Defending John Eastman — Part 3

Bad news, but it's not a surprise anymore...

To assist late arrivers in getting up-to-speed on this matter, please read my prior commentaries: Defending John Eastman Part 1 and Part 2.

After several months of hearings, etc. last week, the judge rendered her decision and declared that John should lose his law license for a potpourri of “reasons.” Based on my involvement (and 12± hours of testimony), I politely disagree. But I digress…

I had to wade through over 50 one-sided media articles (like the prejudicial and inaccurate recounting by the NYT) before I came to a competent one: “The regime has lost all perspective and decency in its war on its perceived enemies.”

After further digging, I also found this excellent commentary: The Heroic Sacrifice of John Eastman. After I posted this commentary, I was sent This Easter, They are Trying to Disbar my Attorney, and Anyone Else who Stands in Their Way.

In my view (as a non-attorney) the two issues debated in this case were:

1 - Did John Eastman have a reasonable basis to believe that the certified 2020 Presidential election results of some states, were likely very inaccurate?

2 - If yes, what should have been his legal advice to VP Mike Pence regarding how to treat certain state certifications of likely very inaccurate results?

John Eastman said YES to the first question. As an election integrity expert (e.g., see here), I also said definitely YES to the first question. (Since I’m not a lawyer or a Constitutional expert, I can’t speak to the second question.)

For a sample of the evidence as to why I say YES, see here.

The California prosecutor, and now the judge, said NO to the first question, which meant that the second one was legally moot anyway.

Dr. Eastman is not only a respected Constitutional expert, but he was Dean of the Claremont Law School for over ten years. In other words, he is no ambulance chaser.

If you’d like to follow the next developments of this saga, please go to John Eastman’s relatively new Substack column, for his own commentary!

We are in very dangerous waters when the judicial system misinterprets (or misapplies) the law, for political reasons. That’s how third-world countries have been known to operate.

Yet again we are dependent on Critically Thinking citizens who can see through the blatant bias of the media, as well as the politicization of the judicial system.

If you are wondering what you can do to meaningfully help the victim of this travesty, consider making a donation to John’s Defense Fund.

---

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).