35 Burst results for "Eastman"

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

05:11 min | Last month

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Four relate to co-conspirators. So they say four documents connect third parties to doctor eastman, similar documents were discussed in the first order. None of which were found to relate to her implicate litigation. They are not protected at the court orders them to be disclosed. So that is person a says, oh hey, you believe crazy things about the election. The person coordinating our head of the department of crazy is John eastman, John meet lunatic, lunatic meet John. Four of those emails are going to be produced. And those might be useful to the one 6 committee to the extent that their names that they haven't heard before. 11 are public documents and so they're not interesting at all. Two are duplicates of previously produced documents that nevertheless found their way on the privilege log and of course like we should give you. Really annoying. If you're a taint team member, whatever, to go through all the emails that are like reply all replying all just everything includes everything. I hate how email works that way, especially when you're getting long email chains with multiple people. Sometimes someone replies to like not everybody in the chain and then that's brought back in. It must be, I don't know, it was job that is, but that sucks. I hate that job. Sorry, sorry to whoever that is. So noted. One is a redacted document in which it involves discussions between a representative of the Trump administration and doctor eastman. They primarily seek legal advice, but some portions discuss only political advice, accordingly, the court orders this document to be disclosed with redactions. So that's an example of what I've talked about where there's some legal advice in there. But the directions are, okay, cut out the legal advice, but the political advice, which is very likely to be, hey, how is this going to be perceived if we do that? You have to disclose. And then there are 8 documents to which the crime fraud exception applies. And this is really, really critical. And again, the court notes, there were 18 others that it thought really hard about releasing. But it felt that it wanted to err on the side of caution and of the 26 that it might get out. You're definitely going to get these 8. And there's a sort of a sense of this is probably going to be enough. We'll find out. So remember the crime fraud exception applies when a client consults an attorney for advice that will serve them in the commission of a fraud or crime and the communications are sufficiently related to and made in furtherance of the crime. So that's what differentiates you email me tomorrow and say, hey, it's my lawyer. If I murder Eli bosnic, what's the implications of that? I can tell you that so long as I'm not making it easier for you to murder Eli bosmic. Of those 8 documents, the court found four in which doctor eastman and other attorneys suggest that irrespective of the merits, the primary goal of filing X particular lawsuit, is to delay or otherwise disrupt the January 6th vote. That's pretty critical. In one email, for example, president Trump's attorney state that quote merely having this case pending in the Supreme Court not ruled on might be enough to delay consideration of Georgia. Well, so is that like a gray area? I mean, if they're filing a lawsuit, yeah, if they're filing a lawsuit under the false pretenses of, I don't care what the results are. I just want to slow this down. 100%, that is not only an abuse of the judicial process. And disbarred, but that is a crime. That is the crime of obstruction of justice and possibly other things. You can not under 18 USC three 71, right? You can't conspire to unlawfully deprive the United States of a presidential election by means of gumming up the works with lawsuits where you don't care about the outcome. Those are big documents. It gets better or worse. Well, as it's getting better, I think we should take a quick little break. Quick break with the cliffhanger of how better it gets. This episode is brought to you by rocket money, formerly known as true bill, you may have heard about it. If you haven't checked it out yet, you need to. Look, here's the thing. Times are a little tough. They've been a little tough for a few years right now. And if you're looking to save what might be significant money per month, you need to check out rocket money. Because you might be wasting money on subscriptions. Everything is a subscription now. Have you noticed that? Basically everything. Software is even a subscription now. If I want to buy some sort of audio software now, it's all subscription based somehow. What a world we live in. And here's the thing, 80% of people have subscriptions, they have forgotten about. Maybe for you, it's an unused Amazon Prime account a Hulu account that never gets streamed. There is a fantastic app that I use that helps me track all of my expenses and because of it, I no longer waste money on subscriptions that I don't use. You might have heard of it. I just mentioned it. It's called rocket money. It used to be known as true bill. The app shows you all your subscriptions in one place and then cancels for you whatever you don't still want. Rocket money can even find subscriptions you didn't know you were paying for.

department of crazy John eastman John meet Trump administration eastman Eli bosnic Eli bosmic president Trump John Supreme Court USC Georgia United States Hulu Amazon
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

07:15 min | Last month

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"I am firmly of the belief that there are with few exceptions, no magic words in the law. So just saying, here would be the hypothetical implications of murder. That in and of itself can still be protected. But the question is, you know, once it moves from because we've talked about that. You want to say, you want to have attorneys free to recommend to their clients and say, here's what would happen if you did that. And that would be breaking the law. Yeah. You want that to protect that advice. You don't want to say, here's how I'm going to help you break the law. And that can be a tough line to draw. But in this case, I feel like it wasn't that tough personally. I agree with you. So here's the thing of these 562 documents, the overwhelming majority of them are eastman's advice with respect to the massively unsuccessful kraken lawsuits that were brought at the time. So he was, as far as I can tell, the point person coordinating all of the insane nonsense being filed by Sidney Powell and Julie Haller and Howard Klein handler and that brigade of idiots during the time. And it was kind of the central repository of maybe let's bring a lawsuit here in Michigan and, you know, have you seen the antrum county report and all that crap? And never minding the fact that that is potentially relevant to the January 6th committee that it is certainly regurgitating nonsense claims that led to the insurrection. An attorney offering their advice on a threatened pending future existing lawsuit, that's core attorney work product. That's to say, hey, what do you think the likelihood of success is that we have in the case in Michigan? That's a thing you ought to be able to ask your attorney. So the overwhelming number of these documents. And you can understand kind of the interplay. Like I don't think the one 6th committee is disappointed by this result at all. All they had to go by was the entry on the privilege log and they're like, yeah, look, the fact that you're just claiming this was advice ray, Michigan lawsuit. No, no, no, we'd like the judge to look at that. And in the overwhelming super majority of cases, the judge looked at it and was like, yeah, some of these are a close call. It says that in the order. But I'm going to err on the side of protecting attorney client privilege for ongoing litigation. But there are exceptions. So let's talk about those exceptions. And like I said, they total 33 different documents. Wow. Thinking logically here. We really shouldn't be surprised or disappointed. If you're looking for smocking guns and it's like, well, the percentage of smocking guns among these emails that were about a bunch of other bullshit, there's only 33 smocking guns here. It's like, it doesn't matter. You only need the one. I have only found the basement full of guns. Go in my Gmail and there's a million emails of us trying to schedule and stuff and all like that, and there's just nonsense, complete personal stuff that's totally fine. And then there's one email where I'm like, oh, also, you know, let's murder Eli on the weekend. It doesn't matter that it's like, well, that was only like .1% of my email, you know? It shouldn't be surprising that there's a bunch of other stuff in there. And this is what 6 or 7% of the documents are. That's a fairly large that would be the equivalent of tens of thousands of let's murder Eli bosnic emails to be uncovered. Which I'm not saying. May or may not be president in your inbox. I'm saying, don't murder him. Right. So four documents relate to what the court calls the electoral count act plan. That's the subject of eastman's memo that said, let's have Pence unilaterally either throw out or as they morphed it into well, call for a delay and we can't certify this right away. And the court says, all 5 of these emails, I'm going to get how it goes from 5 to four in a minute. Discuss in part, actions to support the plan to disrupt the joint session of Congress. Some portion of these emails do discuss litigation strategy, and to that extent they're created anticipation of litigation. However, for other portions, the true animating force behind these emails was advancing a political strategy to persuade vice president Pence to take unilateral action on January 6th. As discussed in the court's prior order to the extent the plan was intended to proceed without judicial involvement, emails pertaining to the plan were not made in anticipation of litigation. Because doctor eastman also claims attorney client privilege for one of these documents, we're going to hold off until we see if there's also resolving the privilege claim, but those four documents very clearly you have to produce them there, they are discussing efforts to persuade Pence to throw out electoral votes. That's not anticipation of litigation. That's anticipation of insurrection. Well, and political advice, correct. Now, yeah, like if he's employed as let's say I'm running for office and Andrew I choose you to be my attorney, of course, because I would. And you're helping with legal stuff, I don't know, filings and all that, but I'm also like, hey, what do you think my strategy to rock the vote should be? And then you give me advice on that. Is that still attorney work product because you're kind of. No, it is not. No, okay. Absolutely not. And again, that's a thing we've talked about that comes up all the time. I know, I just don't remember all the time. And our listeners haven't all listened to all 641 episodes of opening arguments. It's always good to remind them. One of the things that happens all the time is I represent, for example, a client that buys commercial real estate and fast food franchises. And I am often asked to weigh in and help negotiate the deal terms. How much and some of the non economic components to it. When I'm drafting the documents, I'm acting as a lawyer, right? And that is privilege. But if there were to be litigation, you would have an argument that the part of my email that says, I think we should offer to pay $26 million for this. Is not. It's that fine grained. Is that fine grained? And again, I have litigated that position at lost in a mediation, but it remains a viable argument. So let me be clear. Again, doctor Doug legal advice from a podcast, I believe that it remains a viable argument to be adjudicated on a case by case basis that says a lawyer giving business advice is not giving legal advice and to the extent that it is extra that you can pull that out that extrication ought to be produced to the other side ought to be unredacted from the documents. So for these very clearly relate to persuading Pence to break the law. Two, in connection with the state kraken cases, our emails between eastman and non attorney consultants and discuss statistical data with no mention of state election litigation. The remaining document is a report on alleged election irregularities, which the court finds would have been created in substantially similar form without the prospect of litigation. So in other words, some of the underlying information being circulated here about, oh, hey, look, here's how they stole a billion votes in interim county. Those documents have to be produced. I don't think they're going to be particularly interesting. But we're going to get to see them.

eastman Sidney Powell Julie Haller Howard Klein Michigan Eli bosnic Congress Andrew Doug Pence interim county
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

05:48 min | Last month

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"It truly is a smocking gun. And I don't say that lightly as you well know. So just to bring everybody up to speed, the California court has proceeded in three stages. We've covered all three of those stages. Wait, California card? Yeah, remember he went to a California court as the plaintiff to get an injunction to block his employer from turning over records to the one 6th committee. And so the very first review was to determine whether the document sent that week before the one 6 insurrection were protected by attorney client privilege. And that was the first time that the court held these are crime fraud exceptions. And put into print that under the civil standards that it has been established by the one 6th committee that more likely than not, John eastman and Donald Trump have violated 18 USC three 71 and 18 USC 1512 C two that they have committed crimes. And that was the basis for the production of that first tranche of documents to the one 6th committee. We went through those documents. They are a treasure trove of who's who that helped guide the committee in its public hearings. Then there was a second group, right? So on May 2nd, eastman produced a privilege log that had 2000 entries on it, the select committee said, we've agreed to defer review of 576 documents. We have about 800 that, okay, they're clearly attorney client privilege. And then we have 6, 599, actually, that are listed as privileged, but we think no privilege applies. And then the court went through a review. And we'd like you the court to review those 600 documents and order eastman to turn over the ones that aren't really privileged. And the court did that, they required the production of a 159 additional documents. And again, we covered that. Those went to the special committee. And you might have forgotten about those 576 documents that they agreed to just defer, but the court didn't. And Andrew Torres didn't he sleeps with him at night. That's true. 'cause he's a little binder he's made. Yeah, they're all redacted, unfortunately. So on September 14th, the select committee, the one 6th committee, went back and said, hey, those 5 76, we want you. These are earlier pre and post election, but the lower priority stuff. We'd like you to take a look at that now. And again, the court went through and reviewed those. And of those 576 documents ordered the disclosure of another 33. So again, lower priority, we're going to talk about why almost all of them remained privileged in a minute. But of those 33, 8 are pretty important and one is the proverbial smoking gun. So let's go through. These men claimed over those 562 documents for 561 of them. He said they are attorney client work product. So to be attorney client work products, something must be prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial. And it must be prepared by or for another party or buy or for that party's representative. So in other words, I'm putting together all of my stuff anticipating that we are going to trial. And I am doing it on behalf of my client. That's what makes it attorney work product. So I could write, you know, I have Morgan research the landscape. I say, look, somebody has threatened, let's say we're talking about an opening arguments lawsuit. Somebody is threatened, they sent us a cease and desist. They say, if you don't take down this episode of opening arguments, we're going to sue you for defamation. And I say, okay. Office is a pediatric Torres. You can defend opening arguments. We probably would bring in outside council because we're not idiots. But the first thing I would do is have Morgan write us a memo that says, hey, what's the law of defamation in X state? And she would go and look up the law and look up the relevant case citations and kind of give us a high level. Hey, this is the law and defamation in California. Here are the touchstones. Here's your right to bring an anti slapp motion. All of that stuff, right? That memo is work product. In that moment, we'd be like, also, can you just write down how would we overthrow a government if we were going to do it? Well, that's the thing. And we'll get there. That memo is attorney work product. If in the middle of the memo, who knows, we're all in the middle of the memo, Morgan writes, by the way, I would really like to come on law and awful movies at some point, particularly if we're talking about Alex Jones. That portion is not protected by a turning point. Oh, I thought you were going to say, oh, by the way, another way we could solve this lawsuit matters is just by murdering the person who filed it. If that were in there, I have pretty reasonable confidence that she would. She's just like, I just legal options. I'm just mapping out options. Then what the court would do is redact the portions that are attorney work product, and unredacted the murder plots that are murder plot. But isn't that a pretty solid analogy for what they're claiming? 'cause I remember we talked about this. And I remember they're like, oh, yeah, the part where, you know, we're planning like a coup and just, you know, general like, oh, I said, don't do that. I circled, I said, don't do the coup part that I wrote in there. That's exactly right. So if she said, don't, if she said, hey, just writing in the memo, I'm Morgan stringer, say, don't murder Eli bosniak who's suing you, is that attorney work product? You would have a really, really good argument as to whether that falls under the crime fraud exception.

California court John eastman eastman USC Andrew Torres California Donald Trump Morgan Torres Alex Jones Morgan stringer Eli bosniak
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

06:08 min | Last month

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"You know, I plug one of these each and every time. I'm gonna plug a recent feedback Friday because there's a really interesting scenario. The question is, what do you do when the very married pastor you've known your whole life as a pillar of the church and community propositions you on grindr? Yeah, that might require some feedback. So that's on the latest feedback Friday that's a fun one. Whether Jordan is conducting an interview or giving advice to a listener who just met a priest on grindr, for example, you'll find something useful that you can apply to your own life in every single episode of the Jordan harbinger show. That could mean learning how to ask for advice the right way or it could just be discovering a slight mindset tweak that changes how you see the world. So search for the Jordan harbinger show that's HAR B is in boy. IN as a Nancy GER on Apple podcasts Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. All right, Andrew, I've got my smocking jacket on. I love it. Tell us about this mocking gun. Yeah, I kind of, when I was initially writing this segment, I was going to do the like, hey, remember John eastman pepperidge farm, remember? But he really is the gift that keeps on giving. I'm going to elide very quickly over the fact that eastman as did a lot of the January 6th insurrectionists looked at judge Eileen cannon, and her ridiculous crafting of bizarre relief to Donald Trump and said, oh, hey, I want in on that. And judges around the country were like, hey, we're not federalist society weirdos and hacks that are betrothal to the former president. By the way, you're not the former president. So we don't give a shit about you. And have declined to an individual and this includes other Trump judges to extend kind of the insane ruling to non Trump to not an individual's name Trump. So here's what happened, John eastman said, they executed a search warrant, and they took my phone, and I want a rule 41 G motion to return my phone to me. Why? Because they violated my First Amendment rights because this is an infringement on my right to political activity because they now have access to private emails in which I talk about how much I love Donald Trump. That was seriously an argument that was made in prison. Wow, why doesn't every drug dealer thought about argument? Hey, you have my phone that I probably doing all the drug deals on, but you know, also I have a right to free speech, so. Hand it over. Free speech that it was seized in violation of the fourth and 5th amendments that they violated his biometric data to have him look at the phone to open it up to download all the stuff off of it. It's not time for it now, but that is interesting issue. It truly is, but it misses the point that a rule 41 G for return of property is not emotion in limiting. In other words, if you want to argue, a suppression, UV legally taken my stuff where illegally gotten my confession, you can't use it at trial. Fine. Yeah, we're not at trial though. Is that the point here? He has not even been indicted, right? This is just a search warrant. This seems to be a theme among Trump and Trump related people. As they gather evidence, they start filing stuff that would only make sense if we were in the middle of the O. J. Simpson trial. If you were terrified that you're about to be indicted, yeah, exactly. And so yeah, and so the court was like, yeah, before we can even talk about rule 41 G, you need to establish that the injury is being deprived of the property, not that it was improperly seized in the first place. And so he did make one argument on that. He said, look, I have attorney client privileged documents on my phone, which again can be solved with, and they did employ it. A taint team. The court notes eastman has not identified any information for which he claims a privilege. Second, with respect to the case that he cites, there is a timing difference in the prior case, the government kept the petitioner there harbor healthcare. They kept harbors privileged documents for over four years. Here, the government sees the phone approximately three months ago, eastman asserts that he has not been indicted and may never be. Nevertheless, the court finds that his motion on this ground is premature at this time and on these facts, eastman fails to show an irreparable injury. So now, and I get in your phone back and you may well be indicted. You know, I was just thinking, there's been a lot of team teams getting deployed lately and I'm just wondering if there's any endeavor in the Biden administration to start revolutionizing the taint team van fleet and making them green electric. They've done that with the post office, right? They tried to, I think, conservatives stopped. I'm just saying, if we're trying to fix the environment with all the taint teaming that's happening lately, I think, you know, the cram us all into it. Switching from the gas guzzling 80s tainting van thing, to an electric van, I think will save the entire Amazon rainforest, I think. It may well be possible. And let's be clear here. John eastman at some point will be indicted. I mean, he's just very clearly has committed crimes. He was just very indictable. Just look at his face. But eastman is also the key. I mean, he was in the war where he was present with Donald Trump. He was the architect or at least like one of the architects, right? Like we learned a lot about Ken cheeseman from the one 6 committee on cheese, bro? Oh, yeah, was cheeseburger? Oh, okay, I was gonna say if there's a cheeseman in a cheese bro, I'm about to lose my mind. Okay. Because that joke is so good, we will leave in my mistake, right? We learned we learned about cheeseburger from the one 6th committee. But nevertheless, John eastman is the guy who put in print, the hey, we could go around Mike Pence, we'll get somebody, I don't know, maybe Ted Cruz to object, right? Like, I mean, it's just the gift that keeps on giving and indeed when we get to the bottom of this segment, we have what I think is the last piece of the puzzle to indict Donald Trump.

John eastman Trump eastman Donald Trump Eileen cannon Jordan O. J. Simpson Andrew Apple Biden administration Ken cheeseman government Amazon Ted Cruz Mike Pence
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

06:14 min | Last month

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Happening. This isn't real. No, it's happening. I'm delighted to have you here. Did you see the tweet that went pretty viral? The application for the student loan forgiveness has gone up, and there's a tweet that went viral that was like that application was so easy. I'm not sure I might have been getting scammed or whatever. Which is good. I mean, things are going well. They've made it simple. It's doing real good here, this student loan forgiveness program. However, are we going to rain on anyone's parade? I think there's a challenge in the shadow docket. So I don't know if that means like Sauron is challenging it or what, but I'm worried. Sauron Republicans, I mean, it's hard to tell the difference. But yes, as we have detailed since Biden put this plan into action, Republicans are attempting every possible move to derail it from convincing state legislatures that they should tax this loan forgiveness, right? So you should really be mad at Biden when you are Republican state legislatures have moved to have you pay despite the fact that you will pay no federal income tax on the loan for business. That should be the giveaway. It should be, but a segment of our audience will blame Joe Biden for this. First, my crew to take. Then let's do a loan taxes. Got Joe Biden came for the celery. As you pointed out, the program, the website is already up, they launched a beta over the weekend to kind of test it out in 8 million people signed up millions more have signed up since the website kind of officially went live on Monday. And loans are set to be forgiven. The program officially begins this Sunday, September 23rd, so Republicans want to do everything in their power to stop it. They have filed lawsuits. They've lost at every level, and they are now pending before the Supreme Court. As you said on the shadow docket, which is a request for injunctive relief to get an injunction to say against the president of the United States to say no, you can't do this and block it from going into effect while they then tee up their legal arguments about how the president can't do this. And the problem they have faced at every level from every court is a problem of standing. You can't just file a lawsuit and go. I don't think the president could do that. Right. As long-standing listeners know, you have to have an injury and that has to be an injury that the court is capable of addressing. So could you just be like, Satan and be like, I don't like when good things happen. That's great. I'm agreed. The injury here is your canceling debt that might or might not be repaid to a third party lender so you're being deprived of having the third party lender and or maybe the federal government if it has to reimburse the lenders, get a better rate of return on their loan investment. And that's just not a thing, right? Like that's not a cognizable injury. I keep forgetting. It's hard to keep this all in my mind. When the thing is forgiven, when the debt is forgiven, is there like a bank that's like, oh, no, I lose out, or is it that the federal government like I actually pay a bank? Or is it just the federal government is the bank? I can't remember which of those is true. It's both, right? There were private loan servicers, and they could argue that they're being potentially grieved. But remember, when they loaned the money, there was a risk that they would not get the money back. There are various programs with respect to how unpaid loans get reimbursed from the federal government, and of course there are situations in which the lender is being reimbursed by the federal government. So it's really complicated, but it's all an area where there's a bunch of uncertainty already. If they could, if they had concrete injury by any individual loan servicer or by any individual entity of government, they had to put those plaintiffs forward. Oh, yeah, that's a good point. I guess in my mind, I'm wondering why don't they have that, do you think? They don't because of the uncertainty around defaults to begin with and because the programs that are in place to reimburse lenders when people do default. And the government can just say, right, at the heroes act allows you to say, we are going to forgive some or all of a class of debts. So the most clever approach. I actually scripted this up and we were going to do it a couple of weeks ago, but the case got dismissed in the day between when I scripted it up and when we receptive record. But Republicans got a guy in Indiana, which, again, as you know, Republican governor Republican state legislature decided to tax the benefits because they want to drag down Biden's approval as much as possible. And this was a guy who, at least as alleged in the complaint, said, look, I am on track to have my loans forgiven under the prior public loan forgiveness program. And because that's been grandfathered in, that isn't taxed. This executive order makes the changes to that program accelerates it to the beginning. So I'm going to get my refund four years earlier than I would have under the old program, but it's going to be taxed, so I'm going to get less of it. So I am being materially injured. Never minding kind of the curious Ness around that. I actually can't figure out how that works. So he's getting it forgiven earlier. Right. Why does that not offset the fact that he's getting taxed? The argument would be that the time value of money of getting it earlier is less than the amount by which he's going to be taxed. And that would be a factual question. Again, you're talking about state income tax. So it probably hard to believe. It isn't right. But at least hypothetically you could imagine this being a weird corner case. Well, wait a minute, hold on. This case was dismissed, so oh, okay. I was going to say, does this supersede what he already had? Because when the obvious argument just be like, oh, well, if this is worse for you, don't do it, just stick with your old program. Yeah, the EO accelerates all of that. And as you point out, so we can't opt out of the news. He couldn't. But here's the thing. As soon as that lawsuit was filed, the Biden administration said, well, what we'll do is anybody you like your doctor, you keep your doctor.

Sauron federal government Biden Joe Biden Republican state legislature Supreme Court Satan United States Indiana Biden administration
Trump Has Another Bad Day With Release of Eastman Emails

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

00:32 sec | Last month

Trump Has Another Bad Day With Release of Eastman Emails

"Oh, this was also a bad day once again, John, very, very clear. What a bad day. Donald Trump. Oh no, really? Another one, huh? Tweets breaking federal judge David O Carter just ordered the release of emails between Trump and John eastman to the January 6th committee was proved Trump knew of the claims of voter fraud were wrong. This is evidence of corrupt intent on Trump's behalf to defraud the United States. Oh yeah. Here's your nominee Republicans. Go ahead. Let's have a long, bloody primary battle between him and desantis. Let's drag it out and make it

David O Carter Donald Trump John Eastman John United States Desantis
Trump, lawyers pushed claims of voter fraud they knew were false, judge says

AP News Radio

00:47 sec | Last month

Trump, lawyers pushed claims of voter fraud they knew were false, judge says

"A judge says that Trump knew that his voter fraud claims were false a federal judge says that former president Donald Trump signed legal documents after the 2020 election that included voter fraud claims he knew were inaccurate U.S. district court judge David Carter wrote in an 18 page opinion just released that the emails between Trump and attorney John eastman show efforts to submit false claims in federal court for the purpose of delaying the counting of the electoral vote on January 6th 2021 The judge ordered the release of additional emails between Trump and eastman to the House committee investigating the January 6th attack on the capitol He said the emails can not be withheld because they include evidence of potential crimes The judge ordered eastman to give the documents to the committee by the afternoon of

Donald Trump U.S. District Court John Eastman David Carter Eastman House Committee
DOJ Has Been on a 40 Subpoena Blitz

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

02:05 min | 2 months ago

DOJ Has Been on a 40 Subpoena Blitz

"As you mentioned, 40 subpoenaed DoJ has issued 40 subpoenas over the past week. Wow, that's a lot. So Boris Epstein, Mike Roman, had the phone seized. The actions represent a substantial escalation of the investigation. To which Jodie and I say yay, Dan scavino was one of the people getting a subpoena Bernard Carrick. There's that name again. Oh boy. So can we ask him about using the respite suite for the 9 11 first responders to bang his girlfriend just for fun? I'm sorry. Girlfriends. There were two mistresses that he was banging in the apartment. Once we get once we get them under oath, just to ask them that just for fun. Right, just because it was the anniversary of 9 11. Right. It was two mistresses behind his wife's back at the apartment 9 11 workers. And the other one was a porn star, right? Right. Yes. Okay, so my point is so that it's hard to keep track of all the crimes, right? The subpoena is for the plan to submit the fake electors, right? Some subpoenas also seek information into the activities of the save America political action committee, oh my God, how many separate investigations do is this now? Do you think what I don't understand is given everything we know about Bannon's help us build the wall grift and the save America thing, how is this guy raising a dime? Are there that many stupid people in America? Apparently. Yeah. Well, this guy Clark saying, you know, you lord, you'd think there's less fools in this world. You know, I mean, so why would anybody send them any money now? I know. So at least 20 of the subpoenas sought information about communications with lawyers who took part in the fake electors scheme, including Giuliani and John eastman, I mean, for those of us that have veruca salted about the Department of Justice, it does seem like they are on the move. Does it not? Well, they're driving, they drop paper on Stephen Miller, which is great, right. And they drop paper on Newt Gingrich. And I would sell tickets to watch Newt Gingrich in front of the January 6th

Boris Epstein Mike Roman Dan Scavino Bernard Carrick DOJ America Political Action Commi Jodie Bannon America John Eastman Clark Giuliani Department Of Justice Stephen Miller Newt Gingrich
Lawyers: Eastman advised to plead the Fifth in Georgia probe

AP News Radio

00:46 sec | 3 months ago

Lawyers: Eastman advised to plead the Fifth in Georgia probe

"Lawyers for Trump adviser John eastman say they've advised their client to take the 5th as a special grand jury investigates possible election interference in Georgia attorneys Charles Burnham and Harvey silverglate have confirmed the John eastman a lead architect of saw of Donald Trump's efforts to remain in power after the 2020 election has complied with a subpoena and appeared in court in Fulton county They declined to comment on proceedings but say they've advised their client to assert attorney client privilege and invoke his constitutional right to remain silent when testifying Eastman's one of a number of Trump allies whose testimony has been sought by the Fulton county district attorney after a phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad raffensperger became public Georgia's governor Brian Kemp has also been ordered to testify but not until after this November's election I'm Jennifer King

John Eastman Charles Burnham Harvey Silverglate Fulton County Donald Trump Georgia Eastman Secretary Of State Brad Raffen Brian Kemp Jennifer King
Cuffing the Left's Lawyers

Dennis Prager Podcasts

01:05 min | 3 months ago

Cuffing the Left's Lawyers

"Tucker Carlson he enumerated the names of lawyer after lawyer associated with Donald Trump, FBI, handcuffs, what did the FBI do to John eastman? We know very well. In public and the handcuffed them in public, did they handcuff? Okay. Right. If somebody had said that I would be reporting these things, if just 5, ten years ago, certainly. How many of you see some videos of the 1970s, let's say, or AVs? And you realize what a different era, how unburdened, by the hatreds of the left, the average American was when you watch this stuff.

John Eastman FBI Tucker Carlson Donald Trump
Jill Wine-Banks Explains What Goes Into Getting a Search Warrant

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

02:07 min | 3 months ago

Jill Wine-Banks Explains What Goes Into Getting a Search Warrant

"Can you explain as a prosecutor? Jill, what a lot of people have said is do you know how much evidence there has to be for a judge to sign off on a search warrant for the home of a former president. We talked about this with Jeffrey Clark and John eastman that for a lawyer of a president, there's got to be a high bar. Can you explain what just happened yesterday? It's a high power for any American citizen. To be subjected to a search. And a judge will take even extra caution if it happens to be somebody who happens to be the former president of the United States. The bar is very high. It isn't the same as what it would take to convict at a trial, which is beyond a reasonable doubt. But probable cause means it's more probable than that. And remember, there is a judge who has already found that Don eastman and Donald Trump more probably than not, more likely than not, committed a crime. As far as the reporting here, we can, I would say, conclude that the reason for this search had to do with missing documents that were wrongfully taken from The White House and kept at Mar-a-Lago. Some of those are highly classified and pose a national security threat. We don't know if those are the ones that they were looking for. We don't even know for sure that it was documents that belong to the government and not to Donald Trump that they're looking for. But we do know whatever they were looking for if they find other things that are evidence of crime. They can take them if they're in plain sight. They have to be within the exact precincts of what the subpoena said. So if the subpoena says they can search a safe, they can search his office, they can search his bedroom. All of that is fine. That means they can't go into the lobby. It means they can't go into the bed, whatever room isn't named. But if they find something there, then in the places that are specified, it's fair game.

Jeffrey Clark John Eastman Don Eastman Donald Trump Jill United States White House
Charlie Pierce Believes the FBI Must Have Inside Information on Trump

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:15 min | 3 months ago

Charlie Pierce Believes the FBI Must Have Inside Information on Trump

"The thing is. I honestly believe all of those people, they don't know what the FBI grabbed. Right. I mean, they don't, I mean, Jim Jordan doesn't know what they have. They're way out on a limb. He doesn't know what they have. Yeah. That's the thing. But again, I mean, I go along with all of the FBI law enforcement types who say there is no federal judge who ever lived, who signs off on this warrant, unless it's absolutely. Yeah. They've got somebody saying something. Not just suspicions of what may are the fact of the national archives is pissed. I love the national archives and I think that people work there are wonderful, but that's not enough to get a federal judge to sign off on a warrant either. Yeah. We were saying with eastman and Clark, they were saying what it takes to get a warrant to get a raid on attorney like that. But you're right. For the former president, I mean, I think. If I were king of the forest, I would be very interested in what pat cipollone is always already told.

FBI Jim Jordan Eastman Clark Pat Cipollone
Liz Cheney: How Do We Call Ourselves a Nation of Laws?

Mike Gallagher Podcast

01:32 min | 3 months ago

Liz Cheney: How Do We Call Ourselves a Nation of Laws?

"Literally said that. In this scene, this CNN CNN conversation was stunning. Listen to what she said to Cassie hunt over at CNN about prosecuting Trump for January 6th. Some have expressed concern that prosecuting former president Trump would turn him into a martyr and potentially add to his political strength with a base that's follows him pretty rapidly. Do you share that concern? Do you have any concern that a prosecution would strengthen Donald Trump's political hands? I don't think that it's appropriate to think about it that way because the question for us is, are we a nation of laws? Are we a country where no one is above the law? And what do the facts and the evidence show? And certainly, I've been very clear. I think he's guilty of the most serious dereliction of duty of any president in our nation's history. You've had a federal judge in California. Say that it's more likely than not that he and John eastman committed two crimes. So, you know, I think that we're going to continue to follow the facts. I think the Department of Justice will do that. But they have to make decisions about prosecution, understanding what it means if the facts and the evidence are there, and they decide not to prosecute how do we then call ourselves a nation of laws.

CNN Cassie Hunt Donald Trump John Eastman California Department Of Justice
Justice Department Investigating Trump as Part of J6 Probe

The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated

00:53 sec | 4 months ago

Justice Department Investigating Trump as Part of J6 Probe

"Washington Post reporting the Justice Department is investigating president Donald Trump's action as part of its criminal probe of efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. According to four people familiar, they are questioning witnesses before a grand jury. And that's all we know. And here's what I'm here to tell you. Just wait, just wait. Always just wait. There is no story until there's a story. I think it would be reckless in the extreme to prosecute Donald Trump for the actions of one 6, his inaction, in other words, it would be unprecedented. And I don't know what law that would proceed under. The electoral count act is subject to interpretation. There was a wrong interpretation in my view, but not in illegal one by John eastman. The old dean at Chapman with whom I worked for many years in old friend and he was wrong on that, but it wasn't a criminal act, and so I think this is all kind of show for the hard left, never Trump crowd.

Donald Trump Justice Department Washington Post John Eastman Chapman
Glenn Kirschner Feels a Trump Indictment Is Overdue

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:59 min | 4 months ago

Glenn Kirschner Feels a Trump Indictment Is Overdue

"Glen, you just tweeted when the J 6 committee revelations about Donald Trump's crimes. It's time for the DoJ to indict Trump and his co-conspirators. I was saying at the top of the show being out with chairman Schiff last night, we were saying that I understand he Liz Cheney, Elaine Laurie, others, putting public pressure on DoJ. I think that's fine. And I know you're of the impatient crew like I am, but I'm just curious, you know, because other people point to, you know, whether it's the eastman, the Clark raids, as you just said, the Bannon indictment to say that the Justice Department is working. Where do you come down on this in terms of, I mean, are you saying when you say now you really feel like Trump should be being indicted now? Yeah, I think a Trump indictment is long overdue. I try to exercise patients because I appreciate you need to build the strongest case possible against a former president and his co-conspirators. But you know, I just did a piece for MSNBC daily and I said, look, at some point, it's great that you're involved in covert investigations, grand jury investigations, which are secret by law. You're doing things behind closed doors, but Steph, there comes a time when we have to see overt public law enforcement action, like when we have witness tampering, those people need to be arrested promptly and publicly one to neutralize that threat and to send the message of deterrence to others. The problem is, no one on team Trump is being deterred. Why? Because there's no overt public law enforcement action. That I fault the Department of Justice war. They need to start doing that now. I don't care if we don't see a Trump conspiracy indictment tomorrow. We need to see some of these people who are tampering with witnesses and destroying evidence. We need to see them arrested now, and then you build on that.

DOJ Chairman Schiff Liz Cheney Elaine Laurie Donald Trump Bannon Glen Justice Department Clark Msnbc Steph Department Of Justice
Andrew Weissmann Wants Revenge Against Society

Mark Levin

01:42 min | 4 months ago

Andrew Weissmann Wants Revenge Against Society

"In for years he was a federal prosecutor on the federal payroll destroying lives destroying institutions as much as he could You have to imagine That when this punk was in junior high or we call it middle school now or when he was in high school he frequently must have gotten his ass kicked because he is on a revenge against society And he posts the following post the phone DoJ next steps number one prosecute and flip Clark eastman and Meadows Clark is the former official justice eastman of course was the lawyer for Trump and Meadows was the chief of staff Prosecute and flip Clark eastman and Meadows Prosecute and flip them for what Doesn't matter see this is his technique It's very Third Reich like Weissman very Third Reich like Just throw some books at these guys use these very ambiguous laws Threaten to put him in prison for 20 or 30 years and make them say things that they would not otherwise say Number two if you can make a criminal case on them immunize them and force them to testify in the grand jury See This guy would have been fantastic I think he would have been on the wrong side of the Nuremberg trials but would have been fantastic in some fascistic or Marxist regime Because that's where his head is

Clark Eastman Meadows Clark DOJ Donald Trump Meadows Weissman Third Reich Nuremberg
American Greatness Senior Contributor Julie Kelly on the J6 Witch Hunt

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

02:19 min | 5 months ago

American Greatness Senior Contributor Julie Kelly on the J6 Witch Hunt

"And we are joined by Julie Kelly of American greatness, Julie. Welcome back to the show. Hey, Seb, thanks so much for having me on. Let me just put to you straight away the obvious naive layman's question that we've had what more than 700 people hunted down, arrested more than a hundred, I believe, your correct me more than a hundred still confined in political prison cells, not far from this studio. Mostly on menial low grade charges, such as trespass or the obstructing an official process charge and we have a lack of a similar response to the violence being done across America in the names of social justice, BLM, antifa or abortion. Is that a silly question? Am I, am I? Am I missing something Julie Kelly? As usual, savvy you are not missing a thing. You're way ahead of everything as usual. So yes, oh, I will correct you on one number, though. I believe we are up to more than 850 Americans who have been hunted down by this DoJ. They just arrested someone yesterday, said we're here 18 months later, and they are still hunting down capital trespassers, so subjecting them to FBI raids in one case last week, the FBI used an informant to get a man to talk about what he did at the capitol and he was charged with three misdemeanors. This is the crusade, this dragnet, this witch hunt, I believe they're trying to a thousand total January 6th defendants before election day or campaign season. They think it's some sort of talking point. But yes, we have that part of the dragnet witch hunt going on regular Americans. Then, of course, you have what we're seeing recently, which is the roundup of political figures such as the head of the Arizona Republican Party, Georgia Republican Party, and then of course the FBI raid of Jeffrey Clark's home, and the really egregious confrontation by FBI agents with Doctor John eastman stealing his iPhone before showing him a

Julie Kelly Layman FBI Julie BLM DOJ America Arizona Republican Party Georgia Republican Party Jeffrey Clark John Eastman
Kimberley Johnson on Trump Hating Republicans

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:43 min | 5 months ago

Kimberley Johnson on Trump Hating Republicans

"Kimberly, you raise a really interesting point. I'll tell you why, because we just saw, you know, Liz Cheney was celebrating the roe V wade decision. Like, Liz Cheney hates Donald Trump. You're absolutely right. But she's not on our side. In fact, one of the reasons we were talking about, why is there this like, they're not going after Jenny Thomas. When I was hearing, is because Liz Cheney likes the Supreme Court the way it is. She doesn't want Ginny and clarence. She doesn't want any talk of clarence Thomas. Yes. Resigning or getting or you name it, right? And so and I thought this on cue, right this morning, Travis, a lawyer for Jenny Thomas, told the House select committee, he saw no reason for her to testify. Well, yeah, because they see how these hearings are going. Yeah. Exactly. So they came after it came after the committee has made a fresh request for her appearance, and we have the text messages to what Meadows and to eastman. She was right in the middle of this thing. And that her husband already was the one sole vote voting to keep her communications private. Kimberly, so beyond a conflict of interest, I don't even know what you call it. Do you? Yeah. No, I mean, I agree with you a 100%. This is clearly very upsetting coming because, you know, we love to Democrats are so fond of loving the Republicans that are going to go against Trump. But we always have to remember that I do think that at some point they want to break from him because they don't like him. You can see their true reactions to Trump in 2016. Lindsey Graham tweeted it, Ted Cruz was talking about how horrible he was, Marco Rubio, all of them. They don't like him. But now that he gave them everything that they wanted. And now this trial is going to give them a clean

Liz Cheney Jenny Thomas Roe V Wade Kimberly House Select Committee Donald Trump Clarence Thomas Ginny Clarence Supreme Court Travis Eastman Meadows Ted Cruz Lindsey Graham Marco Rubio
Trump Is Ready to Abandon Attorney John Eastman

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:16 min | 5 months ago

Trump Is Ready to Abandon Attorney John Eastman

"Reporting this morning, I'm sure you've heard is that they're getting ready to turn on John eastman that Trump is getting ready to throw Josh. Which you look at any history and go, of course he is. He does it to everybody. What's John eastman going to do is the question, is he going to flip, do you think, is he going to save himself? You know, what could he do that would hurt? He is a lawyer who is in total disrepute because let's face it. His theory was total nonsense. It had even he in a red line version had said, here's the opposite, which is true. And so he knew that what he was saying was fraudulent. Donald Trump knew it was fraudulent because everybody else, including his own lawyers, and his vice president were saying, this is not a power that I have. I can not do this. It's illegal. It seems to me that you can't get away with this continuously. So even if eastman were to turn on him, it would certainly would help. I mean, everybody who turns is good. It's just, I wonder what happened to people like Pence, why didn't he come forward? Why didn't he enforce the Twenty-fifth Amendment? When his own life was put in

John Eastman Donald Trump Josh Eastman
Will Mark Levin Battle Media Matters in Court?

Mark Levin

01:42 min | 5 months ago

Will Mark Levin Battle Media Matters in Court?

"Now I've had enough of these little bastards I've had enough of them I sat down with or spoke to I should say A couple of legal experts litigators who do this for a living I don't That is Handle these kinds of cases They advised me at least thus far to keep my powder dry But I'm chomping at the bit I am chopping at the bit One day those will be public I guess In some report the January 6th committee does But I ask you how would you like a headline A fox toast who apparently helped mastermind John eastman's coup plot was the only one talking about it in prime time Though there's no coup plot There was no masterminding There was none of it None of it And here I am stuck At least for now I'm monitoring it at least for now I'm just being completely open with you Completely open with you This is how they tried to take out rush This is how they try to take out other people to create a caricature of somebody that doesn't exist

John Eastman
Media Matters' Matt Gertz Says Mark Levin Helped With Jan. 6 Plot

Mark Levin

01:21 min | 5 months ago

Media Matters' Matt Gertz Says Mark Levin Helped With Jan. 6 Plot

"But there's a headline there that says a Fox host who apparently helped mastermind John eastman's coup plot Was the only one talking about it in prime time What in the world are they talking about Fox News is bearing Thursday's revelations about the plot by then president Donald Trump and Trump lawyer John eastman writes somebody named Matt gertz To pressure then vice president Mike Pence to a legally reject the lectors from key states That supported Joe Biden and thus subvert the election to keep Trump in office detailed during Thursday's hearing of the House select committee investigating the insurrection at the U.S. capitol on January 6 2021 The only mentions of that conspiracy during fox's prime time blocked Thursday night came from Fox host Mark Levin who apparently worked with eastman to develop the plot and spoke out on Thursday in support of it I developed the coup plot with John eastman what in the hell are they talking about

John Eastman Matt Gertz FOX House Select Committee Mike Pence Donald Trump Fox News Joe Biden Mark Levin U.S. Eastman
"eastman" Discussed on Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:36 min | 5 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

"Let's do a clip number 16 here, eastman asking for a pardon. Doctor eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani and requested that he be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon. Doctor eastman's email stated quote, I've decided that I should be on the pardon list if that is still in the works. Doctor eastman did not receive his presidential pardon. Glen, you've talked a lot about pocket pardons and who may or may not have them. Just in regards to eastman, what do you think about that that consciousness? I mean, that is almost better than a confession to crime. And here's why I say that. When somebody confesses to a crime, 15 seconds on how it usually plays out, you're arrested, you're Miranda, you wave your Miranda rights, advising you that you have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, you waive those rights, you agree to be interrogated, and ultimately you confess to the crime. When we go into court, you know what every defense attorney and defense team will argue, that confession was coerced. It was involuntary. It was improper. It was in violation of the law in one way or another. When you request a pardon, there's no coercion coercion. Nobody forced you to request that comes from within. Based on your belief that you committed a crime and its consciousness of guilt and the only way you can get away with your crime is if the president pardons you. There is no coercive police conduct anywhere near John eastman's request for a

Doctor eastman Miranda John eastman Rudy Giuliani Kellyanne Conway eastman Glen Donald Trump Don Junior Ivanka Rudy Jared Travis
Glenn Kirschner Explains the Gravity of John Eastman's Pardon Request

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:36 min | 5 months ago

Glenn Kirschner Explains the Gravity of John Eastman's Pardon Request

"Let's do a clip number 16 here, eastman asking for a pardon. Doctor eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani and requested that he be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon. Doctor eastman's email stated quote, I've decided that I should be on the pardon list if that is still in the works. Doctor eastman did not receive his presidential pardon. Glen, you've talked a lot about pocket pardons and who may or may not have them. Just in regards to eastman, what do you think about that that consciousness? I mean, that is almost better than a confession to crime. And here's why I say that. When somebody confesses to a crime, 15 seconds on how it usually plays out, you're arrested, you're Miranda, you wave your Miranda rights, advising you that you have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, you waive those rights, you agree to be interrogated, and ultimately you confess to the crime. When we go into court, you know what every defense attorney and defense team will argue, that confession was coerced. It was involuntary. It was improper. It was in violation of the law in one way or another. When you request a pardon, there's no coercion coercion. Nobody forced you to request that comes from within. Based on your belief that you committed a crime and its consciousness of guilt and the only way you can get away with your crime is if the president pardons you. There is no coercive police conduct anywhere near John eastman's request for a

Doctor Eastman Rudy Giuliani Eastman Miranda Glen John Eastman
Legal Analysts Turn John Eastman Into the Fall Guy for Trump

Mark Levin

01:40 min | 5 months ago

Legal Analysts Turn John Eastman Into the Fall Guy for Trump

"The third hearing on January 6th I watched For about 40 minutes and then I had to shut it off This is a choreographed Uninterrupted One sided propaganda presentation And the Democrat party should be paying for this not the American taxpayer And even the legal analysts afterwards Have failed to underscore What kind of a proceeding this is And some of the journalists so called are commenting on the information that's coming out from the lawyers and so forth Even Trump's lawyers didn't believe he could win From the challenge How many lawyers did Trump have He had several Some said yes some said no And John eastman has turned into the fall guy is a lawyer and advocate for the president Whether you agree with his legal judgment his legal findings are not it's what lawyers do And we're told over and over again by the legal analysts that his position on the constitution and the power of the vice president under the Twelfth Amendment and under federal law Is frivolous

Democrat Party Donald Trump John Eastman
"eastman" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

WABE 90.1 FM

05:52 min | 5 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

"That was only escalating And this wasn't a theoretical threat here either And Ron I want to bring you in here because one of the bombshells today was about the president's lawyer John eastman requesting a pardon Here's the committee member Pete Aguilar a Democrat from California reading an email that eastman wrote to Rudy Giuliani Doctor eastman's email stated quote I've decided that I should be on the pardon list If that is still in the works Ron what did you make of that If that is still in the works In other words he was under the impression that a pardon list was in the works And he wanted to get on it And it does not seem to have been a joke And indeed he did not get a pardon and so when he was testifying before this seemed committee on videotape he took the 5th More than a hundred times or at least a hundred times he took the 5th so as not to incriminate himself It was how that happened in this video Exactly We watched some of it not the entire interview but we saw some of it enough to get the idea that after every single question and they were the questions that any person would ask this man at this point what were you doing What were you thinking What was this about what were you trying to do every single one he answers I don't want to incriminate myself So I think that gives us a little bit of a sense of just where professor Chapman was that day and just exactly what he thought he was about He realizes that he was endangering himself from a criminal standpoint Though this is not the first time we've started to hear about this concept of pardons And that we're looking at who all was requesting pardons I think that we have our expectation Claudia is that we will hear about this more in coming here Is that right Exactly There were other members of Congress we've heard who have asked for pardons that is one area panel members have said they're going to detail more in future hearings So this was a long list and longer than we realized Andrea at one point former White House lawyer Eric hirschman warned John eastman that he needed to get a great criminal defense lawyer that there's been a lot of legal theory presented here but break it down for us What's the allegation here of wrongdoing by John eastman in suggesting that the vice president could delay the certification of the vote on January 6th Yeah I think that statement that clip from his deposition took on a whole new meaning today Vice president vice chair Liz Cheney actually released part of that clip previously but at that point we hadn't heard all that had gone into it All of these conversations at various people around former vice president Pence had had with John eastman in which they said what you are proposing in effect They said well could lead to violence Eastman per the testimony that we heard seemed to brush off that idea And then even after there was violence even after we saw what happened on January 6th even after people had died eastman went back to according to hirschman in his deposition and according to Greg Jacob and his live testimony went back and still tried to push this plan of not going along with counting the electors And that is the point at which hirschman says you need to get an effing good defense attorney What he potentially could be charged with and in fact a federal judge in a non binding ruling previously said that he thought it was more likely than not that eastman and Trump had corruptly attempted to obstruct the joint session more likely than not and they attempted to obstruct an official proceeding There are people who many people dozens of people scores maybe even hundreds Tom could tell me who have been convicted at this point of exactly that Obstructing an official proceeding and in many of the cases they have said in their defense We went to the capitol because the president told us to go to the capitol We were following his instructions We thought we were being patriots We thought we were doing the right thing That defense has been rejected by judges as is the question of whether they're actually was an official proceeding that was obstructed that has also been determined to buy most judges to be a valid criminal charge So that is what they're looking at facing the same thing that some of the people who went into the capitol broke the windows and stopped the proceedings have been charged up and many of whom have been convicted at this point What about former president Trump We did see a lot of video of the former president pressuring the vice president at the time we saw the tweets we heard the testimony Is there a suggestion here that Trump himself is looking at a potential criminal liability I think that the way that the committee laid it out certainly raises the question because there were people who worked in The White House for president Trump on January 6th so these were certainly people who were loyal to the president who went and warned before anything yet before the president issued that tweet who had gone to Mark Meadows They said and said the president needs to say something he needs to condemn this violence but the president instead issued the tweet about Mike Pence lacking courage We know from the previous testimony last week that many of the writers read that out and their bull horns they were 40 feet away from the vice president as we learned today as he was hurried out of the Senate chamber All of that suggests that the president was given many opportunities to pull back to call back to stop his plan to stop yelling at the vice president even a top aide to his own daughter former White House in your advisory Ivanka Trump said that Trump had used that P word when speaking to Mike Pence earlier in the day they're trying to lay out a chain of intentionality that Trump knew what he was doing.

John eastman eastman Pete Aguilar professor Chapman Ron Eric hirschman hirschman Liz Cheney Rudy Giuliani Greg Jacob president Trump Claudia Trump Andrea California Pence White House Eastman Congress patriots
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

03:59 min | 6 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Signed in writing by at least one member of the House and one member of the Senate results in the two houses breaking into their separate chambers to resolve the objection. This is his earliest December 4th analysis of the electoral count act. We've heard the position that he articulates to Greg Jacob on January 3rd, the question is, was he lying to Greg Jacob? Was that pretextual? Did he know that argument was nonsense on January 3rd? Well, here's how he describes it a month earlier when there was still time to get state legislatures to appoint an alternate slate of electors. Continuing. Only if that's in capital letters and then an italics, both houses then agree to the objection is the slate deemed invalid. If the house doesn't agree to the objection, as is almost certain, the vote here being by majority rather than by state. Then the objection is not sustained and the slate is counted C three USC section 15. That is the electoral count act. So don't let your colleagues rest on that letter. I understand that it's legalese and I understand you have to do some parsing before the American public. But that is, in my view, as good a proof as you can get that on December 4th, John eastman's opinion of the electoral count act was not that the vice president had plenary authority to just pick them. But rather that you had to have a valid objection agreed to by both the House and the Senate in order to throw out a state's electoral votes. Unless you have an alternate slate of electors that has been certified by the legislature, and you put that plus exhibit D together, those things didn't happen. And so John eastman knew as of the end of the end of December, knew as he was preparing the wargaming memorandum that they didn't have a viable argument under the electoral count act, and it was time to come up with something else. It was time to create a new story that was outcome determinative. That was a veneer of constitutional respectability to keep him to keep Donald Trump in office. Aided by this is another new thing that we learned thanks to the one 6 committee's documents. And that is the John eastman wargaming memorandum. The two memos that we go through that outline the scenarios, not written by John eastman. Was actually written by a guy named Kenneth cheesebrough. Cheeseburger. Cheeseburger. And unlike John eastman, Kenneth cheesebrough has been cooperating with the one 6 committee from the very beginning. Jeez, bro so this is why we haven't heard of this cheese bro, 'cause I think I would remember, I never forget a cheese bro. Is that why we haven't heard him because if he's cooperating in these kind of in the background, his name's not coming out on stuff, is that it? Yeah, that's right. He shows up on the un American bar list. I think I've mentioned this one before. This is a great resource. It is un American bar dot com and they keep tabs on everybody who has appeared in any of the kraken lawsuits. So Ken cheesebrough is a Texas lawyer and his entire blurb is Ken cheesebrough went to Harvard, but does not belong to a law firm and has a thin legal resume. He joined Trump late in the failed effort to steal the 2020 election, adding his name to a case intended to disenfranchise Wisconsin voters. And then it has his email address and his office phone number, which I guess I could read. That's public information. 617-895-6196. So you can call that if you're like, get me cheese bro. There's only one man for this insurrection. It's cheese, bro get him on the line..

John eastman Greg Jacob Kenneth cheesebrough Senate House USC Ken cheesebrough legislature Donald Trump house un Harvard Trump Texas Wisconsin
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

06:06 min | 6 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"This is ray Haynes calling for America to forcibly re vote at gunpoint under the insurrection. You see, we're going to need everybody who cast their normal votes to redo it with a gun pointed at them supervisory to redo their election to redo the whole vote. Otherwise, we're going to have really bad elections like Venezuela. This is calling for the incumbent president having lost a fair election to then declare martial law and at gunpoint ask you, are you sure about that vote you cast in November? Wouldn't you really rather cast one for the person who controls the person with the gun to your head? Andrew does article two have a best two out of three provisions for no, that's not the way any of this works. And I'm about to utter an introductory phrase that I never thought I would utter. I kind of feel like we should call up Larry lessig and commemorate this moment. To give credit to John eastman, his response is this guy, am I right? It's responses. And then the salutation is blocked up, but again, I'm positive. This is ray. I'm not going to sign on or support anything that calls for the use of the insurrection act. If we can not provide enough proof of fraud to convince state legislatures or the Republican majority in the Senate, then even contemplating the insurrection act as a non start starter, eat Brits not start it, but that's a type of I suspect it would lead to a constitutional crisis of the military ignoring such an order. Please, I beg you desist from this path. So, wow. By the way, John eastman knows what it feels like to be that guy, right? Yeah. This is what Greg Jacob was saying. Is that what I look like? Yeah. And then you get another unhinged page long rant that says doctor eastman with a limited use of martial law without the use of the insurrection act be Apple. Martial law. Can we just do a little bit of martial law to do a re vote on this election? Yeah. And that's what led to where I started. Which begins with, I have read through it, no to martial law as well. I will not be associated with any such effort. And again, I implore you not to advance it either. Not sure if this was important, but who is that legal scholar that was like unnamed legal scholar? I'm just curious, do you have it? I do not. I do not know. No guesses. Oh, okay. Yeah. It's Randall license, isn't it? I'll ask her, buddy Randall, I said, you could be. I mean, you know, we have no evidence that it is not Randall eliasson. How about we say it that way? Okay, so that seems to give some evidence that John eastman knew, as early as December 19th, when dealing with the people that, to him, were lunatics. That unless the states, the state legislatures certified alternate slates of electors, there's no constitutional basis to throw out the electors. Do we have better evidence of that? And the answer is we do, in fact, have significantly better evidence than that. And where that comes from is this comes from, and I am trying to figure out what member of the Pennsylvania state legislature wrote to John eastman. People are suggesting that it is the Republican gubernatorial nominee. But we just don't know. What we do know is concurrently with. And in fact, two weeks before this email went out, a member of the Pennsylvania state House of Representatives wrote to eastman after eastman went down to Georgia to try and plead with the Georgia legislature to replace their slates of electors. And he writes, professor eastman, I found your testimony before the Georgia Senate to be compelling here in Pennsylvania, numerous other frustrated colleagues and I are searching for legislative solutions to our current national predicament. And again, current national predicament interesting euphemism for losing a election. Forgive me as I am not an attorney, but my takeaway from your testimony was the following. Please review and let me know if it's an accurate assessment of what you said. And then it says, because the U.S. Constitution vests the authority to create election law in the state legislatures and because Pennsylvania's judicial and executive branches issued decisions and guidance, which contravene the election law, the Pennsylvania state legislature created, resulting in an unlawful election, the state legislature can exercise its plenary authority to appoint presidential electors regardless of restraints existing within Pennsylvania's constitution and statutes because of the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution and because the act of appointing presidential electors is a function of the U.S. Constitution. I'm working on this premise, right? So that's what he writes to eastman. An eastman says, your summary is spot on. And then he talks about having drafted the resolutions in Florida in 2000, which were used in Bush V gore and says, what happened in Florida is both the House and the Senate had drafted identical resolutions, and those had passed out of committee on a party line vote. Floor votes in both chambers were scheduled for the Tuesday and Wednesday following, but the Supreme Court's decision in Bush V gore mooted the issue. Hope that helps feel free to send any follow-up questions you have or call me at. And then they very kindly redact his phone number, which is a shame because otherwise I certainly would have read it as a matter of public interest here. Then he writes a PS and this, I think, is, again, from a legal perspective what I would call another smoking gun. Here's the PS PS. I do not think the letter to members of your state congressional delegation was helpful. Our side can object to the slate of electors all they want..

John eastman ray Haynes Larry lessig Pennsylvania state legislature Greg Jacob doctor eastman buddy Randall Randall eliasson Venezuela Pennsylvania state House of Re Georgia legislature professor eastman Georgia Senate Senate Pennsylvania Andrew eastman America Bush V gore
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

08:31 min | 6 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Consolidated privilege log as quote come with agent and potential clients ray follow up from conference call on possible legal consultation. So yeah, so the brief is really good, but you know me, where I have loved digging in is seeing what you can't just say that to a court, right? Like you have to show documentary proof for all of this. And oh boy, the documents are, I mean, on the one hand, they are very, very revealing as to what the January 6th committee knows. On the other hand, it is terrifying how much deeper how much earlier these conversations were taking place. And with how many different folks these were taking place, how coordinated and widespread this effort was from the very beginning. And when I say from the very beginning, we have emails, conversations dating to the day after the election, two days after the election, in fact, why don't we start with this one because it's, again, all of this is terrifying. But this is exhibit I, this was sent Thursday, November 5th, okay? So two days after the election, before it has been called for Joe Biden. The result is still up in the air. This was sent by cleta Mitchell from Foley & Lardner before she was fired. This is while ostensibly representing the president without having told her partnership committee, which is about as big an offense as you can have as a law firm partner. You might remember cleta Mitchell from such transcripts as Donald Trump's call with Brad raffensperger in Georgia. She is a died in the wool trumper insurrectionist true believer big lie participant. She writes to eastman. John, what would you think of producing a legal memo outlining the constitutional role of state legislators in designating electors? Rather than governors, comma, the U.S. Constitution vests that responsibility with state legislators. Where state executive branch officials have rewritten or ignored state election law, why couldn't legislators reclaim that constitutional duty and designate the electors rather than delegating to governors, the U.S. statute may be unconstitutional as the governed as the government has no authority under the constitution to designate electors. Am I crazy? Redacted. That's always a good rhetorical when to put in there. Redacted called me about this. And if that is not the president or someone in the president's inner circle, this email makes no sense, right? I said a legal memo would be required and you would be the person to write it and maybe get others to sign it. What about that, a movement is stirring, but need constitutional support would you be willing to discuss it with redacted, what about that? So that's Thursday. And from there, we have two separate things. The first thing we have is John eastman producing a memo that was then later released as an op-ed. And that memo says the constitutional authority of state legislators to choose electors. Now, that was released at the American mind, a production of the Claremont institute, a right-wing think tank on December 1st 2020, but it was written on November 9 2020. And it was disseminated to the president from an EOP dot gov address. WHO dot EOP dot gov. That is the executive office of the president. Now, do I know that that's Jared Kushner? I do not know that that's Jared Kushner. But that is somebody from the executive office of the president inside The White House with the label for potus. And that was disseminated in November of 2020. So again, prior to the certification deadline and it was very, very clear that what is going on behind the scenes here is the Trump administration's efforts to convince state legislators Republican state legislatures in states one by Joe Biden to nevertheless designate alternate slates of electors. One of the things we learned about that was, again, I don't want to give a lot of credit to Republican state legislatures. Many of whom were way too eager to cooperate with treason. But ultimately, that didn't go anywhere. Ultimately, they could not so corrupt the process as to get Republican legislatures to say, yeah, notwithstanding the fact that we had an election and our voters went the other way. We are going to designate either two slates of electors and let Congress decide or we're just going to throw out the Biden electors and replace them with Trump electors. It didn't work this time, but I feel like next time they've set the groundwork for something like this, don't you think? That certainly is what they're trying to do. And the groundwork was I'm pushing back on groundwork because they laid a lot of groundwork this time, too. So that's true. Yeah, not that they were, I think that groundwork in terms of the election subsequently that will have changed some of the people who are in those positions, right? Yep. So that didn't happen to the extent that there were alternate slates of electors, these were the Republican insurrectionists who met in the Denny's parking lot and lied. And many of whom are under indictment. Many more of whom are under investigation for filing with the national archives, things that look like official certifications that are perjury that are saying, hey, we were the duly appointed electors and we met at the rotunda if you define rotunda as the Denny's parking lot. After that, we've been focused previously on the January 3rd to January 6th emails and communications and efforts by John eastman, which included the publicly released memoranda that we talked about the last time that we visited this in which he said, look, notwithstanding the fact that there aren't alternate slates of electors, the vice president has plenary power to decide whether electoral votes are valid or not. And we showed that probably that was a pretextual position. But one of the lingering questions that you had for me to which I had to answer, we don't have great evidence right now, is from a criminal perspective. You have to know that the legal position you are taking is untenable in order for it to be a crime under 18 USC three 71. If you don't have dishonest or corrupt intent, that doesn't count. Therefore, let's play as dumb as we possibly can. That's right. That's right. You're having. So then the question is, is there evidence that John eastman knew that he was making up this position on January 3rd? And we introduced some of that. Yeah, it was like the only maybe clarence Thomas, one where this will get 9 O or maybe 8 one. Yeah, that's right. That this would lose 9 O that sort of thing. And I think you and I walked away from that going, if that's all the evidence there is, then it's probably not a slam dunk against John eastman. It may not even be more likely than not against John eastman. And Trump is going to escape. Trump will say. I just totally believe that. So then the question is, is that all there is? And the answer is it's never all there. So now let's jump to exhibit D from this filing. There's a lot going on here. I want to start with the legal significance of this document. And I'm going to describe who it is and the background and boy is it amazing, but this, I think, provides evidence of where the one 6 committee.

cleta Mitchell John eastman Jared Kushner Brad raffensperger Joe Biden constitutional authority of st Claremont institute Foley & Lardner Trump administration Donald Trump U.S. eastman Denny Georgia ed Trump White House John Biden government
"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

08:57 min | 6 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Hello and welcome to opening arguments. This is episode 602. I'm Thomas, that's Andrew Torres. How are you doing, Andrew? I'm fantastic Thomas, how are you doing great? We are getting very, very close to some January 6th hearings. I'm looking forward to it. I'm sure you have a major event planned. Are you doing like a midnight screening of the January 6 hearings in your Chewbacca suit or something? That's a lightsaber and you're not just no, no, right, yeah. I think the Gandalf staff and whatever. I've stayed out all night for front row tickets for this event. No, I have learned to get my hopes up, but government hearings, the past 6 years have been rough on that. Again, as I've said this to you directly, I've said this to our listeners. There is a certain quality of Charlie Brown with the football. And I can not blame you if you are cynical about the January 6th committee. On the other hand, this is a committee that is tasked with and has spent a year and a half compiling evidence with respect to the insurrection. And their job is to communicate that to the public. And so if you have been frustrated that efforts to hold Trump accountable at seem to have fallen short, I'm right there with you, this represents a good opportunity. Again, I can't tell you not to be cynical about that. I can say and this is going to be the theme of this episode. Every time I look at the tiny subset of documents that the January 6th committee has released ahead of schedule in order to accomplish particular objectives as a lawyer, it indicates the stuff that they must have is likely to blow your mind. So again, I may have come down with a case of severe optimism, but I want to share with you some of what we've learned going on behind the scenes at the January 6th committee. Yeah, starting with, I think a lot of this is centered around a major bombshell back right after we recorded the other week. Excited to finally cover this, you were very excited about these documents, these drops, as you say, these little, not really breadcrumbs, the committees, leaving sort of like full loaves of bread. They're leaving it, or maybe like several loaves of bread. More than crumbs, I would say. So here's what I learned to do last time, right? This is in connection with the John easterman civil litigation where John eastman is the plaintiff. In a federal case in the central district of California, despite the fact that John eastman is the plaintiff, the lawyers he hired to represent himself are not civil lawyers. They are white collar criminal defense lawyers, and that's part of why they've sucked so bad at this civil process. I mean, they've done inexplicably stupid things. I'm going to dive into that a little bit here. Infer whatever you want. To me, when somebody says, hey, I really, really want to bring this civil lawsuit to compel my employer, Chapman university, not to turn over documents to a congressional subpoena. And when you ask them, so who have you selected? And you say, well, the people who will keep me out of jail. That seems to me to be telling. It may strike you differently and every person is entitled to their own opinion. Last time, I learned a very, very important thing. We covered in depth the first hearing that took place in that case regarding several hundred emails that were exchanged by and between John eastman, the president of the United States and various other recipients from January 3rd to January 6th. And that's where we got the smoking gun document of John eastman telling counsel for Mike Pence. Hey, since you've already committed some crimes, how about we commit some more crimes? I will never forget it because of whoever Mike Pence is a lawyer guy was having to maintain the civil relationship to. Like, oh, yeah, not sure on the insurrection stuff, but you know, hey, next time you're in town, let's grab dinner. Let's grab, let's grab ball of wine. You know, like, really weird, bizarre universe stuff, a flick. Trying to maybe casually say no. As though it's like an invitation to a movie, you don't want to see. Now, ah, can't make that insurrection. But let's grab dinner. Yeah. So that is Greg Jacob, unlikely hero, and cooperating witness with the January 6th committee. We actually have the opportunity for John eastman to serve in that role in connection with this latest trove of documents. So buckle up for that one. Because that is a wild ride. But what I learned in connection with that first hearing was download the exhibits because the January 6th committee has a ton of documents. They have taken a ton of depositions. They have received a lot of testimony. And what they have done is publicly released just enough to accomplish their objective, which the last time around was to persuade a court which they did. The judge in this case has determined as a matter of law. And again, in a civil case, it's not directly transferable because the standards of proof are different, but has determined that it is more likely than not that Donald Trump and John eastman committed crimes, including obstructing an official government proceeding to whip the counting of the electoral votes on January 6th. And that they were engaged in a conspiracy to defraud the United States. That's a pretty significant finding to convince a court to put on the record. So after that hearing, the court turned over a bunch of documents to the one 6 committee and then said, okay, since I have made this determination, it's also important to go through all the rest of your emails. And let's find out what other evidence of criming there was that took place because we know you didn't invent this on January 3rd. We just received the end of the briefing on May 31st with eastman's reply brief. But at the end of May, so last week we got the complete briefing from all sides with respect to does John eastman have legitimate attorney client privilege here or spoilers. Does he not because it's more evidence of crime? And I went and directly downloaded the 20 exhibits that are attached to the brief itself filed by the January 6th committee is great. It really, and look, again, I know it's our side we're rooting for the good guys. We're rooting to put the bad guys in jail. The text is fantastic, such as, for example, the point in which in his initial brief, John eastman says, well, some of these documents are documents involving potential clients. That is, people who called me up and were seeking representation because they wanted to hire me as a lawyer. And the fact that that didn't go through doesn't mean that I don't have attorney client privilege. And by the way, that's true. If somebody calls me up and says, hey, I just killed a guy and I need you to represent me and I listen to opening arguments all the time. I would then tell that person, hey, I'm sorry, not a criminal lawyer and would hang up. But that conversation would be attorney client privilege. Even though we don't have the full attorney client relationship, we have the initiation. We have a client seeking it out. Yeah, potential representation. So eastman says, hey look, some of these documents are protected by potential representation. The one 6 committee responded to that one by saying, okay, you didn't provide the documentation that the court ordered you to do so. But moreover, quote, for instance, of the first three people whom doctor eastman claims to have spoken about potential representation, the third has been in contact with the select committee through separate council. This separate council informed the select committee that this third person quote never retained nor considered retaining Doctor John eastman rather, the person contacted doctor eastman merely to correct eastman's incorrect publicly stated position on the Pennsylvania constitution. And never had any attorney client privilege communications with doctor eastman. In fact, this third person is produced to the select committee documents that appear to be those described in doctor eastman's.

John eastman Andrew Torres Mike Pence Thomas Charlie Brown Greg Jacob Chapman university Andrew football eastman United States California Donald Trump John select committee through separ Pennsylvania
"eastman" Discussed on WTOP

WTOP

01:54 min | 8 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on WTOP

"It's one 23 new this afternoon a federal judge has ordered Trump adviser John eastman to turn over more than a hundred emails to the House committee investigating the January 6th insurrection at the capitol In his ruling U.S. district court judge David Carter wrote the court finds it more likely than not that former president Trump committed crimes in his attempt to stop Congress from certifying the 2020 election That's a big win today for the January 6th committee eastman had claimed attorney client privilege and withholding those emails The committee argued for the legal exception that allows privilege to be broken when communications involve ongoing or future crimes Now the judge's decision has no bearing on whether or not the former president Trump will be charged criminally but it does ramp up the pressure on the Justice Department to conduct a thorough investigation The January 6th committee is recommending two more former Trump aides be held in contempt of Congress CBS correspondent Scott mcfarlane says the accusations concerned Trump's former trade adviser Peter Navarro and his social media manager Dan scavino The committee accuses Peter Navarro of working on a plan to quote delay Congress's certification and change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election and it says Dan scavino was with Trump January 6th and quote was party to conversations regarding plans to challenge official congressional proceedings Navarro calls a contempt vote a partisan assault B committee meets today to formally recommend prosecution also new today the House committee will reportedly try to interview Virginia Thomas the wife of the Supreme Court Justice clarence Thomas The Washington Post reports Jenny Thomas has repeated outreach to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows came when Trump and his allies were trying to enlist the Supreme Court to negate the results of the 2020 election.

Trump John eastman U.S. district court Peter Navarro Dan scavino David Carter Congress House committee Scott mcfarlane eastman Justice Department CBS Virginia Thomas Navarro Justice clarence Thomas Jenny Thomas Mark Meadows Supreme Court The Washington Post
"eastman" Discussed on Encyclopedia Womannica

Encyclopedia Womannica

06:42 min | 9 months ago

"eastman" Discussed on Encyclopedia Womannica

"Hi from wonder media network. I'm Kate Kelly, and this is will manica. This episode is part of a crossover season with ordinary equality. All about the women whose work and activism contributed to the ongoing history of the equal rights amendment. You can head over to that show to hear a longer version of today's episode and an interview with professor Amy aronson, author of crystal eastman, a revolutionary life. Today's mannequin was unrelenting in her fight for equality. When the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920, after years of fighting for the right of women to vote, she wrote men are saying perhaps thank God this everlasting fight is over. But women, if I know them, are saying, now at last we can begin. She understood that gaining the right to vote was the first step in something much bigger. Please welcome crystal eastman. Crystal eastman was born in glenora, New York in 1881. Her parents, Samuel eastman, and anise Bertha Ford met at oberlin college. Samuel was stunning to become a minister, an anise to become a teacher. But anise ended up following her calling instead. In 1890, she became one of the first women ordained as a congregational minister in New York. And even had her own church. This position was rare for a woman to have at the time. Crystal would later speak highly of her mother, quote. When my mother preached, we hated to miss it. Her voice was music. She spoke simply without effort, almost without jester, standing very still, and what she said seemed to come straight from her heart to yours. Her mother's leadership role was not the only thing that distinguished crystal's childhood. The family often hosted borders who needed a place to stay. Crystal said, there were always clever interesting amusing women coming in and out of the house. This mix of intelligent visitors helped expose her to unconventional ideas growing up. Crystal was also allowed and encouraged to speak her mind. She once complained to her parents that she should not be the only child to do the quote women's work. After that, her parents distributed household chores among their children on the gender neutral basis. The family referred to crystal as a mighty girl. Crystal graduated from high school in 1899 and attended Vassar female college. She distinguished herself as an excellent student and went on to receive a master's in sociology from Columbia University. Crystal then attended law school at New York University. She graduated second in her class in 1907. Despite her obvious talent, crystal couldn't get hired as a lawyer in New York. So she went to Pittsburgh, where she ran the first study on workplace accidents. Crystal made major strides in workers compensation and safety rights. But she decided to focus her energy on women's suffrage. In 1910, she married and moved to Wisconsin. There, crystal was recruited to be the campaign manager of the Wisconsin political equality league. She dove headfirst into the state's campaign for suffrage. Certain national suffrage groups were only trying to benefit white women in their efforts. But crystal worked to unite suffragists across racial lines and collaborated with Mary white ovington, the cofounder of the NAACP. Unfortunately, powerful opponents squashed the effort for suffrage in Wisconsin. Crystal returned to New York, leaving behind her marriage and the method of state by state campaigns. Crystal wanted to shake things up. She banded together with Lucy burns, an old friend, and Alice Paul to push for a federal constitutional amendment. They threw themselves into the national American women's suffrage association. But nahuatl wasn't focused on the federal strategy. As crystal Lucien Alice gained attention for their efforts, they got pushback from the more traditional members of Nawaz. So, the triad split off and formed the national women's party or NWP, the first women's political party in the world. The NWP eventually got women's suffrage over the finish line. But the very people who had resisted their tactics claimed the victory as their own. The Nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920, crystal gave her speech, now we begin. To remind people that women's suffrage was only the beginning of their road to equality, not the final destination. She also spoke out against the disenfranchisement of black women and the race discrimination that would continue even after the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified. Equality under the law was the first thing on her agenda. So in 1923, she and other seasoned suffragists, including Alice Paul, drafted the original equal rights amendment. In 1924, crystal said, to blot out of every law book in the land, to sweep out of every dusty courtroom to erase from every judge's mind, the centuries old precedent as to women's inferiority and dependence and need for protection. To substitute for it at one blow, the simple new precedent of equality. That is a fight worth making, even if it takes ten years. Crystal didn't know that the ERA's journey would take much longer than ten years. In addition to her innovative work with the ERA, crystal was also an anti war advocate, a prolific writer, and the founder of what would become the ACLU, the American civil liberties union. Her radical views and unconventional lifestyle made some people call crystal quote the most dangerous woman in America. Crystal continued to fight for the ERA and tell her early death in 1928 at the age of 46. A friend wrote at the time, she was for thousands a symbol of what a free woman might be. For.

crystal eastman Crystal Kate Kelly Amy aronson glenora Samuel eastman anise Bertha Ford crystal New York Vassar female college NWP oberlin college Wisconsin political equality l Mary white ovington jester Alice Paul Lucy burns national American women's suff Lucien Alice Wisconsin
"eastman" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

77WABC Radio

03:03 min | 1 year ago

"eastman" Discussed on 77WABC Radio

"Good for John eastman and his lawyer Good for Bannon and his lawyer of course we had David shown on the program Absolutely outstanding And I would argue that every single person who is attempted to be dragged before this committee should do the same thing I saw this fellow Mark short who I've known a long time not buddies I believe he was chief of staff who Mike Pence I think he worked for Mike when he was a congressman For a period of time my wife worked with him He also worked for Ali north He also worked for Donald Trump And I think it's found a quasi permanent job now with Pence But that said I read a piece where he is cooperating with the committee to myself When you cooperate with this committee and there's been executive privilege asserted and hasn't been resolved by the courts You're violating the constitution of the United States by undermining the position of the former president who has asserted executive privilege What are you doing And he's not alone There's this guy Jeff Rosen Who was the Deputy Attorney General of the United States became the acting attorney general of the United States with three minutes to go in the administration Apparently he's bleeding his lungs as well Apparently so In most of these people are very fearful of the Washington media And then they have concocted this scenario that they're the ones who are righteous Why don't you at least wait till the courts adjudicate this matter I mean truthfully that's what Bannon said He said look I'll testify but I got to get a resolution in the courts And be Twix and be damned And be twitched in between You know something like that So what's that Oops Are you folks understand what I'm talking about And of course that was the position of Bannon and his lawyers I said let's resolve this so we know what's going on here I don't have the authority to undermine executive pillar But the rats are jumping a ship here They're rats The phone is the frauds the freaks And the way the median Washington puts it you know these are the people who are cooperating Cooperating but the rogue committee You should be fighting this Doesn't mean you ultimately won't have to test if you should be fighting this Because it hasn't been adjudicated This committee is conducting itself as if it's the judge the jury and the executioner That's what I mean It's a stalinist enterprise The irony.

John eastman Bannon Mark short Ali north Jeff Rosen Mike Pence United States Donald Trump David Mike Washington
"eastman" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated

The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated

07:59 min | 1 year ago

"eastman" Discussed on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated

"Finally, by Robert Costa back in his radio Wheelhouse after authoring peril with Bob Woodward, good morning, Robert, how are you? You, it is great to be back with you. Well, thank you. You've had a long book laby had a great bestseller parallelism bookstores everywhere continues to sell. It continues to make news. In fact, let's go back to the most recent headlines Robert Costa from peril. What is the latest, it's really the John eastman memo, John is a friend of mine, and I've known him forever. He's a very fine lawyer. You put in the short form of the eastman memo. Did you have the long form available to you? Well, there are two versions of the eastman memo that eastman memo that matters in our report in peril is the one that goes to senator Mike Lee of Utah that was circulated by The White House. The January 2nd 2021. Did each man know it was going to go out from The White House because lawyers will often. I haven't talked to John yet. But they will often prepare talking point memos, summary memos that are not supposed to go a to the client or be to the top of the client chain and certainly not outside of the client's control. Well, I'm not sure what eastman knew about the circulation of this memo. I do know that John was in the Oval Office with Trump and Pence and Marc short and pence's advisers on January 4th, two days before the certification. Pushing the argument, eastman has made further comments about that meeting The New York Times in our book, which is we stand by. President Trump was really telling Trump, assuming Trump was really telling Pence, listen to Jon, listen to John, you can do this. You can walk away, try to allow this to go to the house, delay the certification. And so John eastman has said that his longer memo makes clear that he did not favor this. And I'll talk to John sometime about this. But let me ask you about the impact of peril. It certainly is going to make it less likely that lawyers will give their candid set of option advice on the far flung to the near certain legal options to a president. Don't you think that's going to happen? I think Hugh though, you got to have when you read the memo, the memo says there are alternate electors in the states and that just wasn't the case. And so it was eastman's memo says there's going to be a scenario where alternate slates of electors are available. Now, eastman is publicly made the case that he wanted to delay the certification if Pence went in that direction. He's making the recommendation that alternate slates would somehow appear, but they weren't no state legislature had recognized any alternate slate at that time on January 4th 5th or 6th. I think it was completely far fetched. I do not believe it was an option. I would tell John that, I don't think he ought to have put that in paper because I know how the president thinks, which is give I can talk Trump, which is give him an option that's far out there. And he'll seize upon it as though it's mainstream and viable. Assuming it's sort of like, how does an economist get out of a hole in the ground first to assume a ladder? Here they assumed an elector. And you can't. I mean, you just can't do that and give it to Donald Trump where he's going to assume the elector. Exactly. I mean, I can't read John's mind or Trump's mind, but Trump wholesale bought in. I spent 9 ten months digging into this. Trump was wholesale believing that this election could go to the house and he could win and that alternate slates of electors could somehow be brought quickly to the four that would allow him to have a victory in the house. Is this something he truly believed? I agree, Robert. What I try and tell everyone is that president Trump is first and foremost, a real estate developer. And real estate developers see houses and buildings and malls. They don't see empty ground. They don't see zoning restrictions. They don't say state law. They don't see sequence in Napa and endangered species. They don't say anything except their vision. And if you tell them at one time, it's possible we could get 5 units an acre, they'll want 6. I mean, that's just how developers think. That's why they get stuff done. It's also why they go bankrupt and then get things done. And it's Donald Trump. And if you give him a memo that says, maybe if electors show up from one state, we'll be able to have the vice president to put that aside. He's going to will it into existence. Is that your experience with the president? Well, I've had interviews with him, but I do know that the story we've reported is that Trump really believed at the end that this was a viable option. And someone like Mike Lee and I think the lead component's important, we report that Lee himself is a serious lawyer on the right. Is trying to look at this and say, is this just isn't possible? This is not and that's why we also detail in the book how senator Ted Cruz is telling Trump at the end on January 5th. Look, we're going to object to Arizona. We're going to propose a commission to look into these issues with even at that moment Trump saying to cruise based on our reporting, hey, you got to do more. You got to object to every state. There was an expectation that many Republicans found unreasonable that Trump they wanted to help Trump Lee likes Trump, Cruz likes Trump. Eastman likes Trump. But there was an expectation by Trump at the end of these things could really move forward in a way that didn't seem legally or politically possible to a lot of people around the president. I'm reminded of PJ o'rourke. You don't give whisky in the car keys to a teenage boy. You don't give scenarios on the Electoral College to a president who's facing defeat. When those scenarios simply can not happen. Let me turn now to the consequences of Donald Trump's continued interest in the 2024 election. I moderated a Senate debate in Ohio among GOP candidates on Sunday Night. 6 candidates all with 7 figures budgets and rising Robert Koch. These are all deeply well financed candidates. 5 of them are clearly trying to grab the former president's attention. One of whom, Matt Dolan is running if rob Portman do you think that's going to be replayed in every race in the United States in 2022? It's certainly possible. I think if Virginia turns toward youngkin and I think the young can model could become something you see a lot of states in a lot of states that Republican candidates are going to go hey, we may not want to be totally with Trump, but we can't walk away from Trump and there's going to be a competition for how you navigate that in a primary. I don't think it's going to be Marjorie Taylor green in every single primary winning, that type of a true through and through Trump style Republican, but you're not going to be a never trumper. I would expect and win a lot of Republican primaries. Should you tied continue to move in that direction? A never trumper. The interesting thing is the fusion of both with Glenn young and Glen and his public said, I've got the forever trumpers in the never trumpers both supporting me over education. And I think that's the model. And the latest Monmouth pole is its tied. I actually think mcauliffe is losing and junk and is winning. And this morning, the idea, well, Terry mcauliffe yesterday told WRC channel 6 WTV our channel 6 this cut number 5. But you know, this is junk in China stir up this critical race theory, which I'll be honest with you Bill, I find highly offensive. Critical race theory is not taught in Virginia. It has never been taught. It is a racist dog whistle. And I'm really tired of it. Now the daily caller this morning Robert Costa reports that loudon county forces parents to sign an NDA style form to view the CRT inspired curriculum. They're clearly a CRT and its legacy in some school boards..

Robert Costa eastman Trump John eastman John senator Mike Lee Marc short President Trump Pence White House Donald Trump Bob Woodward Wheelhouse Trump wholesale president Trump Robert Oval Office pence
"eastman" Discussed on This Day in History Class

This Day in History Class

07:09 min | 1 year ago

"eastman" Discussed on This Day in History Class

"Hello and welcome to this day in history class. A show for people who can never know enough about history. My name is gabe. Lucy and one of my favorite things about history is that it gives us a glimpse of just how novel the technology we take for granted. Used to be. Take cameras for instance. Most of us today have a high quality. One within arm's reach at any given moment thanks to our phones but when cameras were new they were complex bulky and anything but intuitive so today we're going to reflect on just how good we've got it by looking at the day when cameras finally started to get a little more user friendly. The day was tuesday. September fourth eighteen eighty eight american entrepreneur. George eastman founder of the eastman dry plate and film company received a patent for the world's first camera designed to use rolls of film dubbed the kodak. The box style camera was much easier to carry an operate compared to other cameras of the day. This ease of use helped expand the niche world of photography into a hobby. Accessible to almost anyone eastman was born on july twelfth eighteen. Fifty four in waterville new york. He grew up poor and dropped out of high school to support his widowed mother and two sisters one of whom was sick with polio. At age fourteen eastman began his career in business as the office boy for a local insurance company he then got a job as a bank clerk and it was during this tenure that he i took an interest in photography when eastman was twenty four he started making plans for vacation to santo domingo the capital city of the dominican republic while prepping for the trip. A colleague at the bank encouraged eastman to document his travels. This prompted him to invest in his own photographic equipment true to the era. The camera eastman bought was as big as a microwave and required a tripod to operate at the time. Cameras relied on. What's known as wet plate photography in this process the camera's lens used light to capture an image onto a heavy glass plate inserted in the camera then in a complicated multi step process. The glass plate would be coated and dipped in several chemical solutions before being exposed washed unvarnished. Once this lengthy process was complete and only if done correctly a visible negative image would appear on the plate which could then be used to make paper print or photograph. Needless to say taking and developing even a single photo involved a great deal of time effort and technical know-how in fact when eastman had gathered his complete photography kit which he colorfully described as a pack horse load. He found that he still needed to pay five dollars to learn how to use it. In the end george eastman never actually took that vacation to santo domingo but his foray into photography ignited a new passion. He continued to work at the bank during the day but at night he would experiment in his mother's kitchen hoping to find an easier way to take pictures. His research led him to another existing form of photography which involved coating glass plates with gelatin emulsion. That remained light sensitive even after it dried this dry plate. Form of photography simplified the development process and after three years of experimentation eastman came up with his own dry plate formula and entered the photography business full-time as he worked to keep his young company. Afloat eastman continued searching for a new exposure method. That would do away with cumbersome glass plates once and for all he knew that only then then could he achieve his dream to quote. Make the camera as convenient as the pencil. His initial approach was to coat. The gelatin emulsion directly onto paper instead of onto glass plates. That way the paper could be wound into a compact role in loaded into a special holder. Attached the camera when it became clear the wet paper was too sticky and fragile to be rolled up effectively eastman switch to film made from cellulose and the modern camera was born. The first camera to use that film was the one eastman patented in eighteen. Eighty eight the kodak box camera came preloaded with one hundred exposures worth of film and was ready to use with no adjustments or prior knowledge. Needed budding photographers. Could simply ready the shutter by pulling up on a string point the camera at a subject and then press the shutter release to snap a picture. This simplicity was the major selling point for the twenty five dollar kodak camera as evidenced by the cameras slogan. You press the button. We do the wrist once. All one hundred exposures had been used. The entire camera was sent to eastman's headquarters in rochester there. The film was developed. Prints were made and a new role of film was installed. The camera and prince were then returned to the customer with the whole service costing around ten dollars. The kodak camera was such a success. That within a few years of its debut eastman renamed his business the eastman kodak company as for the word kodak which eastman trademark on the same day he patented his camera. It doesn't actually mean anything. Contrary to popular belief it was not an existing word borrowed from a foreign language. According to eastman the made up word was chosen. For four reasons. I it was short and therefore easy to remember second. It was a distinct enough word that it would be difficult to mispronounce third. It had no associations outside of his specific camera and forth. it both started and ended with the letter. K which was eastman's favourite letter. The name proved to be a good choice as kodak went on to become one of the most recognizable brand names of all time. The kodak company and the medium of film photography in general have lost some of their prominence since the advent of digital photography but without george eastman and the role film camera. Who knows when or if photography would've ever become the universal pastime. It is today. I'm gabe lucia. And hopefully.

eastman kodak george eastman eastman dry gabe waterville santo domingo Lucy polio dominican republic new york rochester gabe lucia
"eastman" Discussed on NoCo Now ? 1310 KFKA

NoCo Now ? 1310 KFKA

08:03 min | 1 year ago

"eastman" Discussed on NoCo Now ? 1310 KFKA

"Three zero one Okay let's see here We've got paulina. Meyer coming up In in about ten minutes or so. We'll be joined by the windsor mayor. that We'll be talking about some of the new things windsor has going on. Then chris would. Editor publisher biz west magazine. We'll be joining us as well So really looking forward to the interviews The beginning to hey quick programming reminder tomorrow brady whole of the whole show is going to jump up. We got a schedule is going crazy. I mentioned we'll have mornings scale from six. Am to eight am tomorrow at eight am sharp. I'm going to be doing some broadcasting for all you people out there The eaten red going to be taking on resurrection christian cougars in the quarterfinal matchup of the state volleyball So eight am sharp will be gone. Should rapper wrap up around ten. Am at that point. brady hold jumps in. He'll on our Then we'll get back into some regular programming for you tomorrow with the rockies doubleheader a whole bunch of things thursday same situation have an eight. Am broadcast as well So we'll see where that lines up everything along those lines as well but If you're tune in tomorrow or thursday and wondering what is going on. That's kind of the setup of it but we will be back and on normal schedule on friday for noko now so that is coming up all right. Let's get into the sports world shall we Starting i last night the It was it was a it was the kid. I say a must win game. It was a huge game last night between the colorado avalanche and the vegas golden knights. I will tell you what it lived. Up to the hype. The avs go down early in this one. One two zero in the first period which this team look i. I know it's a. It's easy to say but this team is one that doesn't score very often in the first period but are so fast they're gonna wear you down. They are going to wear you down. And that's what they did with the vegas golden knights last night They go down one zero in the first period the tied up in the second period with about About so nine minutes left in the third period. Jt conver- puts one home in the avs. Take the win to two one. So what i've been told. Is that the avs to win. The presidents cup to beat the vegas golden knights in regulation had to beat the vegas golden knights in regulation. They did that. It didn't look like it was going to happen but they did that. Last night. fill grew our incredible by the way. So now what do they have to do because early two points back. Well all they have to do is be the la kings twice. They play wednesday at seven pm and they play thursday at seven pm and ball arena. So that's the as have. They've got that in front of them. Can they go win. Two games win the presidents cup and get that number one seed heading into the playoffs. I love the avs life where they're headed. I think they can do. They have now won. I must see here six out of their last seven games. They are picking it up. They're getting helping hitting their stride. This looks like it could be just as spectacular. Finish to season four four the colorado avalanche. Take a look at the denver. Nuggets shall we there in action tonight. excuse me this afternoon five. Pm tipoff against the charlotte hornets deliver. comes one forty four and twenty four. They're five and a half point favorites in charlotte. so now what we're seeing is The the nuggets maybe starting to get a little healthier saw the report From katie windy of altitude. Tv's the monte. Morris is now listed as questionable for the game against that that would be huge to get them back to. The nuggets are sitting in fourth place right now in the western conference the charlotte hornets in eight in the eastern conference. This i think this game could maybe surprised that people. I think it's colder than what that five and a half is but the nuggets have come off losses to two very talented teams in the utah jazz and the brooklyn nets. So where do they go. Okay the nuggets forty four and twenty four. They are one game back of the clippers. Dallas is starting to pull ahead. Dallas is two games ahead of the mavs. Honestly you're starting to say almost rather just stay in that number four spot take on dallas you know l. a. keeps falling back there a game and a half out of Six plays who is portland. So it's shaken up shaken up and it's looking like it could benefit the denver nuggets. Let's get to the colorado rockies. They were scheduled to go last night. Obviously mother nature had had some different plans and they're also slated to go. Today i would have a feeling that mother nature would have some different plans as it sits right now the rockies slated to have two seven inning games tomorrow against the padres. I don't know going to happen to the game today. It's supposed to go at six forty with a six ten pre-game show here on kfi k. But we'll see i. There's no way they play that game. It's snowing it's still raining there. There's no way that they get that game in So we'll we'll see what the schedule ends up being. As well as i mentioned tomorrow state volleyball the eaten. Reds gwen forrester and company taking on resurrection christian at eighty am in the quarterfinals university. The university bulldogs and lamar savages. Were slated to go at two pm. But lamar had a positive cova test. They have been disqualified out of the state tournament. And it means that the university bulldogs will now move forward into the semi-finals. They get automatic fi. They play eight. Am on thursday which should be matchup. The reds take care of business like they. They have been. That should be matchup between the reds and university bulldogs on thursday morning. Which is where. We're we're ready to go and that that's what we're looking for winter. That will play. I take title at eight pm on thursday a lot of high school. Actually coming your way as well. Our high school baseball game has been postponed as well. So no no gain today. Anything like that. we will We'll await To see where we go that look for the sports world.

Today two pm friday thursday Dallas paulina Two games thursday morning two games second period chris tomorrow two points lamar eighty am today third period Last night tonight charlotte