It should come as no surprise that the progressive communist democrats, the party of lawyers, have found another way to attack lawyers who lawfully and ethically resent their opposition’s candidates and policies.

By criminalizing the practice of law and claiming that an attorney who discusses legal options and strategies with their client is guilty of a crime and therefore nullifies attorney-client privilege using the crime-fraud exception.  Thus, an attorney can be forced to disclose typically privileged documents and communications to the prosecution unless challenged in court.

The attorney-client privilege is a legal principle that protects the confidentiality of communications between an attorney and their client. It encourages open and honest communication between attorneys and their clients, allowing clients to provide complete and accurate information to their attorneys without fear that those communications will be disclosed.

However, the exception to the attorney-client privilege, known as the crime-fraud exception, claims the privilege does not apply when the communication between an attorney and client is made in furtherance of a crime or fraud. This means that if a client seeks legal advice or assistance to commit a crime or engage in fraudulent activities, the attorney-client privilege may not protect those communications from disclosure.

Thus, attorneys who provided legal advice relating to the 2020 election are presumptively and wrongly alleged to have participated in a criminal matter.

The attack on John Eastman…


Eastman replies…

The 65 Project, a group of radical Democrat activists (and 1 Never-Trump Republican) filed a bar complaint against me with the Supreme Court of the United States. In it, the Group asks that the Court immediately suspend my SCOTUS bar membership without a hearing or investigation and then ultimately disbar me altogether.

This is part of a well-funded effort to attack every attorney participating in the 2020 election challenges. More broadly, the Group has admitted that its goal is “to deter right-wing talent from signing on to any future GOP efforts” to challenge elections, not only by bringing bar complaints but to “shame them and make them toxic in their communities and their firms.”

The complaint is full of false statements and deliberate misrepresentations, so we have Dr. John Eastman fired back with a hard-hitting response, which is available HERE.

The fight continues in California…

Disbarment Proceedings for John Eastman, Ex-Trump Election Lawyer, Begin in California

A disciplinary hearing for John Eastman, the attorney who devised ways to keep Donald Trump in office after he lost the 2020 election against Joe Biden, will begin Tuesday in Los Angeles.

The California State Bar filed eleven charges in January against Eastman, who was until recently dean of Chapman University’s School of Law in Orange County. He stands accused of making false and misleading statements regarding election fraud, “including statements on January 6, 2021, at a rally in Washington, D.C., that contributed to provoking a crowd to assault and breach the Capitol to intimidate then-Vice President Pence and prevent the electoral count from proceeding.”

Eastman will spend the day testifying in his defense in the hope his law license will not be suspended. The disbarment hearing is expected to last eight days, the Associated Press reported. The final decision is left to the California Supreme Court.

The dean was a former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas and ran for California Attorney General in 2010.

What did Eastman do?

Eastman crafted a legal memo suggesting how the constitutional electoral process could be used to challenge election results that may have been fraudulently certified due to election irregularities. 

John Eastman also spoke at the January 6 rally, where he presented a legal argument suggesting that Vice President Mike Pence could reject certain electoral votes, potentially altering the outcome of the election and essentially describing a political procedure used by Democrats in previous elections. Among other things, Eastman had a First Amendment right to speak his mind.

Hardly a criminal matter, but then again, the Democrats lied about Trump and improperly impeached him -- twice.

Weaponizing the legal system by attacking individual lawyers representing specific candidates …

According to Influence Watch…

The 65 Project is a campaign targeting lawyers who aided attempts by then-President Donald Trump and his supporters to overturn the 2020 election results using advertisements, threats of disbarment, and changing rules within the American Bar Association, ostensibly to deter future similar efforts.

The 65 Project was “devised” by Democratic consultant and former Clinton administration official Melissa Moss. It is a project of Law Works, a group with no website or public financial disclosures. LawWorks has previously received grants from public policy-oriented foundation Democracy Fund and is a fiscal project of the Franklin Education Forum, a nonprofit organization that provides training and support to, “advance and broaden the appeal of the progressive cause.”

The name “65 Project” refers to the number of lawsuits filed by supporters of President Donald Trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Though the 65 Project claims to be bipartisan, it is not targeting any Democratic-aligned attorneys who have challenged election laws or results in the past, and is advised exclusively by Democrats and Democratic allies. Texas attorney Paul Davis has described the project as “a desperate attempt by leftist hacks and mercenaries” and an effort “to neutralize anyone on the right with the ability to stand in the way of the left’s efforts to hide malfeasance in the 2020 elections and to clear the path for a repeat of similar malfeasance in the 2022 mid-terms.”

Attorney Michael Teter is the managing director of the 65 Project. He was previously a general counsel for Represent.Us, a left-of-center campaign finance regulation advocacy group, and he was an assistant attorney general in Utah. From 2006-2008, Teter was a litigation associate with Perkins Coie, a law firm with close ties to the Democratic National Committee.

[OCS: Remember, Perkins Coie was the law firm that hired Fusion GPS and was directly involved with a series of Trump Hoaxes. And political practice partner Marc Elias led to actions that may have unconstitutionally violated existing state election laws.] 

The 65 Project’s Senior Advisor is David Brock, the founder of Media Matters for America and American Bridge 21st Century. <Source>

[OCS: Media Matters is a progressive communist democrat propaganda front group.]

Danger to our electoral and legal system…

Engaging in a political strategy that curtails the availability of legal representation by attacking or impeding the legitimate legal representation of political candidates, parties, initiatives, and fundraisers can have a chilling effect on the rule of law and undermine the democratic process.

Attorneys attacking other attorneys for partisan purposes may offend the principles of fairness, justice, and due process and violates ethical principles of professionalism, fairness, and respect for the law.

Portraying fellow attorneys representing political candidates in an unfavorable light can lead to negative public perception. Such actions may be viewed as extremist, intolerant, or anti-democratic, which can alienate potential supporters and damage the individual's or groups' reputations.

Why it works…

Progressive communist democrats run most bar associations, and the media is all-to-willing to publicize bar association fillings and smear the name of decent attorneys for partisan political purposes.

Bottom line…

I believe that attorney misconduct is not one-sided and that some attorneys on the GOP side, like Sydney Powell and L. Linn Wood, deserve scrutiny and sanctions for their egregious legal actions.

It is also my belief that bar associations, being professional organizations primarily composed of lawyers, have inherent structural biases and conflicts of interest in regulating entry into the legal profession, using their regulatory powers to protect their own members or maintain a monopoly over legal services, potentially hindering the advancement of a more inclusive and diverse legal community.

It is time to investigate bar associations and the handling of complaints, sanctions, and fines, along with opening the process to more public disclosure and scrutiny.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS