“I am here today to surrender to an indictment that should never have been brought. It represents a crossing of the Rubicon for our country, implicating the fundamental First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. As troubling, it targets attorneys for their zealous advocacy on behalf of their clients, something attorneys are ethically bound to provide and which was attempted here by “formally challeng[ing] the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means.” – An opportunity never afforded them in the Fulton County Superior Court. Each Defendant in this indictment, no less than any other American citizen, is entitled to rely upon the advice of counsel and the benefit of past legal precedent in challenging what former Vice President Pence described as, “serious allegations of voting irregularities and numerous instances of officials setting aside state election law” in the 2020 election. The attempt to criminalize our rights to such redress with this indictment will have – and is already having – profound consequences for our system of justice. My legal team and I will vigorously contest every count of the indictment in which I am named, and also every count in which others are named, for which my knowledge of the relevant facts, law, and constitutional provisions may prove helpful. I am confident that, when the law is faithfully applied in this proceeding, all of my co-defendants and I will be fully vindicated.”
John Eastman, respected conservative legal scholar, lawyer, law professor and former Dean of Chapman University Law School, as he surrendered last week to authorities on charges in the Georgia case alleging an illegal plot to overturn the Trump’s 2020 election loss.
Eastman is also being disbarred in several jurisdictions, like Rudy Giuliani and others, for representing Donald Trump. I strongly suspect that the legal profession will come to regret this “crossing of the Rubicon,” though my legal ethics colleagues in the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers could barely restrain their cheering for Eastman’s fate. (I have significant evidence that more members agree with Eastman than will let on in the group’s listserv comments, because Trump Derangement holds sway there, and non-woke points of view are treated, shall we say, harshly, with condescension and shunning.)
Eastman was indicted along withTrump and 17 others, accused by partisan District Attorney Fani Willis of, in the objective rhetoric of the Associated Press, “scheming to subvert the will of Georgia voters in a desperate bid to keep Joe Biden out of the White House.”
What the AP meant to say, I’m sure, was that Eastman has been indicted for providing legal advice to a sitting U.S. President in his effort to ensure that the 2020 election was not illegally corrupted to the extent that it defied the U.S. Constitution and subverted the will of the American people.
Ethics Alarms 
Good morning Jack. I just wanted to send you a word of encouragement because it has to be depressing to cover all this corruption in areas of our government most of us never realized was taking place. Keep the faith, believe you are doing your part, and never give in to the naysayers. Additionally I have been reading Charles Krauthammer’s book ‘The Point of it All’ and he recommended reading ‘The Four Essays’ by Isaiah Berlin which I have ordered. When Charles Krauthammer passed I stopped watching Fox News completely. I cannot stand the constant opinions from the commentators and debates with people yelling and talking over each other. And that along with all the other BS that is going on makes me madder than a hornet. Makes me want to sting somebody! Linda
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
Thanks, I needed that.
All those tax lawyers are now on notice that they too are subject to prosecution for tax advice given but rejected by the IRS. That’s probably why they needed 80,000 more IRS agents.
I would not want to engage an attorney who cannot see the problem charging an attorney for the advice given or one afraid of speaking out against the practice out of fear of ridicule.
I just got a cold chill down my spine.
In my town, a man was barred from all city property. He was given such a restraining order for ‘threats against elected officials and city employees’. This was upheld by a judge and made permanent. He was also fined.
What threats did the man make? He exposed the corruption of local officials. The reasoning is that when he exposed their corruption, people were mad at them and made threats. So, exposing corruption is now illegal because if the voters knew what the politicians were doing, they would want to kill them. It is the whislteblower’s fault, really.
This restraining order is a direct line of reasoning from the charges Trump is facing, and for the same reason.
Do you have more information? I would love to see a source for this, as well as a response from the local officials?
It was all on video on Facebook. There was no major media coverage. There is a newsletter that mentioned that he was banned, but that was it. I did find someone who was seeking an out-of-town attorney for him.
https://www.justanswer.com/criminal-law/lv212-friend-goes-city-council-meetings-goes.html
Gotta wonder about those ‘colleagues’ of yours, those ones cheering on the Eastment indictment and witch hunts at the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers insamuch as the group manifestoly exists to provide ” .. national leadership in developing and interpreting standards and scholarly resources in legal and judicial ethics …” As for those who won’t speak out … those over whom “derangement” does NOT hold “sway” … they’re around to have heard the sound of the tree falling in the forest but not only won’t admit hearing it fall they won’t say what it sounds like …? Millennials and Gen Zers took each state’s OATH too, and the law students who’re ABA members?
Sigmund Freud, Woody Allen, Groucho Marx – each said he’d never join a club that would have him as a member.