Get Directions
Get Directions
Free Case Evaluations
I am here today to surrender to an indictment that should never have been brought. It represents a crossing of the Rubicon for our country, implicating the fundamental First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. As troubling, it targets attorneys for their zealous advocacy on behalf of their clients, something attorneys are ethically bound to provide
The indictment in Georgia vs. Donald Trump and 18 others sets out activity that is political, but not criminal. It goes hand-in-glove with the recent effort to criminalize lawful political speech and legal advice, in stark violation of constitutional rights to Freedom of Speech, Right to Petition the Government for Redress of Grievances, and the Right to Counsel. Lawyers everywhere
Almost fifteen years ago, John Eastman defense counsel Harvey Silverglate predicted in the book Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent that the ever expanding federal criminal code was liable to be misused for improper political purposes. This prediction finds its fulfillment in the current administration’s use of heretofore obscure federal statutes to indict its leading political opponent
One common difficulty for defendants in criminal trials is fending off relevance objections from the government during cross-examination. If a judge is not aware of all elements of the defense strategy, the judge may erroneously sustain these objections because he or she simply doesn’t understand where the questioning is going. The point of the questions will be made clear in
The January 6 Committee has been a political and public-relations bust. This is why, on its way out the door, the Committee is desperately trying to make a splash with criminal referrals it was obvious from the very start its members were going to make in an effort to try to destroy their conservative political opponents. The Committee was a
A criminal “referral” from a congressional committee is not binding on the Department of Justice and carries no more legal weight than a “referral” from any American citizen. In fact, a “referral” from the January 6th committee should carry a great deal less weight due to the absurdly partisan nature of the process that produced it. At its inception, the
The mantra of the Department of Justice has long been that the confidentiality of ongoing criminal investigations is sacrosanct. Today we learn that the Department has inexplicably requested a federal judge to unseal proceedings, right on the eve of a heavily hyped January 6 Committee meeting on Monday and final report release on Wednesday of next week, where the proceedings are
Mr. Meek is unaware of what allegations anonymous sources are making about his possession of classified documents. If such documents exist, as claimed, this would be within the scope of Mr. Meek’s long career as an investigative journalist covering government wrongdoing. Press inquiries on this issue are troubling for a different reason: they appear to be based on statements from
After careful consideration, we have filed a notice on behalf of our client, former Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, to “remove” (transfer) his 2020 presidential election-related case currently pending before the DC Board of Professional Responsibility to the US District Court for the District of Columbia. Mr. Clark is in front of the DC Bar’s Board because the head of
The purpose of what lawyers refer to as a “privilege log” is specifically to identify claims of privilege while avoiding disclosing the substance of client materials to the prying eyes of those who, like the January 6 committee, seek to undermine the attorney-client relationship. Judge Carter found Dr. Eastman’s privilege logs perfectly adequate to dismiss a majority of the January
Free Case Evaluations
Get Directions
Get Directions