Eastman Insists He Def Doesn’t Believe Memo’s ‘Crazy’ Plots To Steal Election Were Real | Talking Points Memo

TPM Article Topics
#21

Suggesting that the Vice President has the Constitutional authority to reject the results of an election might be bat-shit insane, but is it illegal to draft such a memo? I don’t think the memo itself suggested attacking Congress if Pence didn’t follow its advice so, isn’t the issue here just one of bad legal advice?

I guess my point is that, even though this lawyer drafted a memo postulating a rather bizarre and unrealistic interpretation of election laws, I’m not sure that, in and of itself, is grounds for discipline. Can lawyers really be held accountable for stupid legal advice that’s not presented in a court of law? Again, I don’t see any evidence that this lawyer suggested a violent attack on Congress; that was Trump’s call not his.

5 Likes
#22

It’s like Eastman thinks we were never kids who got busted and ended up re-weaving most of the facts of a scenario to try to vindicate ourselves before skeptics.

Dude: you are not only lying. You suck at it.

37 Likes
#23

I didn’t think that Biden winning would make this all go away immediately or totally.

I have to confess though, that I really didn’t think we’d be slowly moving towards a … putsch (spelling?), or burning down the reichstag (again spelling), or thinking I might need to bone up on my Russian.

But #@++#$%# #) … can’t it stop?

And another thing … to BOTH Manchkin and Enema … I wish them pain. I really do. I am not threatening anyone. I just hope they experience hardship and suffering, that is brought to them by Karma - when she is in a particularly foul and vengeful mood.

And while I’m at it … the idiot who handed Houston game 4 - get in line with Manchkin & Enema. YOU deserve it too, a-hole.

And just to clarify - Karma is a drag name.

11 Likes
#24

Eastman insisted he doesn’t actually believe in the memo’s jaw-dropping argument that House GOP could replace Biden’s electoral votes, and “anybody who thinks that that’s a viable strategy is crazy.”

Well, Eastman just concluded that Trump is crazy, so there is that.

24 Likes
#25

That’s kinda why the backpedaling and tap-dancing is interesting. What else was being discussed at those meetings that didn’t make it into any memo? The memo is what it is, can be shitty legal reasoning, but there’s plenty of shitty legal memos in existence (waterboarding, a certain OLC memo about not charging a sitting president…), so that doesn’t seem to explain why he’s so desperate to wash his hands.

36 Likes
#26

Quite a lame defense you have there, counselor; any fairies or leprechauns involved?

10 Likes
#27

Bingo.

18 Likes
#28

Call him in front of the Jan. 6 committee. Have him answer these questions under oath. He has already waived any attorney-client privilege by talking to National Review about conversations he had with the “client.” Have him discuss under oath to whom he spoke and what was said.

26 Likes
#29

“I want to be very precise here…"

Because I’m lying.

21 Likes
#30

Perhaps the ever ready to sue anyone for anything recipient of this “scenario” might actually have a case for legal malpractice??? So, restitution AND lose license?!?

This whole story just does not wash. Where are the other potential scenarios?

Was the memo started with “Per our conversation you wanted to see potential scenarios, no matter how unlikely to succeed, that may be argued. Please find one such scenario below…”

Was he really thinking the world would buy this?!?

6 Likes
#31

Methinks he doth protest too much.

10 Likes
#32

Looks like he’s still repping himself. Question, when you appear before your state’s bar disciplinary organization to explain your actions, can you use counsel there? If it varies by state, I think he’s CA.

11 Likes
#33

Failing. Really, the dude needs to STFU.

25 Likes
#34

Eastman: Well, of course I get many calls, and I simply cannot recall with whom I spoke or when that was, if indeed it was, as it were, or, indeed, what we spoke about, if we spoke, as to which I am unclear. However, I do recall telling Mister President not to do these specific things or he could end up with a second term that was not kosher.

13 Likes
#35

Suppose, however, the lawyer gives the advice he now admits was legally incorrect as part of a conspiracy to overthrow the government? In other words, he’s not giving legal advice for any reason other than to justify the violation of law. I’m a lawyer myself, and you raise an interesting point.

9 Likes
#36

John Yoo did that for waterboarding, doesn’t seem to have hurt his career.

11 Likes
#37

That’s a pretty low bar, though not so low that most people can’t limbo under it.

6 Likes
#38

Eastman seems to think it is worth tying himself in knots and making a complete fool of himself in the process. His rep is in tatters and he knows it.

12 Likes
#39

I’ve learned so much that I didn’t know since Trump. Did you know Puerto Rico was an island? And it is surrounded by water, too. Wow. And you can redraw maps and reality with a sharpie. Then there are those cancer causing windmills. I mean, who the fuck knew?

11 Likes
#40

Not illegal, but definitely problematic under the California Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, Rule 1.2.1(a): “A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage or assist a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal, fraudulent, or a violation of any law, rule, or ruling of a tribunal.”

44 Likes
Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available