Whether disbarment occurs or not, the judgement in California on John Eastman’s scholarly and legal skill has found him potentially peddling insurrection and sedition within a RICO framework. The California State Bar's devastating report on John Eastman contains bad news for Trump as well, despite Fox News editing Eastman’s interview with Laura Ingraham to avoid more legal exposure on their supporting “The Big Lie”.
The California Bar Report addresses the legal positions advanced by Dr. John Eastman in relation to the counting of electoral votes for the 2020 presidential election. It focuses on two issues:
1. Whether the Vice President, in his capacity as President of the Senate, has unilateral authority to resolve disputes about electoral votes or to take other unilateral actions with respect to the electoral count.
2. Whether the Vice President may delay the electoral count for a state legislature to take action with respect to a state’s electoral votes and whether a state legislature may lawfully appoint electors after the electoral count commences.
This report concludes that no reasonable lawyer exercising diligence appropriate to the circumstances would adopt Dr. Eastman’s legal positions on either issue
Finally, Dr. Eastman’s proposal that Vice President Pence unilaterally delay the electoral count similarly delays, but does not avoid, the question of who resolves disputes about electoral votes. The proposal suggests the delay so state legislatures could appoint a new slate of electors. Even if state legislatures appointed those new electors as Dr. Eastman suggested, the electoral count must recommence in order for any electoral votes from those states being counted. When Congress reconvened for the electoral count after that belated appointment, however, it would be faced with two competing slates of electors: the slate certified by the governor and received prior to January 6, 2021, and the slate appointed by the state legislature subsequent to January 6, 2021. Dr. Eastman conceded that if Congress resolved that dispute under the Electoral Count Act, the governor-certified slate would be counted and President Biden would prevail. In order for President Trump to prevail as Dr. Eastman’s 6-page memorandum indicated, Vice President Pence would thus need to unilaterally resolve the dispute between the two competing slates of electors. Accordingly, despite his suggestion to the contrary, Dr. Eastman’s proposal for Vice President Pence to delay the count ultimately depends on Vice President Pence exercising the unilateral power to resolve disputes about which electoral votes to count.
[...]
Beginning in 1865 and for over 150 years, Congress has unequivocally asserted authority to resolve disputes about electoral votes and to regulate all other substantive aspects of the electoral count through a formal rule or statute. That assertion of authority began with Joint Rule 22 in 1865, continued with the Electoral Commission of 1877, extended with the Electoral Count Act of 1887,and was reaffirmed by the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022.
[...]
Self-government is at the core of American government because “[a] dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government.”284 Without the democratic check of an election whose result is fairly and independently determined, that guarantee of liberty would be eviscerated. The Founding generation fought the Revolutionary War to overthrow a monarchy and to establish a representative democracy. They did not fight that war to establish an executive branch of government that could entrench itself indefinitely by deciding the results of its own reelection, thereby recreating the monarchy that they had rejected in the Revolution. Madison also wrote that in our constitutional system, “[n]o man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.”285 Dr. Eastman’s legal positions violate that foundational principle of the rule of law.
wpdash.medianewsgroup.com/...
That interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in McPherson, like Dr. Eastman’s interpretation of the Electors Clause, is frivolous. (p.87)
Fox News host Laura Ingraham told John Eastman she has not seen evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election after he claimed there was.
Eastman was booked last week in Fulton County, Georgia after being indicted under the state’s Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act along with 18 others, including former President Donald Trump. District Attorney Fani Willis alleges the defendants ran afoul of the statute when they tried to overturn the election results in the state, which Trump lost.
After the election, Eastman claimed Republican-controlled legislatures in states Trump lost could invalidate the results. He further claimed that as presiding officer over the election certification in Congress, then-Vice President Mike Pence had the authority to refuse to certify the election.
Appearing on Tuesday’s edition of The Ingraham Angle, Eastman repeated the false claim that substantial fraud took place.
www.mediaite.com/...