Good stuff indeed! Hopefully, these three stories are only the beginning of consequences facing Santos, Eastman, and (we may hope) Barr.
And this will be my last thanks to Jay marking the apparently successful end to my campaign to replace the unwarrantedly dignifying term "conspiracy theorist" with something that better reflects the nefarious, shallow, and manipulative character of these evil people. "Conspiracy peddler" is a fine choice. Bravo!
We have passed so far through the looking glass that Alice is wondering whether to send out a search party. Eastman and Barr are both foul, sick, crooks. Santos, while also a crook, is perhaps considering a career in criminal stand-up. "Well, if checking these boxes didn't work, let's just uncheck them! That should fix everything. Need a treasurer? Just use what's-his-name. He's everybody else's treasurer so he won't even notice if we sign his name to our filing. All set--let's go have another nice dinner for $199.99!"
I’m beginning to think of your posts as edu-tainment. So informative and hilarious. Thank you for starting off my day on the Left Coast on the right foot. 😉
Excellent piece, as usual! It does seem to have a few more adroit, well-deserved, laugh-out-loud moments than usual! YAY! Cuz this stuff, while extremely pertinent to keeping our democracy safe, is really making me crazy. It's going on far too long now.
Agreed on all counts! We do always need to laugh. It doesn't take away from the seriousness of the subject, but gives us a release valve to help keep us sane. Thank you for your wit, your humor, plus your ability to research all this important information and disseminate it with that dash of humor.
We are being served a complex layered crimey cake, full of discordant flavors and competing essence, permeated with the overwhelming heavy aroma of rancid dairy.
Ack!
It's all too much, this crimetastic era, where tongues don't even start wagging until your fourth infraction and you could count the non-crimey peeps on a hand. Sporting an amputated index appendage.
So glad the State Bar of California is finally taking action against Eastman. But what about Bill Barr?
And I wonder why don't the bars of every state take action against the Supreme Court? Are they afraid they'll be blacklisted? If people can rise up against their representatives, why can't lawyers rise up against their governing body? The Constitution provides that justices serve with “good Behaviour,” which they haven't. Otherwise, the number of justices need to change (which has happened 6 times before) before we return to originalism and all that entails.
Jeannine, none of the State Bars have any jurisdiction regarding the conduct of Federal Judges in Federal Court. The enforcement of Federal ethical standards against or supporting the 9 is a very hot topic at this exact moment. Of more immediate concern is the issue of recusal from a matter when a SCOTUS spouse or Family member is directly or indirectly involved in a legal controversy before Court. Even the appearance of a conflict should not be tolerated. In California, I once had state Judge recuse herself from a case because one of the parties in the case had fixed the air conditioning unit of the Judge's daughter at the daughter's Apartment. SCOTUS ethical rules should more stringent given their reputation is in a dumpster fire right now.
My guess relating to "Santos" is that his grandparents likely were Nazis who left Germany, running to Brazil at the end of WWII, to avoid prosecution. Maybe some in his family were Jewish but hid it so they could be socially proper German Nazis in the 1930s.
"who has been covering the Santos saga like thick foundation on a Brazilian drag queen" Almost peed myself!
I couldn’t resist.
You must have been channeling Dorothy Parker.
Same. Jay certainly has a way with words. Also noticed the untucked, er unticked reference. LOL
Me too! I burst out laughing.
Santos always wanted to be a fabulist drag queen...
Beyond perfect!
Me too. So funny
Spicy! I love it!
John Charles Eastman, Anaheim CA, California State Bar #193726. Disciplinary charges have been filed: CA State Bar Case No: 23-0-30029.
Good stuff indeed! Hopefully, these three stories are only the beginning of consequences facing Santos, Eastman, and (we may hope) Barr.
And this will be my last thanks to Jay marking the apparently successful end to my campaign to replace the unwarrantedly dignifying term "conspiracy theorist" with something that better reflects the nefarious, shallow, and manipulative character of these evil people. "Conspiracy peddler" is a fine choice. Bravo!
We have passed so far through the looking glass that Alice is wondering whether to send out a search party. Eastman and Barr are both foul, sick, crooks. Santos, while also a crook, is perhaps considering a career in criminal stand-up. "Well, if checking these boxes didn't work, let's just uncheck them! That should fix everything. Need a treasurer? Just use what's-his-name. He's everybody else's treasurer so he won't even notice if we sign his name to our filing. All set--let's go have another nice dinner for $199.99!"
I’m beginning to think of your posts as edu-tainment. So informative and hilarious. Thank you for starting off my day on the Left Coast on the right foot. 😉
Excellent piece, as usual! It does seem to have a few more adroit, well-deserved, laugh-out-loud moments than usual! YAY! Cuz this stuff, while extremely pertinent to keeping our democracy safe, is really making me crazy. It's going on far too long now.
We have to be able to laugh even while we take this stuff very seriously. it’s too much otherwise.
Agreed on all counts! We do always need to laugh. It doesn't take away from the seriousness of the subject, but gives us a release valve to help keep us sane. Thank you for your wit, your humor, plus your ability to research all this important information and disseminate it with that dash of humor.
Seriously loved this post, Jay 😉
TGIFriYAY— thank you Jay!
Giuliani is also facing his day of reckoning. The wheels of justice turn slowly and surely.
Slowly, surely. Surely? I’ll believe it only when any of these criminals actually go to jail.
Are any of the campaign finance violations actual criminal charges, and if so, by whom would he be prosecuted and what are the possible penalties ?
Falsely signing a federal document results in the criminal charge is this case. Not a good thing to do.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519
Old Georgie could find himself stripped of his Nobel Prize, his Pulitzer, his NCAA Championship, and his Oscar. Pretty severe stuff.
Untucked 🤣
We are being served a complex layered crimey cake, full of discordant flavors and competing essence, permeated with the overwhelming heavy aroma of rancid dairy.
Ack!
It's all too much, this crimetastic era, where tongues don't even start wagging until your fourth infraction and you could count the non-crimey peeps on a hand. Sporting an amputated index appendage.
The Age of Crime.
Might just be someone's next musical.....
Bonus WTF is a term I will now be using every time some new piece of GOP corrupt news comes out! SMH 🤷🏼♀️
Great piece, Jay!
To the surprise of no one even moderately smart and informed, it turns out the Trump administration weaponized their Justice Department.
So glad the State Bar of California is finally taking action against Eastman. But what about Bill Barr?
And I wonder why don't the bars of every state take action against the Supreme Court? Are they afraid they'll be blacklisted? If people can rise up against their representatives, why can't lawyers rise up against their governing body? The Constitution provides that justices serve with “good Behaviour,” which they haven't. Otherwise, the number of justices need to change (which has happened 6 times before) before we return to originalism and all that entails.
Jeannine, none of the State Bars have any jurisdiction regarding the conduct of Federal Judges in Federal Court. The enforcement of Federal ethical standards against or supporting the 9 is a very hot topic at this exact moment. Of more immediate concern is the issue of recusal from a matter when a SCOTUS spouse or Family member is directly or indirectly involved in a legal controversy before Court. Even the appearance of a conflict should not be tolerated. In California, I once had state Judge recuse herself from a case because one of the parties in the case had fixed the air conditioning unit of the Judge's daughter at the daughter's Apartment. SCOTUS ethical rules should more stringent given their reputation is in a dumpster fire right now.
My guess relating to "Santos" is that his grandparents likely were Nazis who left Germany, running to Brazil at the end of WWII, to avoid prosecution. Maybe some in his family were Jewish but hid it so they could be socially proper German Nazis in the 1930s.
I thought that as well.