consider.
RM: Did this capture all the areas you felt were important?
SY: The major things that came to our minds..
#EastmanTrial Image
RM needs more time on DC's questions.
RM: You looked at data to 1948? You thought data was consistent to 2004 then changed. What did?
CA Bar objects, didn't perform contrast analysis pre 2016. Then he leads again. Judge reprimands.
SY: Opposing lawyer made a big deal about the timing so I looked back over time. It's difficult to get a correct result if you start with bad data. So we worried about veracity of 2016 and if we were on foundational sand. Looked back at voter participation rate, fine through 2000
CA Bar objects, testimony is limited to Contrast Analysis, not voter participation. RM says door opened
SY: 1948-2000 consistent but 2004 dramatic increase in voter participation rate. In CA it was declining until 2000, then increased dramatically like a hockey stick.
SY: I do not know what caused it. But it was dramatic from 2004.
CA Bar objects, beyond expertise. Sustained.

Randall Miller and Duncan Carling have finished with Dr. Young.

Whew! Stan Young is excused. 10 minute #EastmanTrial break then 2 character witnesses.
Stan Young was tough because Duncan Carling speaks very quickly & complex because he studied the subject matter. Stan Young made it hard because a lot of what he said frankly didn't make sense. Election denier logic and train of through is difficult to express. #EastmanTrial Image
🥳 Hope that made sense, #LukeCrew! If y'all have other things to add, please do and I'll look to paste them in. That was about the last of the comedy... character witnesses, more John Eastman, then CA Bar's rebuttal witnesses. Unless Miller tries to slip more in. #EastmanTrial

• • •

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

Keep Current with Luke Johnson 🇺🇸

Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 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 @Orly_licious

Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 4
🧵More to the Story: Ali Alexander Akbar BRAGGED that Paul Gosar & Andy Biggs were his partners on the #StopTheSteal rallies that led to the #Jan6 violent riots. They all must be held accountable, they've laughed it off for years. politico.com/news/2024/04/0…
VIDEO: In Ali Alexander Akbar's OWN WORDS. @DOJCrimDiv: Why hasn't Akbar been charged in connection with the #Jan6 riots? @SeditionHunters "I was the person that came up with the January 6 idea with Congressman Gosar, Congressman Mo Brooks and then Congressman Andy Biggs. We four schemed up of putting maximum pressure on Congress, while they were voting, so that who we couldn’t lobby, we could change the hearts and minds of Republicans who were in that body hearing our loud war from outside." — Ali Alexander
‘Stop the Steal’ Founder Spilled to Jan. 6 Committee About Contact With Republican Lawmakers
Ali Alexander interacted with Reps. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) ahead of the riot at the Capitol rollingstone.com/politics/polit…
Read 7 tweets
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 4
🚨 #JeffClark 4/4/24 3:00pm ET Livetweet 🧵: DAY 7 of DC Bar Disbarment Trial of Jeffrey Bossert Clark. ⚖️ THE FINALE! Will Merril Hirsh & the DC Bar Panel issue "preliminary non-binding statement"? Will Jeff Clark sing patriotic songs?🍿 #JeffClarkTrial
⚖️ Here's the link to watch #JeffClarkTrial's Live Finale! (There's no allowed archiving or recording, Steve Bannon): 📺
Read 56 tweets
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 4
🚨 #JeffClark 4/4/24 9:30am ET Livetweet 🧵: DAY 7 of DC Bar Disbarment Trial of Jeffrey Bossert Clark. ⚖️ "Hot Bench" for Closing Arguments Day! Will a "preliminary non-binding statement" issue? Will Jeff stay dressed?🍿 #JeffClarkTrial Live (no archive): youtube.com/@d.c.bprhearin…
⚖️ #JeffClarkTrial: Re VoterGA crank conspiracy theorist Garland Favorito, an outstanding, comprehensive analysis by Georgia expert @LorenCollins:
#JeffClarkTrial ⚖️ "Painful testimony" analysis by @WeakGameForever of Mike Lindell acolyte, Cause of America's Shawn Smith.
Read 89 tweets
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 3
🚨 #JeffClark 4/3/24 1:05pm ET: 🧵 DAY 6 Disbarment Trial of Jeff Clark. ⚖️ Harry Haury Shawn Smith? Stan Young? Tony Shaffer? "Preliminary non-binding decision"? #JeffClarkTrial 📺 Livestreams (no archives): youtube.com/@d.c.bprhearin…
⚖️ DC Bar #JeffClarkTrial In re Jeffrey B. Clark, Board Docket No. 22-BD-039 No transcripts yet, but posted within 10 business days: Public filings for #JeffClarkDisbarment are in the Cases of Public Interest Folder at Main DC Bar Discipline page: dcbar.org/attorney-disci…
Nothing new on the DC Bar Case Manager page re #JeffClarkTrial. This is where the transcripts will be. Here are recent entries. Image
Read 44 tweets
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 2
🚨 #JeffClark 4/2/24 2pm ET: Part II of DAY 5 Disbarment Trial of Jeff Clark. #LINDELLAPALOOZA hearings today & Apr 3 at 12:30pm ET. 2024. ⚖️ "In re Jeffrey B. Clark, Board Docket No. 22-BD-039" #JeffClarkTrial 📺 No transcripts yet, but they will be here within 10 business days: Public filings for #JeffClarkDisbarment are in the Cases of Public Interest Folder at Main DC Bar Discipline page:

districtofcolumbiabar.sharepoint.com/sites/BPRCaseM…
dcbar.org/attorney-disci…
#LukeCrew, we just watched what I considered a masterful impeachment of Garland Favorito by @DC_Bar attorney Hamilton P. “Phil” Fox III. 3 hours of Clark's case time destroyed. NOT SO! Says suspended hack lawyer Rachel Alexander. Did we misunderstand what just happened? 🚀 Image
#JeffClarkTrial:🤡 Right Wing ecosystem in overdrive. MAGA's superstar furry, Catturd, who ran over his own dog recently, promotes discredited polling fantasists Rasmussen (which invites sponsors like Cernovich), which promotes suspended lawyer Rachel Alexander's biased lying. 🎪
Image
Image
Read 45 tweets
Luke Johnson 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Apr 2
🚨 #JeffClark DAY 5 Disbarment Trial ALERT! Jeff Clark's #LINDELLAPALOOZA hearings today Apr 2 at 9:30am ET & Apr 3 at 12:30pm ET. 2024. ⚖️ "In re Jeffrey B. Clark, Board Docket No. 22-BD-039" #JeffClarkTrial ⭐️: More Garland Favorito, Ed Meese, Heather Honey & more! YouTube livestreams (no archives) here: Clark also faces 2 felony counts in Fulton County GA for the same actions cited in the bar complaint. No transcripts yet, but they will be here within 10 business days: Public filings for #JeffClarkDisbarment are in the Cases of Public Interest Folder at Main DC Bar Discipline page:
youtube.com/@d.c.bprhearin…
districtofcolumbiabar.sharepoint.com/sites/BPRCaseM…
dcbar.org/attorney-disci…
youtube.com/@d.c.bprhearin…
Mike Lindell ROYALTY today. We've met many of these unqualified, inexperienced #ElectionDeniers at the John #EastmanTrial, and from Judge Roland's ruling, seen how terrific & effective they were in their testimony. Here are Jeff Clark and John Eastman in their Fulton County GA MUG SHOTS. #JeffClarkTrialImage
Image
One cliffhanger last night: Steve Bannon et al flouted the NO RECORDING rules and had an archive on X of #JeffClarkTrial Day 4. Thanks #LukeCrew, it seems it's been taken down. Livestreams aren't required & I wrote & said we appreciated it. Will this be mentioned in DC Bar trial?
Read 41 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(