John Eastman disbarment hearing

[NewMexGirl]

Thank you, Orly and p0rtia! Wonderful reporting.

[Rolodex]

Great thread! I'm new here but have been following the Eastman hearing since the beginning.

All the witnesses (except the expected character ones) have been giving mind-numbing detail about data (from people who know about data) regarding elections (about which none seem to be experts). I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure exactly what all this testimony is supposed to support, except that maybe he was relying on these folks' information and analysis (although he didn't seem to consider opposing data/analysis, which would seem a pretty important part of research). That said I also started wondering about his appearance at the rally on J6. Was that part of the bar's charges? I looked (not very hard) for exactly the bar's charges, and got this from the CA Bar's page:

"The State Bar of California’s Chief Trial Counsel George Cardona announced today the filing of a Notice of Disciplinary Charges (NDC) against attorney John Charles Eastman (State Bar No. 193726). The 11 charges arise from allegations that Eastman engaged in a course of conduct to plan, promote, and assist then-President Trump in executing a strategy, unsupported by facts or law, to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election by obstructing the count of electoral votes of certain states.

Specific charges allege that Eastman made false and misleading statements regarding purported election fraud, including statements on January 6, 2021, at a rally in Washington, D.C., that contributed to provoking a crowd to assault and breach the Capitol to intimidate then-Vice President Pence and prevent the electoral count from proceeding."

So, yes, the J6 speech is mentioned here, but as yet I haven't heard mention of it at the hearing, even though in this description it describes "provoking a crowd."

Wonder if Duncan will ever bring it up. Or if he'll ever get to cross examine Eastman since Miller can't shut up.

[Foggy]

Welcome to our raucous little playpen, Rolodex.

[Maybenaut]

Could it be that they want to appeal-proof the decision to pull his license, by making sure he can't argue that he didn't get to put on a defense?

Yes. Too also: There's no jury to inconvenience.

Having said that, if the trial judge was ... "more aggressive" in limiting testimony, the appellate court likely would defer to the trial court's rulings.

She’s starting to remind me of Judge Ito, who was long on warnings and short on consequences.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Welcome, Rolodex!

[chancery]

Having said that, if the trial judge was ... "more aggressive" in limiting testimony, the appellate court likely would defer to the trial court's rulings.

She’s starting to remind me of Judge Ito, who was long on warnings and short on consequences.

Hmm. Yes, but ...

Judge Yvette Roland spent her first 30 years of practice doing civil litigation at a BigLaw firm (Duane Morris), an experience which would be unlikely to develop the kinds of rapid-fire decision-making skills that judges need to keep unruly lawyers in line. In fact it's possible to be a very effective big case civil litigation lawyer with only the most rudimentary trial skills.

Now, she has apparently been a state bar court judge, a full time position, for nearly 10 years,* which is plenty of time to learn her current job.

Even so, I have trouble believing that presiding at the notoriously slow-moving state bar court provides the same depth and breadth of experience that a judge would get on a busy regular trial court, the experience which lets good judges develop a strong intuitive sense of what will and won't get them reversed.

So I'm inclined to cut her some slack for being cautious.

_________
*https://www.duanemorris.com/pressreleas ... _5358.html

[Frater I*I]

Are you saying he might be coming apart?

He may even turn to Jell-O....

[Rolodex]

Welcome to our raucous little playpen, Rolodex.

Thanks! So glad to be here. Orly invited me!

Super good forum without the to weed through!

[Suranis]

Welcome to our raucous little playpen, Rolodex.

Thanks! So glad to be here. Orly invited me!

Super good forum without the to weed through!

Oh don't worry it will arrive. I'll post at some point.

[Rolodex]

Suranis, I'm not worried about you. You've used apostrophes correctly.

[RVInit]

Welcome, Rolodex!

[RVInit]

Sunaris, I'm not worried about you. You've used apostrophes correctly.

[northland10]

Are you saying he might be coming apart?

He may even turn to Jell-O....

No, I'm not going to post the other Jello moment in the Airplane moves. I will let somebody used to getting in trouble with others do it.

[Luke]

Yay, ThreadReaderApp worked today. I think it's because of their tweet limit (which I didn't know) is 100 tweets. I have messages in to them and to Twitter... I'm not sure if i can go back and delete tweets in the thread without breaking it. Asked Twitter about that. Hopefully I can, I like TRA. Live and learn.

Eastman is a POS. It was funny though that he FOUGHT about... 1/6 CROWD size. What a Trumper. It's in the thread. He's trying to refute the ethics charges, but saying what respected experts Russ Ramsland & Joe Oltmann were/are is ridiculous. He also went where I didn't expect, he talked about Georgia and Coffee County. I'd think he'd stay far away from a scene of the crime. But thought it was terrific he did.


Luke Johnson @Orly_licious 3m
Oct 23, 2023 John Eastman testified about his actions in DC on 1/5/21 & #January6th before the Capitol Riots. He's trying to refute the NDC (Notice of Disciplinary Charges by the CA Bar's
@StateBarCA. Day 26 of #EastmanTrial. Back 10/24 2pm EDT.

[p0rtia]

Eastman direct examination was actually interesting yesterday--because they finally got around to what Eastman was doing on Jan 6.

Nuggets:

- His little speech was not planned and was thus impromtu.

- He estimated the crowd at the Ellipse to be a quarter or a half a million. (Later neutral estimates put it at 10,000, max).

- The reason he finds the idea that the 2020 election was fair/unrigged/unstolen is because they had hundreds and hundreds of affidavits detailing the unfairness/rigging/stealing.

- He NEVER SAID that dead people voting (all four of them) was dispositive. He JUST SAID that DEAD PEOPLE VOTED. Which was true. Therefore the charges against him are PROVED FALSE! ... The dead people voting was just part of it. But TO THIS DAY he has never seen Michigan explainging their 6,000 DEAD PEOPLE VOTING.

- He wasn't trying to urge people to insurrection, like it says in the charging document. Or telling them that the election had been stolen. So the charging document is WRONG. He was just...asking questions. (Seriously. NB: Have you seen the video of his speech at the Ellipse???)

- Another Randy Miller Maddening Speech Habit: Miller narrates his own performance by explaining the things he is saying. It is an incredible time waster, since the result is that his questions generally take at least twice as long to get out as necessary. A couple of examples:

Judge: Please ask your next question, Mr. Miller.

Miller: Yes, thank you, Judge. Dr. Eastman, I'm going to ask you some questions now, and I'll try to keep this as focused as possible.

Judge: You're wasting time, Mr. Miller. Ask your question.

Miller. I apologize, Judge. I know it's important to keep the questioning moving, so I'll try to move on a little faster, by keeping my focus just on the exhibits that have been accepted by your honor this morning and avoiding questions that might bring up issues with exhibits that we have not yet agreed upon.

Judge: You're doing it right now, Mr. Miller.

Miller: I don't think I am, Your Honor. But, okay, I'll move on and ask my question.

Maddening.

[NewMexGirl]

26 days! I feel my life seeping away as Miller goes on and on. Orly and p0rtia, listening in on the trial, are true Fogbow heroes.

[Frater I*I]

- He wasn't trying to urge people to insurrection, like it says in the charging document. Or telling them that the election had been stolen. So the charging document is WRONG. He was just...asking questions. (Seriously. NB: Have you seen the video of his speech at the Ellipse???)

Better known as JAQing off....





I'll see myself out....

[Gregg]

At least we now know what it takes for the California bar to get off its ass and take notice.

I myself am getting a little chuckle that the State that has no problem with Orly Taitz is trying to get him .

[Rolodex]

Eastman direct examination was actually interesting yesterday--because they finally got around to what Eastman was doing on Jan 6.

Nuggets:

- His little speech was not planned and was thus impromtu.

- He estimated the crowd at the Ellipse to be a quarter or a half a million. (Later neutral estimates put it at 10,000, max).

- The reason he finds the idea that the 2020 election was fair/unrigged/unstolen is because they had hundreds and hundreds of affidavits detailing the unfairness/rigging/stealing.

- He NEVER SAID that dead people voting (all four of them) was dispositive. He JUST SAID that DEAD PEOPLE VOTED. Which was true. Therefore the charges against him are PROVED FALSE! ... The dead people voting was just part of it. But TO THIS DAY he has never seen Michigan explainging their 6,000 DEAD PEOPLE VOTING.

- He wasn't trying to urge people to insurrection, like it says in the charging document. Or telling them that the election had been stolen. So the charging document is WRONG. He was just...asking questions. (Seriously. NB: Have you seen the video of his speech at the Ellipse???)

- Another Randy Miller Maddening Speech Habit: Miller narrates his own performance by explaining the things he is saying. It is an incredible time waster, since the result is that his questions generally take at least twice as long to get out as necessary. A couple of examples:

Judge: Please ask your next question, Mr. Miller.

Miller: Yes, thank you, Judge. Dr. Eastman, I'm going to ask you some questions now, and I'll try to keep this as focused as possible.

Judge: You're wasting time, Mr. Miller. Ask your question.

Miller. I apologize, Judge. I know it's important to keep the questioning moving, so I'll try to move on a little faster, by keeping my focus just on the exhibits that have been accepted by your honor this morning and avoiding questions that might bring up issues with exhibits that we have not yet agreed upon.

Judge: You're doing it right now, Mr. Miller.

Miller: I don't think I am, Your Honor. But, okay, I'll move on and ask my question.

Maddening.

This is a wonderful wrap up. I wanted to strangle Miller today - that whole explaining what he's saying; I don't know how the judge keeps from throwing something at him (except of course they were all remote today).

But ol' John got a lil salty today! He was borderline rude - talking fast, loud, angrily - and that was when his own attorney was questioning him. It made me wonder if he'd heard about Meadows. Maybe he's still thinking about Jenna Ellis, too. I hope Willis doesn't bargain with him. He's a True Believer™ who honestly thinks he's right about all this codswallop.
When Duncan gets him, it's gonna be lit. I hope that's Monday because I have more time to watch. LOL

[p0rtia]

My favorite part of the day:

Judge Roland: How much more time do you need with Dr. Eastman?

Miller: I'd say...45 minutes. No more than that.

Judge Roland: You've said that before. Okay, off the record till Monday morning, when we'll resume with Dr. Eastman. For ONE HOUR.

[Luke]

HUGE DAY of testimony today. To make sure ThreadReaderApp wouldn't cut off, three parts!


Luke Johnson @Orly_licious 2h
31st day of #EastmanTrial. Randall Miller finishes John Eastman's Direct Examination, then CA Bar's @StateBarCA Duncan Carling begins Cross-Ex. 3 parts of intense testimony!

Part III: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719 ... 36632.html

Part II: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719 ... 87805.html

Part I: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719 ... 91164.html


Next trial date THU 11/2 at NOON EDT. Then supposedly, Closing Arguments Fri 11/3 and that's it! Dang, didn't realize how long this would go on and how much work it would be, this was my 16th day or something and they are long days. But I'm happy we have a record and don't have to rely on lies from Rachel Alexander and RWNJs. All this will be coming around again in Fulton County.

[raison de arizona]

Apparently Eastman owned them, as reported all over the RWNJ-verse.
https://twitter.com/rach_ic/status/1719142998930591849

Best line in the disbarment trial of Trump's attorney John Eastman today was by Eastman. He has this incredible mind that remembers everything. The California bar's attorney started a new subject and asked him how he knew that tens of thousands of mail-in ballots were returned in the 2020 Pennsylvania election before the date they were mailed out, and wanted to know how Eastman figured out what the mailed out date was. Eastman responded instantly without referencing anything, "Footnote 1 of your exhibit 132."

[Rolodex]

Apparently Eastman owned them, as reported all over the RWNJ-verse.
https://twitter.com/rach_ic/status/1719142998930591849

Best line in the disbarment trial of Trump's attorney John Eastman today was by Eastman. He has this incredible mind that remembers everything. The California bar's attorney started a new subject and asked him how he knew that tens of thousands of mail-in ballots were returned in the 2020 Pennsylvania election before the date they were mailed out, and wanted to know how Eastman figured out what the mailed out date was. Eastman responded instantly without referencing anything, "Footnote 1 of your exhibit 132."

She was conveniently leaving out all the times Eastman said he didn't remember something that Carling asked him about. I had meetings Monday, so missed a few hours of Eastman - thanks @Orly_licious for letting me catch up. I've got something mid-day Thursday but I'll on the bird site with the crew most of the day!
The judge ought to give Miller 10 minutes for re-direct and set a timer on her desk. A timer with a really loud alarm.

[NewMexGirl]

Thank you, Orly!

[Slim Cognito]

Was that particular footnote relevant or is it just something he pulled out of his ass to make himself look smarter than everyone else in the room? And how is a remark like that handled? I can't imagine court going into recess so everybody can pull out a document and read through it in order to enter it into the transcript.