Fogbow

Nothing will happen with this.

The only time our esteemed California Bar takes any lawyer malfeasance into account is when they play games with their trust accounts. That can lead to disbarment in a San Francisco minute.

There are always "mitigating" factors with other transgressions, so the lawyer gets off with a sternly worded letter of reprimand and a two-minute minor penalty.

(A person that I went to junior and senior high school with became a lawyer. This person was always doing shady things in their law practice. Complaint after complaint were resolved with public information placed into in the file and maybe a 30-day suspension or two years' probation. There must have been four complaints and an arrest against this lawyer over 35 years. Finally, when he dipped into his trust fund [I think he was lapping ] he was disbarred.)

Lapping?

Thanks, I just learned a new word. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lappingscheme.asp

Eastman is posting on his Substack. He's begging for more money (he's raised $260K of $300K on GiveSendGo but it's been going on for a while https://www.givesendgo.com/Eastman). He also posted his 99-page response to the Bar.

https://johneastman.substack.com/p/resp ... estigation (no link to the letter or public response, you have to download it from there it looks like).

Had wondered why this old tweet was getting liked and retweeted again

"For completeness," the CSB charged Eastman (in State Bar Ct. Case No. 21-O-11801) with:

* Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6106 [six counts]: Moral Turpitude - Misrepresentation
* Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6106 [two counts]: Moral Turpitude [basically negligence]
* Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6068(a): Failure to Support the Constitution and Laws of the United States
* Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6068(d) [two counts]: Seeking to Mislead a Court ((1) the SCOTUS Texas v. Pennsylvania caper; (2) in N.D. Georgia)

From my non-lawyer point of view, any and all of these appear to be consequential. When stacked on top of each other, I think he is unfit to represent others or provide legal advice if these allegations are true.

But something tells me that he will retain his license after some minor CE requirements and a brief probationary period.

https://twitter.com/jadler1969/status/1 ... 7283308816

Greg Dworkin reposted
Jonathan H. Adler
@jadler1969
Surprise!!
Conservative group tells judge it has no evidence to back its claims of Georgia ballot stuffing

Sidney has her own thread, but this covers several of the Kraken Kooks. Sanctions stand (Michigan case). And I'm standing by to hopefully watch their disbarment hearings.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... rcna139256

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected appeals brought by Trump-allied lawyers who faced legal sanctions for baselessly alleging in court that the 2020 election in Michigan was fraudulently won by President Joe Biden.

By rejecting the appeals, the court left in place a June 2023 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that partially upheld the sanctions.

Rolodex wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:11 pm Sidney has her own thread, but this covers several of the Kraken Kooks. Sanctions stand (Michigan case). And I'm standing by to hopefully watch their disbarment hearings.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... rcna139256

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected appeals brought by Trump-allied lawyers who faced legal sanctions for baselessly alleging in court that the 2020 election in Michigan was fraudulently won by President Joe Biden.

By rejecting the appeals, the court left in place a June 2023 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that partially upheld the sanctions.

Tx! I had the pleasure of watching the Michigan hearing, the one where all the attorneys and their attorneys complained bitterly that it was not their job as attorneys to establish the truth of the on-the-surface-inane positions they were vouching for in their pleadings. Dershowitz was particularly hilarious, explaining that he had not read anything about the papers he put his name to, and was only on board if needed and had not written one word (all this in the face of the email exchange in which he agreed to be on board).

I think La Habba was there too, or that might have been another case? First time I heard her--I was as I always am, initially impressed with her ease of speaking and forcefulness, right up to the point where it becomes clear she is spouting Earth 2 legal theories.

p0rtia wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:59 pm I think La Habba was there too, or that might have been another case? First time I heard her--I was as I always am, initially impressed with her ease of speaking and forcefulness, right up to the point where it becomes clear she is spouting Earth 2 legal theories.

I think you mean Earth-3 - the alternate DC Comics universe where evil always triumphs over good (with Ultra-Man, Superwoman and the Owl as evil versions of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman).

Do they all have goatees?

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:44 pm Do they all have goatees?

Sadly, no. Not sure DC could have gotten away with a bearded Wonder Woman back when the Comics Code was still enforced. (Even now it might be banned in Florida.)