'Damning' reports shows why John Eastman’s 'legal goose might be cooked': conservative

Former law professor John C. Eastman is among the attorneys who is listed as a co-defendant in Fulton County, Georgia Fani Willis' criminal indictment of former President Donald Trump. Willis alleges that Eastman played a prominent role in Trump's scheme to overturn the 2020 election results — and violated Georgia law in the process.

In addition, Eastman is facing possible disbarment in California, where he is based.

In her August 28 opinion column, the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin analyzes a "damning" 91-page report on Eastman from legal expert Matthew A. Seligman. The Never Trumper has obtained a copy from the California Bar, arguing that Seligman "strips away any 'colorable,' or legally plausible, defense that Eastman was acting in good faith in rendering advice to" Trump.

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

"This report has serious ramifications for Eastman's professional licensure and his defense in Georgia," Rubin stresses. "Moreover, his co-defendant and co-counsel in the alleged legal scheme, Kenneth Chesebro, who has employed many of the same excuses as Eastman, might be in serious jeopardy in his October 23 trial."

In a post-election memo, Eastman outlined a plan for overturning the Electoral College results. But then-Vice President Mike Pence rejected Eastman's recommendations during a joint session of Congress on January 6, 2021 and certified now-President Joe Biden's victory — much to Trump's chagrin.

"In his report," Rubin explains, "Seligman addressed whether 'the legal positions advanced by Dr. John Eastman in relation to the counting of electoral votes for the 2020 presidential election' were reasonable…. Seligman reviewed the 12th Amendment, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and 'centuries-long practice by Congress' to find that the Eastman positions were so devoid of support that 'no reasonable attorney exercising appropriate diligence in the circumstances would adopt them.' In essence, Seligman strips away the pretense that Eastman — and, by extension, Chesebro — engaged in routine legal work."

The columnist adds, "Seligman's report echoes the finding of U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter, who, in a matter concerning Eastman's claim of attorney-client privilege to protect documents from the January 6 House Select Committee, found that it 'more likely than not' that Eastman and Trump had engaged in criminal activity…. In short, if Seligman is right, Eastman's legal goose — as well as Chesebro's and Trump's — might be cooked."

READ MORE:'He's in for quite the ride': John Eastman surrenders at Atlanta jail while facing possible disbarment