January 6th insurrection thread...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24521262-eastman-decision-trial

The full decision by the State Bar Court.

"Despite the depth, breadth, and complexity of the case law and historical context cited by the parties, this disciplinary proceeding boils down to an analysis of whether or not Eastman, in his role as the attorney for then-President Donald Trump (hereinafter referred to as President Trump) and his re-election campaign, acted dishonestly in his comments and advice given regarding the issue of whether then-Vice President Mike Pence (hereinafter referred to as Vice President Pence) had authority to unilaterally reject certain states’ slate of electors and/or delay or recess the electoral count during the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021, and the manner in which he pursued legal action aimed at obstructing the lawful electoral process."
 
Last edited:
There are lines a lawyer can't cross. Backstopping a crime with a cockamamie legal theory is one of those. Including allegations known to be false in a legal filing is another.

Count Ten – Moral Turpitude (§ 6106) In count ten, OCTC charges Eastman with moral turpitude in violation of section 6106, by repeatedly proposing and seeking to encourage Vice President Pence to exercise authority to disregard the electoral votes of certain states or delay the counting of electoral votes.
 
Last edited:
A legal theory that democrats have used with every election they've lost. Dershowitz was called brilliant in 2000.

It's what you have to expect from leftist dirtbags.
 
Count One – Failure to Support the Laws of The United States (§ 6068, subd. (a)) Section 6068, subdivision (a), places a duty on attorneys to support the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state. OCTC is required to specifically identify the underlying provision of law allegedly violated. (See In the Matter of Lilley (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 476, 486.) “The requirement of specification of the underlying provision of law allegedly violated means that the Supreme Court interprets section 6068(a) as a conduit by which attorneys may be charged and disciplined for violations of other specific laws which are not otherwise made disciplinable under the State Bar Act.”
 
nsacpi said:
what can i say...more lawfare by yet another DC jury
Click to expand...

A lawyer gets a slap on the wrist for lying to the FISA court which should be a jail sentence with disbarrment and a lawyer who uses a legal theory that has been used for decades gets a recommendation for disbarment you know there's a huge double standard.

I know putting two and two together is quite difficult for you. I'm here to help ya, buddy.
 
Last edited:
If the judge takes the bar recommendation and Eastman is disbarred he probably has zero chance in the Cal appellate courts.

If he can hold on and appeal to the SCOTUS it will be an easy win, maybe a 9-0.
 
"The evidence clearly and convincingly proves that Eastman and President Trump entered into an agreement to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress by unlawfully having Vice President Pence reject or delay the counting of electoral votes on January 6, 2021. Specifically, on December 23, 2020, and January 3, 2021, respectively, Eastman wrote two-page and six-page memos outlining a detailed plan of action for Vice President Pence to declare President Trump the re-elected president."

This I didn't know. Learn something new every day.
 
In all seriousness this will be as easy for the SCOTUS as the Trump Colorado case. This disbarment judgment is this bad.

The so-called "fringe" legal theory has been used for decades, especially be dems. The VP declined and that was the end of it. I showed videotape of Gore and Biden declining them. This is how it works. Yes, the dems actually got further than Trump. Overthrowing democracy, my ass.

Nobody cared and nobody was disbarred when the dems did it.
 
nsacpi said:
"The evidence clearly and convincingly proves that Eastman and President Trump entered into an agreement to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress by unlawfully having Vice President Pence reject or delay the counting of electoral votes on January 6, 2021. Specifically, on December 23, 2020, and January 3, 2021, respectively, Eastman wrote two-page and six-page memos outlining a detailed plan of action for Vice President Pence to declare President Trump the re-elected president."

This I didn't know. Learn something new every day.
Click to expand...

I would love to see the paperwork for that. I bet it is taken out of context. If it was real you would have to think the media would have released it by now. The plan was to delay and audit all the states. If it showed Trump really won then perhaps a declaration of Trump won it or a redo.
 
3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected.

The above is from the December 23 memo. Bolding added for emphasis. Authored by Eastman. And enthusiastically embraced by amateur videographer and fellow lawyer Kenneth Chesebro as "really awesome."

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21066248-eastman-memo

The entire memo it should not go unmentioned is premised upon a falsehood: “7 states have transmitted dual slates of electors to the President of the Senate.” That was not accurate. Each of the seven states transmitted only a single valid slate of electors who voted for Joe Biden.
 
Last edited:
I admit I didn't know that memo existed. It still doesn't mean that they went with that particular plan.

"Lauro said Thursday that Trump pushed then-Vice President Mike Pence to delay Congress from counting the electoral votes on the pretext that some states needed more time to investigate supposed claims of fraud.

“What President Trump said is: ‘Let’s go with option D,’” Lauro said on Fox News. “Let’s just halt, let’s just pause the voting and allow the state legislatures to take one last look and make a determination as to whether or not the elections were handled fairly.”

https://news.yahoo.com/oops-trump-lawyer-john-lauro-153200125.html

They went with option D. I guess A-C options were the more hardcore options that Eastman suggested.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/01/02/ted-cruz-joe-biden/

"U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and some of his fellow GOP senators announced they would vote to reject the certification of Electoral College votes for the presidential election unless an emergency audit is conducted."
 
He makes a good pint. Should the Colorado Supreme Court be disbarred for coming up with a fringe theory?

[tw]1773166128749007230[/tw]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top