Read on Twitter
⚖️ Nov 3 2023: PART III 🧵 John Eastman, "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time...Don't do it." Day 33, planned FINAL DAY of #EastmanTrial, CA Bar Disbarment Trial. Rebuttal & aggregation testimony continues Dr. Grimmer's sur-rebuttal by Eastman's lawyer Randy Miller.
Fri Nov 3 #EastmanTrial, The CA Bar Disbarment of John Eastman previous Livetweets today:
PART I:
PART II: threadreaderapp.com/thread/1720465…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1720522…
PART I:
PART II: threadreaderapp.com/thread/1720465…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1720522…
Here's a link to all my previous livetweeting of the #EastmanTrial on ThreadReaderApp: … A few days had too many tweets, please look at my Highlights tab for those days recaps.threadreaderapp.com/user/Orly_lici…
Thank you so much Sandy! I appreciate you hugely. Your vote of confidence means the world to me. 💙
@sandy2138 just supported @orly_licious on @buymeacoffee! 🎉
You can buy them a coffee here — buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2/c…
@sandy2138 just supported @orly_licious on @buymeacoffee! 🎉
You can buy them a coffee here — buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2/c…
💀 JP, huge thanks! We've all suffered through this #EastmanTrial together, and having you here has made it so much better! I'm grateful.
JP Dalton just supported Luke Johnson on @buymeacoffee! 🎉
You can support by buying a coffee☕ here — buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2/c…
JP Dalton just supported Luke Johnson on @buymeacoffee! 🎉
You can support by buying a coffee☕ here — buymeacoffee.com/lukejohnson2/c…
⚖️ 6:20PM EDT: On the record in CA Bar Disbarment Trial of John Eastman #EastmanTrial. Miller questions Grimmer. Judge wants to be done 7:30-8PM EDT.
To view the CA Bar docket, use this link, pick "Smart Search", enter "Eastman, John Charles": discipline.calbar.ca.gov/portal/Home/Da…
To view the CA Bar docket, use this link, pick "Smart Search", enter "Eastman, John Charles": discipline.calbar.ca.gov/portal/Home/Da…
Randy Miller brings up the "complete" version (he says) of PA Vote Codes. Grimmer asks for date since #s change. RM doesn't know.
Judge: Who generated & when?
RM: Yesterday by Heather Honey from . 🪿 Quack.
JG: I don't think this table is on the PA site. PA.gov
Judge: Who generated & when?
RM: Yesterday by Heather Honey from . 🪿 Quack.
JG: I don't think this table is on the PA site. PA.gov
#EastmanTrial
Miller looks at OLMAILV.
RM: Represents?
JG: It's an online request for a voter who's been verified. Major point: To get 42404, I got smaller # like 38K so don't know breakdown. 0 column=same date requested & returned. In Cat C, Emergency, somebody else can pick up.
Miller looks at OLMAILV.
RM: Represents?
JG: It's an online request for a voter who's been verified. Major point: To get 42404, I got smaller # like 38K so don't know breakdown. 0 column=same date requested & returned. In Cat C, Emergency, somebody else can pick up.
RM: Would you agree an applicant who asked for a ballot online wouldn't be more likely to vote in person?
JG: I'd have no way to know that.
Miller changes subject to TX v PA case. What did you review?
JG: Looked at Bill of Complaint.
JG: I'd have no way to know that.
Miller changes subject to TX v PA case. What did you review?
JG: Looked at Bill of Complaint.
RM: Did you see allegations about illegality (violated state election code).
JG: Yes.
RM: Did you review anything besides the discrepancy in PA mail-in ballot & Wayne County MI allegations we discussed re illegality?
JG: Mail-in GA, Ryan Report "missing" in PA & mail date.
JG: Yes.
RM: Did you review anything besides the discrepancy in PA mail-in ballot & Wayne County MI allegations we discussed re illegality?
JG: Mail-in GA, Ryan Report "missing" in PA & mail date.
Grimmer says Cicchetti failed to have a correct analysis his null hypothesis. Miller moves on. Back to Line 22 of underage registrants in GA.
RM: Right column of Gilles' info called Confidence Level...
JG: Didn't know origin.
RM: What info?
JG: Don't know what it means.
RM: Right column of Gilles' info called Confidence Level...
JG: Didn't know origin.
RM: What info?
JG: Don't know what it means.
RM: But it says "medium".
JG: Yes. No idea what it means. Favorito's letter allegedly refuting Raffensperger didn't include that.
JG: Obtained voter files from GA, used specific query Gilles used. 900pg doc, lists 86K people Gilles called "suspicious". JG digitized those records.
JG: Yes. No idea what it means. Favorito's letter allegedly refuting Raffensperger didn't include that.
JG: Obtained voter files from GA, used specific query Gilles used. 900pg doc, lists 86K people Gilles called "suspicious". JG digitized those records.
RM: Did you use other than Gilles?
JG: Yes, incl complaint with updated Gilles from Braynard.
Judge: How does Braynard's work relate to Gilles spreadsheet?
RM: Doesn't but close.
Judge: No.
JG: Yes, incl complaint with updated Gilles from Braynard.
Judge: How does Braynard's work relate to Gilles spreadsheet?
RM: Doesn't but close.
Judge: No.
RM: What Gilles reviewed?
JG: In Trump V R, Gilles signed 2 affidavits. 2nd provides info on rejection of mail-in ballots. In early Jan, there was another case. Had updated affidavit. 3 total looked at.
RM: Did he make changes for Jan?
JG: Yes, Dec was 66K, revised to 2K.
JG: In Trump V R, Gilles signed 2 affidavits. 2nd provides info on rejection of mail-in ballots. In early Jan, there was another case. Had updated affidavit. 3 total looked at.
RM: Did he make changes for Jan?
JG: Yes, Dec was 66K, revised to 2K.
RM: Basis of change?
JG: Don't know, but read a footnote in Eastman emails about transposition. But Gilles made no note, just changed it.
RM: How?
JG: Query in doc, where mistakes were made. GABF20GCOB, Gilles used 16, obvious error, was 2016 not 2020 (!).
JG: Don't know, but read a footnote in Eastman emails about transposition. But Gilles made no note, just changed it.
RM: How?
JG: Query in doc, where mistakes were made. GABF20GCOB, Gilles used 16, obvious error, was 2016 not 2020 (!).
JG: Ran query in this doc, didn't run 66K, Dr. Charles Stewart couldn't run query either.
Carling: Gilles is a CPA, not a PhD.
Randy Miller is finished with Dr. Grimmer!
Carling has a follow-up about UACAVA.
Carling: Gilles is a CPA, not a PhD.
Randy Miller is finished with Dr. Grimmer!
Carling has a follow-up about UACAVA.
JG: Living abroad or in the military, specific kind of ballot that can be emailed or faxed.
DC: If not mailed, still have a mail date?
JG: Yes.
DC: Another way a label could be printed but not through the mail.
Carling is done. Dr. Grimmer is excused.
DC: If not mailed, still have a mail date?
JG: Yes.
DC: Another way a label could be printed but not through the mail.
Carling is done. Dr. Grimmer is excused.
#EastmanTrial
CA Bar Rebuttal Case is done. Carling has 3-4 questions for John Eastman.
Home stretch for The Long and Winding Road to John Eastman's Disbarment.
CA Bar Rebuttal Case is done. Carling has 3-4 questions for John Eastman.
Home stretch for The Long and Winding Road to John Eastman's Disbarment.
And here he is, the Georgia indicted, preliminarily culpable for ethics breaches in 2020 bid to keep Trump in power... John Eastman!
Before... and After.
Before... and After.
Suspended lawyer hack Rachel Alexander jumps as a rat from a sinking ship. Rachel: "I predicted on the 1st day of trial there was a 100% chance the judge would disbar". #LukeCrew 💪 listened to evidence & testimony. Unlike Rachel's VictimWorld we believe everybody gets fair shot.
#EastmanTrial
🔥 Duncan Carling asks John Eastman about his comment that NDC has false statements & filers should be disbarred.
DC: City Sentinel in OK, 9/23, published these words from you: "Outrageous persecution of me by activist lawyers to get Trump"... Did you write that?
🔥 Duncan Carling asks John Eastman about his comment that NDC has false statements & filers should be disbarred.
DC: City Sentinel in OK, 9/23, published these words from you: "Outrageous persecution of me by activist lawyers to get Trump"... Did you write that?
JE: My fundraising company, I didn't write it. Don't recall if I reviewed.
DC: You let info go out in your name without review?
JE: I need to raise money. Out to get me: States United Democracy Center, activist group & 65 Project, whose mission is to disbar & make lawyers toxic.
DC: You let info go out in your name without review?
JE: I need to raise money. Out to get me: States United Democracy Center, activist group & 65 Project, whose mission is to disbar & make lawyers toxic.
DC: Do you know how many complaints CA Bar received?
JE: No
DC: Did you know signatories including law professors not associated with the group signed the complaint?
JE: No.
Do you believe you've been charged with misconduct just because of Trump?
JE: Yes. Never before in CA Bar.
JE: No
DC: Did you know signatories including law professors not associated with the group signed the complaint?
JE: No.
Do you believe you've been charged with misconduct just because of Trump?
JE: Yes. Never before in CA Bar.
DC: Was it animosity for Trump vs. your actions?
JE: Animosity for Trump, SUDC & 65 Project.
Those are Carling's only questions. NO REMORSE.
Judge has a question, but she's asking again about what Miller would put on as sur-rebuttal with Eastman.
Miller: 5 sets about Grimmer.
JE: Animosity for Trump, SUDC & 65 Project.
Those are Carling's only questions. NO REMORSE.
Judge has a question, but she's asking again about what Miller would put on as sur-rebuttal with Eastman.
Miller: 5 sets about Grimmer.
Judge: Exactly about what?
Miller: I've asked a dozen times...
Judge: And you can't find a request.
Miller: Don't see a rule requiring it.
Judge: If you want a sur-rebuttal at this late date, exactly for that?
Miller: Testimony from Grimmer that Eastman wants to respond to.
Miller: I've asked a dozen times...
Judge: And you can't find a request.
Miller: Don't see a rule requiring it.
Judge: If you want a sur-rebuttal at this late date, exactly for that?
Miller: Testimony from Grimmer that Eastman wants to respond to.
Judge: Where's your request?
RM: As a matter of right...
Judge: Your office said you wanted a rebuttal of Patrick Colbeck (but he was bounced). I have not located any request...
Judge: We're going to take a 10 minute break for Miller to find the sur-rebuttal request. 💣
RM: As a matter of right...
Judge: Your office said you wanted a rebuttal of Patrick Colbeck (but he was bounced). I have not located any request...
Judge: We're going to take a 10 minute break for Miller to find the sur-rebuttal request. 💣
💪 #LukeCrew, your humor & vast knowledge are truly amazing. I deeply value our new friendships. I extend an invitation to join us at The Fogbow, the sole discussion forum I'm part of. Remember our motto: Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester And Grow. 🥊 thefogbow.com/forum/search.p…
#LukeCrew, do we need a drinking game for every time Rachel Alexander hits her Trifecta of Nastiness? Always the same 3 things: 1) Paid Troll 2) Prescription Drugs 3) Parent's Basement. 💀 She isn't the creative type, is she? We've had laughs at her expense so there's that...
8PM EDT: #EastmanTrial back on the record, Randy Miller is trying to find references to allowing Eastman's sur-rebuttal. There's 2 seemingly weak examples from Sep. Judge Roland says there's broad discretion for the judge to decide. Since Grimmer is excused, may not be fair.
Judge Roland: It also may be repetitive & duplicative...
RM: Not necessarily true, Dr. Eastman has a right to respond to Dr. Grimmer's points saying Eastman not credible, doesn't line up, etc.
Judge: You were aware Grimmer was a rebuttal witness, we're not going down that road.
RM: Not necessarily true, Dr. Eastman has a right to respond to Dr. Grimmer's points saying Eastman not credible, doesn't line up, etc.
Judge: You were aware Grimmer was a rebuttal witness, we're not going down that road.
Judge Roland: John Eastman's sur-rebuttal is denied, it will be cumulative.
RM: I disagree, hearing new aspects or opinions of the case...
Judge: What new opinions?
RM: All Grimmer's new comments.
Judge: Those are not new. No sur-rebuttal.
RM: I disagree, hearing new aspects or opinions of the case...
Judge: What new opinions?
RM: All Grimmer's new comments.
Judge: Those are not new. No sur-rebuttal.
Carling: Is Miller withdrawing Eastman as mitigation witness?
Miller: NO!
Judge: Let's do that.
Miller will be asking mitigation questions.
#EastmanTrial
Miller: NO!
Judge: Let's do that.
Miller will be asking mitigation questions.
#EastmanTrial
RM: Re 1.6 Good Faith Belief.
JE: Yes, good faith belief I did everything right.
Judge: Belief in what?
JE: In accuracy of statements, allegations that illegality occurred in conduct of election, that it opened the door for fraud, & that under historical record VP had authority.
JE: Yes, good faith belief I did everything right.
Judge: Belief in what?
JE: In accuracy of statements, allegations that illegality occurred in conduct of election, that it opened the door for fraud, & that under historical record VP had authority.
John Eastman is getting downright hostile. Gee, after saying all the CA Bar should be disbarred, wonder why they don't think of Johnny as sweet honey?
RM: Think it was objectively reasonable?
#EastmanTrial
RM: Think it was objectively reasonable?
#EastmanTrial
JE: When it's an open question & from Constitutional it's objectively reasonable and correct. And in the 10 weeks, I haven't heard challenge to my allegations to criminality in the election.
Miller tries to argue. Judge: Your next question.
Ever disciplinary action before? JE: No
Miller tries to argue. Judge: Your next question.
Ever disciplinary action before? JE: No
Miller talks about character witnesses. Eastman talks about being honored & humbled... Judge stops him.
Judge: It's improper for a Respondent to offer his own character referenced.
Miller talks about cooperating with investigation. Judge says no mitigation, it's required.
Judge: It's improper for a Respondent to offer his own character referenced.
Miller talks about cooperating with investigation. Judge says no mitigation, it's required.
RM: Did proceeding cause harm to your clients?
JE: None whatsoever. None ever filed a complaint.
Miller finished. State Bar has no cross-examination. They move to Exhibits.
John Eastman is seething. Opinion: He is being held responsible for his actions. It's about time. 🍀
JE: None whatsoever. None ever filed a complaint.
Miller finished. State Bar has no cross-examination. They move to Exhibits.
John Eastman is seething. Opinion: He is being held responsible for his actions. It's about time. 🍀
Judge has 1 more question for Eastman: After being retained by Trump, you didn't communicate directly from the Sep timeframe until Jan 4?
JE No. Not with the group Cleta Mitchell organized, not until late Nov or early Dec I had contact with him re the case at the Supreme Court.
JE No. Not with the group Cleta Mitchell organized, not until late Nov or early Dec I had contact with him re the case at the Supreme Court.
John Eastman & all his Georgia RICO Election Defendant pals knew what they were doing. They needed to learn the hard way: ATTEMPTING TO SUBVERT A UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CARRIES SEVERE PENALTIES. In my opinion, they're getting exactly what they deserve. #EastmanTrial
Trump & his allies had their day in court after the 2020 Election. In fact, 64 days in court. They LOST 63 cases & PA win was irrelevant. Their low-information, civics-challenged sycophants can scream all they want but these included Trump judges (including SCOTUS). #EastmanTrial
Opinions: For 10 weeks, #LukeCrew 💪 tirelessly searched for the proverbial SMOKING GUNS that could vindicate John Eastman in #EastmanTrial. We’ve scoured every avenue seeking legal justification. However, the only SMOKING GUNS we’ve uncovered are the ones presented here. 😿
We’ve searched far and wide, paid close attention & anticipated John Eastman’s strong & hard flexing against his disbarment in California during the #EastmanTrial. However, even with Eastman's delightful personality and cheerful demeanor, only this materialized.
Could Randall Miller, Zachary Mayer & other John Eastman lawyers astonish us with THEIR SMOKING GUNS? Could their legal muscle transform John Eastman from a charged criminal in Georgia & potential disbarment in California into a Muscle God in #EastmanTrial? The answer was no.
While often sweaty & pumped, John Eastman and Randall Miller just didn't show RESULTS. It was a complete failure for them. #EastmanTrial showed that the California Bar's Notice of Disciplinary Complaint was accurate and John Eastman should be thrown out of the gym & disbarred.
At least charming John Eastman remembers the classic song from the Broadway Musical ANNIE: "You're Never Fully Dressed Without A Smile". His natural effervescence, affability, enjoyability & suavity shine through. #EastmanTrial showed Eastman got exactly what he deserved. 🥳
While John Eastman's witnesses Michael Gableman, John Droz, Ray Blehar, Joe Fried, Garland Favorito & Stan Young lacked the skills, background, training or experience to offer opinion or analysis re election subject matter, remember: It's about the friends we met along the way.💙
Some more Exhibit work next week. They skipped oral closing arguments, but they have until 11/22 to file written Closing Arguments that are less than 75 pages & only cite to evidence presented at #EastmanTrial. That's also the date the matter will be submitted by Judge Roland.
And with that, the #EastmanTrial is OVER! 🥳 In my opinion, Duncan Carling & the CA Bar team were superb & more than proved their case for John Eastman's CA disbarment. It’s been a privilege to accompany all of you, #LukeCrew! 💪 Have an GREAT weekend & onto the next trial! 💙
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
