Rachel Alexander: California Bar Seeks to Disbar Trump Attorney John Eastman for Nothing

The attacks on conservative lawyers by state bars across the country continue, especially against those who are involved in fighting voter suppression and disenfranchisement. The 65 Project was established to file complaints against Conservative Attorneys to have them disbarred. It’s worked quite well since few election attorneys now dare to represent Kari Lake and other conservative candidates who lost their races due to massive voter disenfranchisement. The left filed a complaint against John Eastman, a top conservative lawyer, last year for representing Donald Trump in his 2020 challenge efforts. On Thursday, the State Bar of California heard the complaint. Announcement It is trying to disbar him. 

The 65 Project filed a Complaint against Eastman, a law professor who once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and founding director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, with the U.S. Supreme Court, and the States United Democracy Center (SUDC) filed a Complaint California Bar. The SUDC consists of liberal Republicans and progressive activists like Janet Napolitano. According to the Bar, Eastman told Trump and Vice President Mike Pence not to certify the election. But that’s completely false. Eastman reviewed all legal options available to them, but he didn’t recommend any. In fact, he was quite negative about this option. 

Eastman “determined that, in light of the acknowledged illegality and serious allegations of fraud, one possible option was for the Vice President to accede to requests from numerous state legislators to postpone certification for a brief period to allow the claims of fraud and illegality to be assessed by the state legislatures.”

He was.n’t trying to overturn the election or cause an insurrection, as the Bar characterizes it. He was Advice On “whether the electoral votes that had been certified were legally certified after state election officials violated numerous provisions of state election law that had been adopted by the legislatures of the several states at issue, violations that unconstitutionally intruded on the legislatures’ plenary power to direct the manner of choosing electors.”

In fact “Eastman himself advised the Vice President during the Oval Office meeting on January 4, 2021, that it would be foolish to unilaterally reject electoral votes absent certificate of alternatives from state legislators, even if he had such constitutional authority.”

The Bar accused Eastman defaming historical sources and stated that he “knew or was grossly negligent” In “not knowing” The law review articles that he cited were “fundamentally flawed.” Eastman did not believe that there were any problems with the law review articles. They go through rigorous editing and reviewing before they are published. 

The Bar stated that “no reasonable attorney with expertise in constitutional or election law would have concluded that the Vice President was legally authorized to take the actions respondent proposed.” But that’s not true. Based on historical precedents, almost every conservative election lawyer believes that it is possible. 

Eastman’s attorney Randall Miller sent a 100-page Response to the Bar’s initial investigation, with hundreds of pages of attachments. In it, Miller cited numerous examples in our country’s history where the Vice President deliberately chose to count or not count electoral votes. Thomas Jefferson, Vice President, demanded that the electoral votes from Georgia were counted in 1801, despite the fact that they had been incorrectly certified. Richard Nixon, in 1961, demanded that the Kennedy electors be counted rather than the Nixon electors. This despite the fact that the Nixon electors were the ones who had been certified to vote. And so on.

Eastman mentioned several legal experts, some from the 1800s who had concluded the same. Twelfth Amendment This gives the Vice President this discretionary option. The Bar and others tried to use statements made by two people critical of this position, but Eastman pointed out that wasn’t taking into account their complete statements. Former Fourth Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig  That was January 4, 2021. “John is a brilliant constitutional scholar. Whatever John is telling the President has some basis in the law.”

Similarly, Vice President Pence’s General Counsel, Greg Jacob, advised Pence that legal scholars disagreed about the scope of authority the Vice President had under the Twelfth Amendment. He also , “There is some historical evidence that [Vice Presidents] Adams and Jefferson both resolved issues over the validity of electoral votes in their favor.”

The Bar also pursued Eastman for his involvement with various Trump election lawsuits. Eastman  the Bar’s complaint “is filled with distortions, half-truths, and outright falsehoods.” The complaint repeated the abusive language used in irresponsible hack MSM journalists like one who wrote for The New Republic. Characterized Eastman “plotting to illegally overturn a presidential election.” 

The Bar  Eastman was involved in vague, but alarming-sounding ethical violations. “moral turpitude, dishonesty, and corruption.” Those are catchall terms in state bars’ Rules of Professional Conduct that are frequently used to target conservative attorneys when the bars can’t get them on anything else. The Bar’s investigations are kept confidential unless the attorney is considered a “threat to the public,” Which they absurdly claimed Eastman to be. 

Federal prosecutors are also investigating Eastman. They seize his phone last June. Some of the Top legal minds Support him in the country, including self-description “left-libertarian” Harvey Silverglate, Author of Three felonies a day: How the Feds Target the Incogent.

The only way left-wing Bar can disbar Eastman is to lie about his actions and ignore all the evidence. Nobody with half a brain believes Eastman called for an insurrection. However, with fake news coverage of proceedings, the Bar might get away with dismantling one of the participants. Most trusted The country has a number of conservative legal minds. This is a shocking dismantling and reorganization of the rule law. The right has two tiers of legal justice, while the left has few attorneys who will represent them.