(08-18-2023 06:07 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote: (08-18-2023 12:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: (08-18-2023 12:41 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote: (08-17-2023 05:31 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote: (08-17-2023 10:32 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: Jr.
Google 'Eadtman memo'. It's all over.
Google 'Chesebro memo'. It's also available but not as much as the above.
If you want the cliffs notes on them, simply pop to the Smith J6 indictment or the new Fulton Co indictment for the summary versions.
Thanks for the Links, so I guess you're talking about this memo.
https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2021/images/09/2...n.memo.pdf Am I right because I'm not able to find an original copy.
What I looked at in the Link above is not dated or signed by Eastman. It looks like someone wrote this after January 6 and if I remember it was sent to a New York paper by someone and it was anonymous is that correct. Are you basing your case on this PDF file? Have you seen the original memo by Eastman ?
Never did get an answer.
Eastman turned over this memo as part of the J6 committee subpoena and subsequent to the litigation in the Federal courts in California on whether it was privileged or not.
He has been confronted in subsequent litigation on that very same memo, and acknowledged in court filings that it is his work, and was the same memo that he sent to Trump, and they discussed in several group meetings in late November through December of 2020. Again, all in the court proceedings on whether to bust Eastman's attorney client privilege -- where that same memo was cited by the sitting judge, and the later 9th Cir. appeal, as being evidence of a greater probability that the Trump and Eastman were acting within the crime/fraud exception with this, and thus not subject to the attorney client privilege.
Next fing wackadoodle 'its all a fake' garbage point.... seems to be the rage around here. Along with doing no background work in the slightest.
First off Eastman had memos not one memo. What you are looking at is someones summary of their take of what they saw in those memos, so take that for what it's worth. I asked you if you had ever seen the original memos, you never replied so I will take that as a no.
Given it is an electronic document at its onset, it is kind of hard to detail an original.
And, this is what was the crux of the litigation in the Cal. Fed. Dist., admitted by Eastman to be his work, and turned over by Eastman as his work.
If you want to dance on the word 'original', feel free. Kind of stupid, but hey, its a free country.
Quote: So lets just say that some or part or all of what was in those memos are true. Where is the crime of people sitting in an office and snowballing on what they can do about a stolen election.
The crimes of 'conspiracy to' and 'attempt to'. That is the items that are charged for the most part in the Jack Smith and Fulton Co indictments.
One need not complete the crime, nor is success of the crime an out, to get dinged on those aspects.
In short, if I have a written plan to knock over my local bank, there is no problem.
If I spitball over drinks with the buds, no problem.
The instant anyone takes any action on that plan -- big problems for everyone.
There is a reason why Barr and Cippollone told Trump that if he persisted in the actions outlined in the plan, he would face criminal issues for a long time.
And on top of it, it is really fing stupid to write a plan down that is questionable legally. And really fing stupid to make any action on it when the lawyer author admits that it wont pass muster.
Stupid games, stupid prizes.
Quote:These ideas are written down on pieces of paper. Pence did not carry out any of these ideas on the 6th of January. So where is the crime.
See above.
Quote: You or anyone else will never convince me that the 2020 election was not stolen so you can save you breath.
I dont think I have ever attempted to do that. Some people also believe that Woody Harrelson's father was a hitman in the JFK assassination. Whatever blows your hair back.
Quote: Eastman is not in federal court in California. He's in the State Bar Court of California.
First, the issue I talk of above was a lawsuit to enforce a subpoena in Cali. In Federal Court there.
Second, I dont have clue what you are saying in your second sentence. It is kind of gibberish, with respect. Are you trying to convey where he is licensed? That is simply the state bar. I dont know what a state bar court is. There isnt such a thing.
He is facing disbarment. I dont know what forum that is in, and that is not what I am referring to above.
Quote: I have a question for you. Do you believe Biden received 81 million legal votes?
It's a yes or no question.
I dont think Biden received exactly 81 legal million votes. So no.
There is zero evidence that underlies any change to the various state totals. I dont know what the total in the 51 electoral races amounts to. If you have proof or hard evidence of other totals, please do tell.
/
[NEWS] States CANNOT use state law against federal officials for things they did as feds
