Speaker 1: Being Donald Trump's lawyer is risky.
You can end up disbarred or like John Eastman, you can end up indicted.
He did everything right and somehow they indicted him.
Speaker 3: I did everything right and they indicted me.
Speaker 1: One piece of advice that lawyers often give clients is if you've been indicted
for something, don't go on TV and talk about that same.
Something.
But that is exactly what John Eastman did in this second part of his interview with
Fox News propagandist Laura Ingraham.
John Eastman shows up and talks about exactly what he was trying to do with his memo and
with delaying the certification of the election.
He seems to admit to crimes in this interview.
This interview is not a good idea.
He is a lawyer, and I don't know how he didn't realize that this was a very bad idea.
It's sort of like at trial, the prosecutors can say, folks, here is video of the defendant
admitting to the crimes.
Take a look at.
Speaker 2: This, John.
And just again, to clarify this, on January six, what did you want to happen?
Right.
And how was that historically grounded and the history of our country?
How would that have taken place?
So just so the viewers can understand what would have unfolded.
Right.
Speaker 1: If you had gotten away with it, what would have.
Speaker 2: Happened and how that would have ultimately been constitutional?
So that, you know, several things.
Some people would urge that Vice President Pence simply had power to reject electors
who certification was still pending in.
I don't believe in Texas.
Go ahead.
I don't believe that.
I don't.
One thing I agree with and I and I explicitly told Vice President Pence in the Oval Office
on January 4th, Right.
That even though it was an open issue under the circumstances we had, I thought it was
the weaker argument and it would be foolish to exercise such power even if he had it.
What I recommended, and I've said this repeatedly, is that he accede to requests from more than
100 state legislators in the swing states to give them a week to try and sort out the
impact of what everybody acknowledged was illegality in the conduct of the election
election.
Now, I specifically said that not everyone acknowledges it, but that was the argument
that was being made, obviously, and there were obviously irregularities that everybody
had seen.
But whether that was whether it rose to the level of change in the outcome of the election,
again, without a legal proceeding in the states that mattered, the argument ultimately was
a difficult one to make.
I mean, hence hence here we are.
Speaker 1: So, listen, if you look at this only superficially, you might wrongly come
away with the belief that, oh, this is exculpatory.
Eastman is saying, no, I didn't think it was the strongest argument that Mike Pence could
just reject it, period.
What I wanted him to do was to say, hey, we're going to just not do anything for a week in
order to allow these people making debunked, by the way, claims to whatever investigator
have their day.
The real reading here and the one which slick prosecutors will likely be able to prove to
a jury using this video is that Eastman's intention was come up with a plan to delay
certification, impede the certification, despite the fact that the vice president does not
have that power.
It doesn't matter whether his opinion was that just rejecting fully rather than delaying
was a less strong legal argument.
That is mumbo jumbo he's admitting here.
Yeah, I was coming up with a way to for at least one week impede the certification dictated
by the Constitution and which the vice president does not have the right to impede.
He's admitting to the crime.
Now, of course, the right wingers will say, David, this is exculpatory.
He's saying that that's not what he was trying to do.
Well, at the end of the day, he was coming up with a way to prevent the certification
on the basis of the vice president's actions recommended by Eastman, which the Constitution
does not grant the vice president.
That's the bottom line here.
We wanted Pence to do this other illegal thing, not the one everybody says we wanted him to
do.
That's not great.
And if you've been indicted for something, most lawyers would say, don't go on TV to
talk about it.
That's a very bad idea.
This interview might become an exhibit in the prosecution of John Eastman.
And if you think Eastman's worried, I can't tell.
Maybe he's not worried.
Maybe why he's saying these things.
The guy who is worried is Donald Trump.
And later in the show, we will talk about the radical 180 Trump off the rails after
realizing my trial starts in a few months.
I could end up in prison for the rest of my life.
And Trump manically recording and publishing videos more than 30 in a few hours yesterday,
losing it.
But that's later.
We'll also have part two of my interview with right winger Dennis Prager.
We're going to talk about Ted Cruz jumping on the Biden to beer bandwagon and the latest
COVID conspiracy.
What a program.
I hope you're subscribed on YouTube.
We'll be back right after this