John Eastman disbarment hearing

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Firstborn Son and his buds were into pumping iron and constantly compared their "smoking guns". It was a lovely sight to behold.. Thanks for the blond, orly.

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Debunking John Droz's Michigan Report
Introduction

As part of his defense, John Eastman called on John Droz, failing to get him qualified as an expert witness. One of the documents Droz would have relied on is the report he edited on the so-called anomalies a group of non-experts claim to have found while looking through the election data from Michigan, titled the Michigan 2020 Voter Analysis Report (hereafter referred to as the Michigan Report). A copy can be found on scribd at the following link (if you don't have a subscription, you may have to watch a short ad every page or so). The first draft was released 11-27-2020, with the latest revision dated April of 2021. Eastman would have relied on the first draft, so the errors noted would have likely been worse.

https://www.scribd.com/document/4876156 ... sis-Report

The report starts off with an intro by Droz, followed by individual chapters written by various authors. Since most authors are using the same dataset, there is a lot of overlap between chapters. I will be reviewing individual chapters in each installment.

Droz starts off by imagining a dozen means by which nefarious actors might manipulate the vote count. He notes that these might have reasonable explanations, but that certain reports and studies show that these reasons aren't supported by voters. He then admits that it would be difficult to prove most of these means, so instead chooses to apply statistical models to find "major statistical aberrations in some of the Michigan results that are extremely unlikely to occur naturally." The authors focus on what has been determined as the two largest anomalies (per Chapter 2), and call for a recount in those two counties. If the recount shows the reported numbers were accurate, allegedly they would then accept the results as a statistical fluke. (We of course know this is false, since they rejected the recounts in Georgia and other locales). Otherwise, FORENSIC AUDITS FOR EVERYBODY!

Before continuing to the individual chapters, I want to talk about the data-source common to many of the chapters. The NYT made available a time series summary of the Biden v Trump race for each state, presumably updating in real time. The raw data may have come from Edison (this is somewhat unclear), but the time series itself is only a summary that lacks precision. What do I mean? Let's look at an entry in the time series.

{"vote_shares":{"trumpd":0.498,"bidenj":0.485},"votes":4724327,"eevp":83,"eevp_source":"edison","timestamp":"2020-11-04T11:31:53Z"}

vote_shares = the percentage of the vote for Trump or Biden, rounded to the nearest 0.1% (other candidates not listed)
votes = total votes counted, including third party candidates
eevp = expected electoral vote percentage = percent of the expected votes from that state, rounded to nearest percent
eevp_source = source of the expected total vote estimate (most people assume this means all the data is sourced from Edison, but it may only be the estimated total vote that came from Edison)
timestamp = time the entry was generated, expressed by date and UTC time (the Z tells us that UTC is used), subtract 5 hours to get EST (Daylight Saving ended the weekend before)

Of particular note is that the vote_share is subject to significant rounding error. Any attempt to determine the number of votes for Trump or Biden will fall within a range of 0.1% of the current total votes. For example, in the sample entry above, it would be incorrect to say that Trump had 0.498 * 4724327 = 2,352,715 votes. The correct entry would be 2,352,715 +/- 2,362 votes. For many of the entries, the rounding error overlaps with the previous entry. The use of this time series is the origin of the claims for fractional voting and vote shifting. It also affects the Michigan Report in several ways. It is not clear how the interval between time entries was determined; my guess is that a certain threshold of new votes triggered the release of a new entry, but I haven't analyzed the data to be sure.

The time series for Michigan is at the following link (you can substitute the name of the state to get the series for other states):

https://static01.nyt.com/elections-asse ... ident.json

More discussion about the data-source can be found at http://securitydebrief.com/2020/11/14/s ... formation/, including how to find the raw data files, broken down by county and by precinct for a given moment in time.

[Dave from down under]

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Sorry, I hoped to have a couple more up today, but I got my Covid shot yesterday and as usual, it's kicking my ass. Just earlier than previously.

[June bug]

Sorry you’re having a bad reaction, but thanks so much for the first installment!

[Luke]

Kevin, hope you bounce back soon buddy. This is a great analysis. Droz isn't finished in the Eastman trial. Would it be OK to use the analysis in the trial thread? Maybe I can use screen shots... folks should see this excellent debunking.

[bob]

Not the hearing per se, but:

[raison de arizona]

Holy crap, Thomas recused?!

[Volkonski]

Holy crap, Thomas recused?!

Thomas was visited by three ghosts recently.

[bob]

Holy crap, Thomas recused?!

IIRC, Thomas is literally discussed in some of the emails.

[pipistrelle]

Holy crap, Thomas recused?!

IIRC, Thomas is literally discussed in some of the emails.

Shocking that would matter to him.

[p0rtia]

Holy crap, Thomas recused?!

IIRC, Thomas is literally discussed in some of the emails.

I bet....

[Luke]

Here we go!


Luke Johnson @Orly_licious
Welcome everybody! It's Tue Oct 3 & the #EastmanTrial, CA Bar Disbarment Trial of #JohnEastman, begins 1pm EDT. Today's plan is to resume with #ElectionDenier John Droz. Judge Roland said ending today at 6:30pm EDT. 9/29 ended with disasterous Eastman witness, Joe Blehar.

[p0rtia]

Still getting a Court in Recess notice as of 2 PM Tuesday.

Anybody getting the hearing?

[Luke]

Nope, this is the latest they've ever been. Don't think it's canceled since the slide is there, but it's strange.

[p0rtia]

Started at 2:35.

[Luke]

They said tech problems...

LOTS of very technical information. A 90-tweet day. As Realist might say:

10/3's burning John #EastmanTrial Q was: What's it like to spend a day with #ElectionDenier Ray Blehar? As fun & informative as you'd expect. With no election experience, more irrelevant, mostly inadmissible testimony. But Rachel Alexander will be happy!

7h • 90 tweets • 25 min read
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709 ... 31515.html





Eager to catch up on the McCarthy fun!

[tek]

JF: Broke down by state. Democrats said Biden won because of better messaging & marketing -- so it should have been better everywhere. But it wasn't.

Oh come on.. Even I find that just plain stupid.

[p0rtia]

Got to hear most of the cross of Eastman's (not expert) witnesses yesterday. Finally.

It was boring as hell, and hard to follow because the audio was poor and I know nothing about statistics. (Kudos to Carling who came off as more informed on that topic than either Droz or Blehar (sp).

But the point of both crosses was crystal clear:

These dodos cherry picked their data and misread their own conclusions. Again and again and again. They made no attempt to compare their findings with the historical date. No one on either team had any experience with elections. They were looking for proof of fraud in the elections, and they found it. Oh, and they don't use the word fraud they just use anomaly. Because they don't want to get effing sued.

Of course we know that, but it was fun to listen to Carling skewering their credibility so effortlessly.

[raison de arizona]

https://twitter.com/Rach_IC/status/1709 ... 28885?s=20

Finally. Now that John Eastman has actually gotten one of his witnesses designated an expert, statistician Dr. Stanley Young, the statistical PhDs team's contrast analysis of the 2020 presidential election is finally being thoroughly discussed without constant objections and stricken testimony. That report looked at 48 states, broken down by county, and compared the increases in votes that Biden got in 2020 compared to Hillary Clinton in 2016, with helpful graphs in addition to the raw numbers. https://election-integrity.info/Contrast_Report.pdf

Skimmed the report. It's pretty bad. They don't like that Biden got more votes than Clinton, and therefore something must be amiss.

[Luke]

The naming and shaming of Rachel Alexander by the judge was my personal highlight. It's included in the tweets.


Wed Oct 4 #EastmanTrial #JohnEastman's CA Bar Disbarment Trial. Today: Finale of Ray Blehar & beginning of Dr. Stan Young's direct. Rachel Alexander, partisan hack & AZ Supreme Court-suspended lawyer, called out for interacting with Blehar. 10/6 next.


Luke Johnson @Orly_licious
6h • 69 tweets • 17 min read
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1709 ... 74529.html

[raison de arizona]

He'll never learn.

John Eastman, in Fundraising Email, Continues to Claim “election illegality and fraud” in the 2020 Election

https://electionlawblog.org/?p=139002

[Ben-Prime]

In fairness, I would almost expect him to keep pushing on the 'no, really, I truly believe this with all my heart, therefore it was legitimate advice' button, no matter how absurd.

[Luke]

That's all, folks, until Tue 10/17! Today was a funny Kurt Olsen cross and the criminal himself, John Eastman (on direct).

This was a LONG week! Gave in on paying the $8 for Twitter premium (hid the checkmark) only to be able to post longer tweets. It really came in handy, it was moving fast and 280 characters with witness testimony is absurd. People have been SO SWEET donating to Buy Me A Coffee, I never expected it. It's close to $200 now and more than the money, it's the appreciation.

If you want to catch up on the 10+ previous days of testimony, at the beginning below there's a list with links.

Hadn't planned to do this & it's blown a fu*king hole in my schedule, but since it's not being archived I'll be damned if idiots like Rachel Alexander are going to be the last word on what happened.

Hope y'all enjoy... feedback & criticism encouraged (but don't be too mean tonight).



Luke Johnson @Orly_licious 31m
10/6/23 was a big day for #EastmanTrial: Mike Lindell & Kari Lake's lawyer, Kurt Olsen, & the indicted-in-GA John Eastman himself! Here's a of the merriment & good time had by all at the CA Bar Court. NO TRIAL NEXT WEEK. Next trial day: Tue Oct 17.

8h • 73 tweets • 29 min read
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1710 ... 72014.html

[Dave from down under]