John Eastman — an attorney and Trump ally who was the architect behind one of the schemes to help in former President’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election — is asking a California judge to postpone the ongoing disbarment proceedings against him, saying he’s concerned that he’ll soon be criminally charged by special counsel Jack Smith.
Ooo snap! Uh… Delay! Denied. Uh… Sidebar! Denied…
Please don’t disbar me yet, I might be Federally indicted first!
Not sure that’s a solid argument to be making.
Oh look, if it isn’t the consequences of my own actions.
Well okay then. Suspend his license until he can either get out of the tangle or hang himself with it.
If they suspend his license he can always overthrow the government and re-instate himself. Not sure what the big deal is here?
Why does he want a delay? Does he intend to defend himself? (“A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client,” so that would fit.)
“might bring charges”? Seems like wishful thinking.
There doesn’t seem to be much doubt elsewhere that he will in fact be charged.
Would you deny an old man his sense of whimsy?
But but but I thought his lawyer was going to send Jack Smith a letter saying Eastman didn’t do any criming at all! Did that genius strategery not work?
I cannot conceive of a rational & just reason that justice that has been examined & weighed - should have the reading out & punishment -be put on hold… especially since it is an absolute certainty that if this disingenuous worm thought for a moment that he would be exonerated & not disbarred - he would be jumping up and down demanding the prompt announcement of the outcome on the chance that it would help him.
May Chapman receive 30,000 paper cuts … and then be soaked in lemon juice & rolled about in salt!
“The minute you read something that you can’t understand, you can almost be sure that it was drawn up by a lawyer.” ― Will Rogers
Not sure why he wants to delay the disbarment; he’s resigned his gig at the law school and I doubt he has any clients (or, at least no clients other than crackpots and losers). So what difference does it make whether he’s got his law license or not?
Eastman: You can’t disbar me now. I fear I am suspected of a crime. That means I’m facing difficult decisions as to who to tell what.
Aw, gee.
if the Department of Justice files charges then Eastman might decide to assert his Fifth Amendment rights — which would allow him to refuse testimony that might be used against him — during his disbarment proceedings. But, the lawyers argue, invoking the Fifth Amendment in the disbarment proceedings would muddy Eastman’s ability to defend his law license.
Shorter Eastman: I have to tell two different sets of lies in these trials, and if they happen in the wrong order the courts may notice my deception.
Eastman may need to retain his license because he’s the only one fool enough to defend him.
Meh…give it to him…but order that he may not practice in any way in the meantime and take his pecker as surety.
Nope.
If he has to take the Fifth in a criminal trial, he should be disbarred and prevented from being an officer of any court.
Is that a rule? It should be.
