We’re now in the eighth week of testimony as I fight against efforts launched by radical leftwing lawyers to have me disbarred in California. My team continues to present evidence of illegality in the 2020 election, powerfully undermining the contention of State Bar lawyers that there was no legal basis for me to assist President Trump in challenging irregularities.
I’ve taken the stand myself to discuss the constitutional basis for my representation, and I have been touched by many prominent members of the legal profession who are testifying about my character and integrity.
Before getting into a detailed update on the California disbarment case, I would like to respectfully ask for your financial support. The lawfare persecution that is being waged against me is overwhelming, and the legal bills that are mounting are extraordinary. I’ve already incurred over half a million dollars in expenses, and I estimate that defending my good name and reputation will cost over $1 million in additional expense going forward.
Now to summarize the latest developments in the disbarment case in California.
My team previously presented powerful testimony from experts and lawyers involved in election integrity issues and litigation in Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Michigan about irregularities and illegalities that occurred in those states. These were not merely technical errors that impacted a few votes here or there. The witnesses testified that the illegalities and irregularities were outcome determinative in many cases.
This week a prominent election lawyer, Kurt Olsen, testified about findings in Detroit that over 174,000 ballots were cast there without any registration number attributable to the voter. He also testified about thousands of Joe Biden ballots in Detroit that were likely the result of election workers running ballots through the tabulators multiple times, “with Republican poll watchers obstructed or denied access, and election officials ignoring poll watchers challenges, as documented by numerous declarations.”
Mr. Olsen also testified about legal challenges in Pennsylvania that questioned the integrity of that state’s conduct of the election. Elections officials accepted and counted some 10,000 ballots that were late – arriving after the election – and failed to segregate those late ballots, making it impossible to later remove them from the count. Further, they accepted and counted 58,221 mail ballots that were returned before the ballots had even been mailed out to voters!
Clearly, my legal team has demolished the State Bar’s contention that there was no evidence whatsoever of comprehensive election irregularities in the 2020 election and thus my legal filings and statements to the contrary show that I lack the ethical foundation to continue to be a lawyer.
My team also focused on the constitutional basis for my legal arguments in representing President Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election.
In this regard, I took the stand to challenge the State Bar’s contention – one echoed by leftwing lawfare groups and Democrat activists – that I advised Vice President Pence that he had the authority to refuse to count certified election results that had been submitted in states where illegalities had been alleged.
In fact, my presentation to Vice President Pence was far more nuanced than what is suggested. I made it clear that the constitutionality of the Electoral Count Act had never been addressed and thus it was an open legal question whether the Vice President in his role as President of the Senate had the authority to reject certified results. But I also made it clear that even if the Vice President had such authority, he should not exercise it.
Rather, I relied on substantial legal research and scholarship that made it clear that the Vice President did have the authority to briefly delay certification of the election results in order to give state legislators the ability to examine alleged irregularities. That is the request that was made of Vice President Pence on behalf of President Trump. Article II of the US Constitution gives state legislatures the power to choose state electors. Over 100 state legislators had signed letters asking for time to investigate illegalities.
The constitutional basis for President Trump’s challenge of election results is, of course, critical. My testimony in this regard buttressed previous testimony given by prominent constitutional scholar John Yoo that discussed at length the role of the Vice President when acting as President of the Senate in opening and counting election results from states. Professor Yoo testified that the overwhelming weight of legal scholarship on this question agreed with my position that the Vice President, not Congress, has authority to resolve disputes over electors.
This testimony destroys the State Bar’s false allegation that there was no legal basis for me to assert President Trump’s objections to the 2020 election.
Finally, the trial this week is providing an opportunity for many prominent legal experts to speak to my character as a man and an attorney. Former US Attorney General Ed Meese submitted written testimony in my support, for which I am very grateful. Former California Supreme Court and US Appeals Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown testified in person in strong support of my good moral character and meticulous attention to detail and thoroughness of my research.
But I was particularly touched by the testimony of a former law school student, Laurie Stewart. A devout Christian and CEO of Peacemaker Ministries (a Christian alternative dispute organization), Ms. Stewart testified that I am a “very good man who has impeccable moral character, integrity. I think he’s a brilliant, amazing, genius constitutional scholar” who is a “stickler for detail, the rule of law, and being honest and being very candid…He’s a zealous advocate for his ideas and he has the legal basis for his ideas.”
Retired Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Philip Mautino, who has known me for several decades, testified about me as follows: “[He] always was very principled, and if he took heat for some of his viewpoints, he would just withstand the heat. He always kept to his principles.” Further, the former judge said, “He’s a “good Christian, married man for many years, has two nice children.”
Clearly, the character witnesses who have submitted testimony disprove the false and highly insulting assertion by the State Bar that I lack the moral turpitude and ethical foundation to continue to practice law.
While this was originally thought to be the final week of testimony in my disbarment case, it now appears that additional court days will be scheduled in order to complete testimony and conduct closing arguments. Additional written briefs will follow. The State Bar Court Judge will have 90 days from when the case is formally submitted to make her decision, which then can be appealed to a special hearing department within the State Bar Court, and then further appealed to the California State Supreme Court as well as to the United States Supreme Court.
Going through what I have endured in this outrageous persecution of me by the State Bar is more than I would ever wish on my worst enemy. But even as I devote months of time preparing the case and weeks in court presenting it – not to mention expending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses – I also have to deal with the lawfare abuse that is at the core of my prosecution in Georgia by leftwing Democrat DA Fani Willis. Further, Special Counsel Jack Smith has named me an “unindicated co-conspirator” in Washington DC in his indictment of President Trump for alleged election interference.
As mentioned earlier, I am looking at over $1 million in additional legal expenses to defend myself. Not only are the lawfare radicals who are targeting me trying to prevent me from making a living, they want to bankrupt me and my family and throw me in prison for years to come.
I am grateful to everyone who has contributed previously to my legal defense fund. However, with the massive lawfare assault that has been unleashed against me by leftwing zealots, I ask you to please make a generous donation at this important time. It would mean a great deal to me and my family, and would go a long way to ensure my legal team has the resources needed to fight.
Thank you for your friendship and support. Please keep me and my family in your prayers.
Sincerely,
John Eastman
Constitutional Scholar
Attorney for President Donald Trump
PS – I have been so fortunate to have the support of friends, family and colleagues. But I have been particularly blessed to be supported by people I have never even met. Thank you for whatever help you can provide now at this critical time.