Words of Advice:

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

"Foreign Relations Boil Down to Two Things: Talking With People or Killing Them." -- Unknown

"Mobs Do Not Rush Across Town to Do Good Deeds." -- James Lee Burke

"Colt .45s; putting bad guys underground since 1873." -- Unknown

"Stay Strapped or Get Clapped." -- probably not Mr. Rogers

"Let’s eat all of these people!” — Venom

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

Friday, June 17, 2022

Another Day, Another Dollar, and John Eastman Still Hasn't Been Arrested

Attorney John Eastman told former President Donald Trump their plan to have the vice president unilaterally throw out electors from multiple states was illegal and would be shot down by the Supreme Court, witnesses testified Thursday during a hearing of the January 6th Committee.

Greg Jacob, who served as general counsel for former Vice President Mike Pence, testified in person Thursday. He said he had multiple conversations with Eastman – a former professor at the Chapman University School of Law who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas – about two courses of action Eastman and Trump wanted Pence take on Jan. 6. In one, Pence would have thrown out certified electors from multiple states disputed by Trump and instead ratified slates of “alternate electors.” In the other, Pence would have adjourned the joint session of Congress for a 10-day recess to allow legislatures in the disputed states to “finish their work.” According to Jacob, after being pressed on the issue, Eastman acknowledged neither plan backed by historic or legal precedent and both violated multiple provisions of the Electoral Count Act.

Besides asking for a pardon for his crimes (as the article points out), Eastman was, apparently, so sure that he committed crimes that he took the Fifth over a hundred times while being deposed by the Committee.

Why hasn't he been arrested and charged with attempted sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, attempted obstruction of a government proceeding, among Lord knows what else?

The next question is whether he'll be disbarred before or after he receives a fair trial, followed by a term in prison.


pigpen51 said...

Taking the 5th amendment is not an admission of guilt. And it is not meant to be construed as such. The judge in any case where it is used is supposed to admonish the jury of just such a thing.
There are many reasons for taking the 5th, and not all of them involve the guilt of the party taking it. It might be to protect another, in this case former president Trump, who is a jackal and an ass. Or it could also be used to avoid something that could be coming in advance, that the general public knows nothing about. I am sure that there are literally a dozen other reasons for taking the 5th, but it is a citizen's right, protected by the constitution, and should not be assumed to indicate the guilt of the person using the amendment to protect him or her self. Because of the very many laws on the books now, it can be pretty difficult to know if you have inadvertently broken some law, and by discussing it, you could actually be digging yourself a deeper hole. So it is best to remain silent, especially when facing what appears to be a political witch hunt.

Comrade Misfit said...

You take the 5th Amendment so as to not incriminate yourself. Afaik, other than spousal exceptions, there is no 5th Amendment right not to testify so as to not incriminate someone else.

Yes, you're right that there's not supposed to be an imputation of guilt for invoking the Fifth. But in the popular mind, there sure as hell is. Remember all those mob guys who refused to testify before Congress in the Sixties? Everyone assumed, then, that they were guilty. Same when that Catholic archbishop took the Fifth repeatedly in a deposition.

Nothing's changed, other than it being a different criminal organization.