John Eastman

Emails show Trump lawyer John Eastman hoped the Supreme Court would help overturn the 2020 election. Eastman was also in contact with Ginni Thomas, ...

Whatever subsequent evidence shows about Ginni or Clarence Thomas’s involvement (or innocence) in the plot to overturn the 2020 election, it is now very plain that there was no federal or state government entity that Trump and his hirelings left unsullied. “Whether or not those news accounts were true, I can categorically confirm that at no time did I discuss with Mrs. Thomas or Justice Thomas any matters pending or likely to come before the Court,” Eastman wrote. Well, yesterday the Washington Post reported that Ginni Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas and a well-known right-wing political activist, was extensively in touch with Eastman via email as part of her own relentless cheerleading for an overturned election: “So the odds are not based on the legal merits but an assessment of the justices’ spines, and I understand that there is a heated fight underway,” Mr. Eastman wrote [on December 24, 2020], according to the people briefed on the contents of the email. Team Trump placed great stock in the constitutional theory known as the “independent state legislatures doctrine,” which holds that state legislatures are the ultimate authority on regulating federal elections. As the House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection focuses on Trump lawyer John Eastman and his efforts to convince Mike Pence to overturn Joe Biden’s election victory, evidence is slowly emerging that Eastman had other schemes in mind as fallback options if the main ploy failed.

The House January 6 committee is expected to scrutinize the once-obscure legal scholar, months after a federal judge said it's “more likely than not” that ...

Just days after the Capitol riot, over 100 Chapman University faculty members signed an open letter arguing Eastman “does not belong on our campus,” and Chapman President Daniele Struppa denounced Eastman but rebuffed calls to fire him. Several news outlets reported Wednesday the committee got emails between Eastman and Ginni Thomas, a right-wing activist married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas who pushed to overturn Biden’s win—but the emails’ contents aren’t known. Separately, in one December 2020 email, Eastman alluded to a “heated fight” over whether the Supreme Court should take up an election challenge, the New York Times reported Wednesday. It’s unclear if Eastman had information on the high court's usually-secretive deliberations. And one day later, Eastman called White House attorney Eric Herschmann to discuss legal efforts in Georgia, Herschmann told the January 6 committee in testimony released this week. “If Dr. Eastman and President Trump’s plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution.” Eastman’s interest in the election didn’t seem to evaporate after the January 6 riot.

The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack is in possession of email correspondence between conservative attorney John ...

To determine whether, you know, the same people who were establishing a backchannel to the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, the Three Percenters, and the domestic violent extremist movement also had a backchannel, somehow, to the Supreme Court of the United States of America." Chesebro and a lawyer for Eastman did not respond to the Times' requests for comment. He added, "For those willing to do their duty, we should help them by giving them a Wisconsin cert petition to add into the mix." He demonstrated support for the claim that election fraud is a threat to America. It was a theory Pence ultimately rejected -- to the ire of Trump Thomas did not respond to a CNN request for comment.

A lawyer advising President Donald J. Trump claimed in an email after Election Day 2020 to have insight into a “heated fight” among the Supreme Court justices ...

But just below the surface, there’s a related question: How would Eastman know about a “heated fight” among justices on the high court? The lawyer, John Eastman, made the statement in a Dec. 24, 2020, exchange with a pro-Trump lawyer and Trump campaign officials over whether to file legal papers that they hoped might prompt four justices to agree to hear an election case from Wisconsin. Again, there’s a surface-level significance to this, and then there’s the deeper meaning. Maybe the dots shouldn’t be connected this way. By any fair measure, John Eastman is among the most controversial figures in the larger Jan. 6 scandal. A lawyer advising President Donald J. Trump claimed in an email after Election Day 2020 to have insight into a “heated fight” among the Supreme Court justices over whether to hear arguments about the president’s efforts to overturn his defeat at the polls, two people briefed on the email said.

People arrive before the third hearing of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol, on June 16, 2022, in Washington, D.C..

Former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told the committee that on the morning of Jan. 6, Giuliani told him he was “probably right” that the plan was illegal. It goes without saying that Trump was not happy Pence didn’t go along with the scheme. “There is just no way that the framers of the Constitution, who divided and authority, who separated it out, who had broken away from George III and declared him to be a tyrant, there is no way they would have put in the hands of one person the authority to determine who was going to be president of the United States.” Jacob went into further detail about his communications with Eastman ahead of Jan. 6, making clear that Eastman was well aware that the plan wasn’t legally sound. “The history was absolutely decisive,” Jacob continued. Jacob is also testifying before the committee.

John Eastman knew his plan to have Mike Pence block certification of the election would lose 9-0 before the Supreme Court, the ex-VP's attorney Greg Jacob ...

“You would have had a constitutional jump-ball situation with that standoff.” “I asked John: can’t we both agree this is a terrible idea?” Jacob said. Eastman also apparently told Jacob that the courts wouldn’t get involved, and that they would instead invoke the “political question” doctrine. “He had recommended against it on the 4th,” Jacob confirmed. If the courts did not step in to resolve this, there was nobody else to resolve it.” That position would have been opposed by the House and Senate. “I expressed my vociferous disagreement with that point,” Jacob said. Jacob said that he walked Eastman through the multiple reasons why the Constitution wouldn’t support Eastman’s approach. It would be a disastrous situation. Eastman and Rudy Giuliani both pushed the theory that Pence could reject the certification of Biden’s election. Jacob resisted this plan and blamed Eastman’s theory for the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. “I said that issue might well have to be decided in the streets,” Jacob said.

Was John Eastman's claim about a 'heated fight' at the Supreme Court a function of online rumors?

As the University of Texas’s Steve Vladeck noted, there was no legal issue before the court when Eastman wrote to Chesebro on Dec. 24 that would imply there was a heated fight underway; it would have been settled more than a week prior. When Chesebro put “wild” in quotes, he was almost certainly referring to Trump’s tweet encouraging people to come to Washington on that day, pledging that it would be “wild.” In fact, that was the point of Eastman’s email: Send them a case to take up! The Texas elector raised it as the state cast its electoral votes on Dec. 14. In other words, we have an obvious conduit for claims about a heated argument making their way to Eastman even if Virginia Thomas didn’t raise them: online misinformation. The Epoch Times article linked by Trump, in fact, includes a statement from the Supreme Court pointing out that there were no in-person meetings, given the coronavirus pandemic. The first iteration published on Dec. 12. Some were political hacks who refused to be the sole arbiter of such a strong political issue. Trump tried to argue, for example, that the Supreme Court rejected his last-ditch effort to block the election results, Texas v. Rumors circulated that the Justices devolved to shouting and argued intensely over how to handle the Texas v. Pennsylvania was rejected by the high court on Dec. 11, 2020. “Judges, including Justices of the United States Supreme Court, were scared.

Dr. John Eastman, the conservative legal scholar and ex-lawyer for former President Trump who championed the theory along with Trump that the vice president ...

Former federal judge J. Michael Luttig testified Thursday that if former President Trump succeeded in convincing former Vice President Pence to declare Trump the president in 2020, it would have been "the first constitutional crisis since the founding of the republic." Why it matters: The witnesses' testimonies underscored the "pressure campaign" against Pence by Trump to reject election results — and how Pence "never budged from the position" that he did not have the power to unilaterally overturn the election. Two of former Vice President Mike Pence's legal aides testified Thursday that the former vice president repeatedly resisted former President Trump's pressure to reject electoral votes during the third public Jan. 6 committee hearing. The bottom line: These actions opened Eastman up to criminal liability, according to Judge David Carter, who wrote in March that Trump and Eastman's efforts were a "coup in search of a legal theory." Dr. John Eastman, the conservative legal scholar and ex-lawyer for former President Trump who championed the theory along with Trump that the vice president could unilaterally reject electors, sought a presidential pardon in the aftermath of Jan. 6. Why it matters: The revelation came out in a hearing of the Jan. 6 select committee, where the panel sought to prove that Trump and those around him were fully aware of the illegality of their plans.

White House Counsel Pat Cipollone thought it was wrong according to testimony. Eric Herschmann said he told Eastman that it didn't make any sense beforehand and ...

Just an absolute clown show, which of course is exactly the environment required for someone like Eastman to burrow his way in and get the ear of the president. However, it’s the folks postured as — to borrow from Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien’s testimony — “team normal” whose testimony fascinates me as someone who used to labor over timelines built off documentary and testimonial evidence. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone thought it was wrong according to testimony. Sponsored And yet based on what we’re seeing, no one seemed all that worried about putting John Eastman on stage to explain his theory to a crowd of proto-fascist goons. Sponsored

Jan 6. was “a coup in search of a legal theory,” Judge Carter wrote about the plot to pressure Pence into deciding the election. The committee laid out the ...

The Vice President and I are in total agreement that the Vice President has the power to act. On the morning of Jan. 6, he called me out of the blue and I was like getting dressed and we had an intellectual discussion about … the VP’s role. According to Short, Eastman presented two options for what Pence could do: Reject Biden electors he personally disagreed with outright and declare himself and Trump the victor, or he could call a recess of the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6 and send the “disputed” electors back to state legislatures to be recertified in favor of Trump. White House lawyer Eric Herschmann testified that he told Eastman directly that his plan was “completely crazy,” that he was “out of your effin’ mind,” and that “you’re going to cause riots in the streets.” This warning didn’t seem to trouble Eastman. According to Herschmann’s videotaped deposition, in advance of Jan. 6, Eastman said that he’d be OK with that. At that Jan. 5 meeting, though, Eastman acknowledged that there was no legal or historical standing for the vice president to unilaterally decide the election. “His first words after introduction and as we sat down were, ‘I’m here to request that you reject the electors in the disputed states,’” according to Jacob. The former Pence attorney was so shocked by this reversal that he wrote down in contemporaneous notes that were presented before the committee “Requesting VP reject.” On Jan. 4, Jacob attended an Oval Office meeting with Pence, Trump, Short, and Eastman during which Eastman pushed the vice president to unilaterally overturn the election. Jacob also testified that he too warned Eastman of the likely violence and chaos his path would bring upon the nation. Trump advisor Jason Miller testified that White House Counsel “Pat Cipollone thought the idea was nutty and had at one point confronted Eastman basically with the same sentiment.” Pence’s Chief of Staff, Marc Short, meanwhile testified that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told him prior to Jan. 6 that he also believed the vice president had no authority to do what Trump was asking. “There is no justifiable basis to conclude that the vice president has that kind of authority.” was “a coup in search of a legal theory,” Judge Carter wrote about the plot to pressure Pence into deciding the election. Pence narrowly escaped potential harm when rioters came within 40 feet of confronting him as he moved to a secure location, the committee revealed on Thursday. On top of these revelations, we also learned that Eastman sought to shield himself from potential criminal liability following the insurrection and his failed attempts at stopping the peaceful transition of power.

John Eastman, the lawyer who played a key role in efforts to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 election, confirmed Thursday that the ...

The email showed Thomas inviting him to speak on Dec. 8 to Frontliners, which she described as “a group of grassroots state leaders.” Neither Eastman nor Ginni Thomas responded to a request for comment. The other documents Eastman was ordered to turn over contained agendas for two more meetings of the group, the judge wrote. Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), the chair of the House committee, said Thursday that the committee had sent a letter asking Thomas for an interview. They were sent by the group’s “high-profile leader,” he wrote. U.S. District Judge David O. Carter last week ordered Eastman to release more than 100 emails and other records, overruling Eastman’s claims that those communications were privileged and should be protected.

Trump lawyer John Eastman is shown on a screen during a House January 6 committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on June 16, 2022.

Jacob later said that Eastman tried to argue that the courts would not get involved in the dispute. Jacob said he responded that such a scenario would have created "an unprecedented constitutional jump-ball situation with that standoff. Jacob went on to describe how after Congress had reconvened following the insurrection, Eastman sent him an email later that evening. , the law that governed the congressional certification of electoral votes. And he initially started, 'Well, I think maybe you would only lose 7-2', and after some further discussion, acknowledged, 'Well yeah, you're right, we would lose 9, nothing .'" Because you think the election was stolen?'"

I've decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works,” John Eastman wrote, shortly after the Capitol riot, according to the ...

Much of the hearing on Thursday was designed to show that Eastman — and pretty much everyone else around him — doubted the legality of his plan to stop the certification, which Ed Kilgore notes appears to be part of an effort to convince the Justice Department to criminally prosecute Eastman and Trump. Representative Pete Aguilar displayed a memo, written by Eastman in October 2020, showing that the attorney doubted that Pence could choose which electors counted and which ones did not. “We think it’s time that we, at some point, invite her to come talk to the committee,” Bennie Thompson, the committee chair, said Thursday. (Eastman denies trying to influence the Thomas family.) Eastman saying he had inside information on closed deliberations inside the Court resulted in Ginni Thomas (the conspiracy-minded wife of Justice Clarence Thomas), with whom Eastman has corresponded, possibly expecting a deposition.

The former law professor's name came up a number or times during the Jan. 6 investigation committee's hearing on Trump's pressure to get his vice president ...

You may click on “Your Choices” below to learn about and use cookie management tools to limit use of cookies when you visit NPR’s sites. If you click “Agree and Continue” below, you acknowledge that your cookie choices in those tools will be respected and that you otherwise agree to the use of cookies on NPR’s sites. NPR’s sites use cookies, similar tracking and storage technologies, and information about the device you use to access our sites (together, “cookies”) to enhance your viewing, listening and user experience, personalize content, personalize messages from NPR’s sponsors, provide social media features, and analyze NPR’s traffic.

John Eastman pushed a coup plot he knew to be illegal, so he sought a pardon from Donald Trump. Why didn't he get one?

The revelation that attorney John Eastman asked Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani to include him on the presidential pardon list reflects what experts have described as an unprecedented level of wheeling and dealing over clemency during the Trump administration. Let’s also not brush past the specific choice of words: The Republican lawyer didn’t ask for a pardon, so much as he “decided” that his name should simply be added to an existing list. Told that the execution of his coup scheme would likely lead to civil unrest and violence in American streets, Eastman was indifferent. Right off the bat, let’s note the obvious fact that Eastman feared prosecution, which was hardly an unreasonable concern given his role in a coup attempt. As a matter of law and politics, the lawyer may have been a fringe operator, better suited for a role on a far-right, C-list podcast than a seat in the Oval Office, but in the aftermath of Election Day 2020, Trump didn’t much care. Eastman was not, however, merely a behind-the-scenes author of a ridiculous memo.

During Thursday's third public hearing of the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol, Trump White House lawyer Eric ...

JOHN EASTMAN: Fifth. JOHN EASTMAN: Fifth. JOHN EASTMAN: Fifth. JOHN EASTMAN: Fifth. JOHN EASTMAN: Fifth. Dr. Eastman’s email stated, quote, “I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works.” Dr. Eastman did not receive his presidential pardon. You’re going to need it.” And then I hung up on him. And he started to ask me about something dealing with Georgia and preserving something potentially for appeal. AMY GOODMAN: Also during Thursday’s hearing, Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann described in recorded testimony his call with John Eastman, the lawyer advising former President Trump on the plan to overturn the 2020 election. And I said to him, 'Are you out of your F—ing mind?' Right? I said, 'I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth from now on: orderly transition. … I don't want to hear any other F—ing words coming out of your mouth no matter what, other than orderly transition. REP. PETE AGUILAR: In fact, just a few days later, Dr. Eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani and requested that he be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon.

We finally have firm evidence of a post-Jan. 6 effort involving pardons for those who sought to overturn the election. Here's what it means.

He might have felt that law was unconstitutional or that it had already been violated, but he was literally saying the law should be ignored. In a clip played repeatedly by the Jan. 6 committee this week, White House lawyer Eric Herschmann testified about a conversation he had with Eastman on Jan. 7. But he said Eastman believed the court might punt on the merits and stay out of the dispute altogether. EASTMAN: "I've decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works. Eastman could certainly argue that he was merely seeking to insulate himself from being targeted by the incoming administration. At Thursday’s hearing, Greg Jacob, the former general counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence, added to the evidence that Eastman knew what he was doing was illegal. But we do now know that there was a pardon effort at the highest levels of this plot. Last month, the Jan. 6 committee cited such an effort in a letter seeking testimony from one House Republican, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.); CNN reported that a “Stop the Steal” leader said he planned the rally with Biggs and other members of Congress. But that letter did not specifically say Biggs himself sought a pardon. That suggests that the plotters weighed the possible need for a pardon in some considerable measure — that those who led the effort to overturn the election believed they might have enough legal liability that they floated the extraordinary step of obtaining rare, preemptive presidential pardons. CNN reported less than two weeks after Jan. 6 that Trump had considered pardons both for himself and his family, as well as for Republican members of Congress. But he was reportedly talked out of it by White House lawyers, who warned that he would likely need to cite specific crimes people were being pardoned for. And in the case of Eastman, there is significant evidence that he knew his plot was indeed illegal. And while by itself it doesn’t constitute an admission of guilt, it fills out a fast-crystallizing picture that those involved in the plot knew what they were doing was, at the very least, potentially illegal.

The House panel hearing on Thursday focused on the role of conservative lawyer John Eastman, who pushed a theory that former Vice President Mike Pence could ...

WALSH: Right. It was federal Judge David Carter in that case, where there was a ruling that Eastman had to turn over materials to the January 6 committee. He actually went to the same law school as Eastman. And he told Eastman in no uncertain terms that the theory that he was pushing to give this incredible power to one person, the vice president, who was on the presidential ticket, was not in line with the Constitution. Eastman also talked to White House lawyer Eric Herschmann, who was incredibly blunt about what could happen if Pence did what he was asking. The committee also revealed an email that Eastman sent to Rudy Giuliani asking for a presidential pardon. Eastman was an outside legal adviser to Trump. He was a law professor who had circulated a memo that got a lot of attention from Trump supporters because it argued that Vice President Mike Pence had the power to reject the certified electoral votes from some states. ERIC HERSCHMANN: I said, you're going to cause riots in the streets. At Trump's rally that morning, Eastman called out the vice president.