Sunday, October 03, 2021

John Eastman deserves his 15 minutes of fame. Regardless of whether it was Andy Warhol who coined the phrase.

 Yes, it is proper that the Warhol thing has first brief commentary. Two sources; Phrase Finder, and Wikipedia, the latter telling you more than you'd want to know. Phrase Finder states -

In February 1968 Warhol exhibited his first international retrospective exhibition at the Moderna Museet gallery in Stockholm. The exhibition catalogue contained "In the future everybody will be world famous for fifteen minutes.". It is far and away the best-known of the many quotations attributed to Warhol, in fact it is probably the only comment of his that most people know.

The line began to bore Warhol in later years when interviewers kept asking him about it. In 1979 he did repeat it though, claiming that the line had truth - "my prediction from the sixties finally came true: In the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes.".

So Warhol is the source, he did say it, and referenced it years after it appeared in a museum catalog. It is not a misattributed quote.

EASTMAN

Unless you are weird by knowing of Eastman or have a photographic memory of the name, you likely are saying, "Who?".

This morning I learned of Eastman, proving you can stumble over many strange things while reading Internet posts. After reading the Daily Beast post on the womens' march, 2021, I followed a link to this DB commentary:

Trump Lawyer Recalls ‘Uncomfortable’ Showdown With Pence After Election

LEGAL EAGLE?

Reuters

Not a flattering image, and likely chosen by DB as such. At least Eastman had the good sense to wear a topcoat on a chilly Jan. 6, DC day. Eastman has had earlier DB coverage:

Much like other efforts by Trump’s lawyers during the post-election legal blitz to cancel Biden’s decisive victory, this new lawsuit has little hope of achieving that goal, even as President Trump pitches it to his supporters as the first step to reclaiming the presidency.

Underscoring the suit's remote prospects is the lawyer being asked to push it.

Chapman University law professor John Eastman is the attorney representing Trump., according to the court filing. He is a familiar face for Fox News viewers, having made his biggest media splash this year when he authored a widely  panned Newsweek op-ed that engaged in groundless birtherism around Harris.

In the op-ed, Eastman claimed that the Democratic senator wasn’t a natural born citizen, even though she was clearly born in Oakland, California, because she was born to non permanent residents of the country: an Indian mother and a Jamaican father. He extended that line of reasoning to argue that she lacked the eligibility to run for vice president of the United States.

The essay, published in August under the title, “Some Questions for Kamala Harris About Eligibility,” was considered so laughable and racist at the news organization that it triggered a revolt among staffers and, eventually, a public apology. But by then, President Trump was already using the op-ed to spread innuendo about Harris’s eligibility, and telling reporters that Eastman, who now represents him as a personal attorney, “brilliant.”

[...] Over the past four years, Eastman has joined a number of lawsuits seeking to support conservative causes and Trump administration officials.

The first discussed DB item linked to a lengthier NYT item which might interest some readers. It has more bio information than DB gave.

Last, Gateway Pundit sees injustice heaped upon poor lawyer Eastman as an outcome of his having spoken to the Jan. 6 crowd before Trump, himself, worked that crowd. No quote beyond:

[...] After the riots at the US Capitol Dr. John Eastman was fired from his position as law professor at Chapman University.

According to a group of current and former law students Dr. Eastman was wrongly smeared and attacked for allegedly inciting violence at the US Capitol hours later.

Several acquaintances of Dr. Eastman are now speaking out defending their friend against the salacious accusations.

[...] 

Like some Crabgrass readers, I questioned the above "salacious" terminology as wrong; it was not a Harvey Weinstein thing, not that at all. No groping, no inuendo, just a warmup speech to Trump's Jan. 6 crowd.

Now - The Big Question:

Did it take you more than fifteen minutes to read the above? The guess, yes, if you followed links. No, if you did not. Ancillary question, does this post make him "famous," any more than cited and more widely read web content did?

_____________UPDATE____________

Crooks and Liars has a recent post on Eastman and the NYT. After law school at U.Chicago, he clerked for Clarence Thomas; that among other little known facts.

Stillness in the Storm, re Eastman. Posted Jan. 6, 2021.

A websearch.