In an interview released on Thursday, John Eastman restated that he’s an...
In an interview, John Eastman reiterated his belief that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. He argued that the threat from the modern left has become so intolerable that it justifies overthrowing the government. Eastman claimed the stakes represent an existential threat to the nation’s survival. While he did not mention specific voter fraud, he cited government agencies suppressing information as justification for not sitting idly by. Eastman’s remarks appear to repeat the suggestion that overthrowing the government is legitimate to stop what he sees as threats from the left. However, his own actions and statements around January 6 have been mischaracterized according to Eastman.
This is intentional - they’re trying to lay the groundwork for Trump’s Jan6 indictment defense: He was simply taking the advice of his lawyer in good faith that he believed he had actually won the election.
Even aside from that, they wont be able to argue that he believed it in good faith when they’ve got TONS of advisers refuting that, even instances of contemporaneous public refutations from people within Trump’s circle.
We thought we’d already seen Stupid Watergate, and it just keeps getting stupider…
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
This is intentional - they’re trying to lay the groundwork for Trump’s Jan6 indictment defense: He was simply taking the advice of his lawyer in good faith that he believed he had actually won the election.
What they don’t realize is that this is a trap by Jack Smith - because that enables the prosecutors to look into Trumps communications with his lawyers - https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/jack-smith-has-set-a-trap-for-trump?sd=pf
Doesn’t this quote from the article make it seem like Trump was making his own decision:
" … claimed that Trump himself read a series of academic law review articles about the Electoral Count Act to brush up on the relevant law."
Yeah it does. But I find that claim extremely hard to believe.
Even aside from that, they wont be able to argue that he believed it in good faith when they’ve got TONS of advisers refuting that, even instances of contemporaneous public refutations from people within Trump’s circle.
We thought we’d already seen Stupid Watergate, and it just keeps getting stupider…