Another One Bites the Dust: Trump 2020 Lawyer Can No Longer Practice

It’s official: John Eastman, Trump’s former lawyer, can no longer practice law in the state of California, pending his appeal through California’s courts.

As of Tuesday, Eastman is listed as “not eligible to practice law” on the State Bar of California’s website. The move comes three days after State Bar Court of California Judge Yvette Roland recommended that Eastman’s law license be put on “involuntary inactive” status.

In January, the California state bar began disbarment proceedings against Eastman for helping to lead Donald Trump’s efforts to undermine the 2020 presidential election results and prevent the certification of votes, which included a direct appeal to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Eastman also helped try to create slates of fake pro-Trump electors in states won by Joe Biden, and helped Trump spread election fraud falsehoods, including at the January 6, 2021, rally in Washington, D.C., that turned into the Capitol insurrection. While Roland rejected the charge that Eastman’s speech helped incite the January 6 riot, she did slam his actions as “exceptionally serious ethical violations.”

Roland also said the “scale and egregiousness of Eastman’s unethical actions far surpasses” that of Donald Segretti, the lawyer who helped Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign try to sabotage the Democrats.

Eastman can still win his legal credentials back on appeal, as the California Supreme Court has the final say. But if his legal career does come to an end, his legacy isn’t great, even without his election wrongdoing: He once questioned Kamala Harris’s citizenship, arguing that she might be ineligible for the office of vice president because, he claimed, she wasn’t a U.S. citizen at birth. His argument even extended into claiming that birthright citizenship itself might not be constitutional.

Eastman may not be the last Trump ally to lose their legal license: A Washington, D.C., ethics board is currently considering whether to disbar former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and Sidney Powell could be disbarred as a result of her October guilty plea to six misdemeanor counts related to the 2020 election in Georgia.

* The headline of this article has been corrected. Eastman has not been officially disbarred yet.

The Daily Caller had to issue a full retraction of an Easter Sunday hit piece on President Joe Biden after it emerged the publication hadn’t performed even the most basic reporting.

The outlet, founded by former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and political pundit Neil Patel, had accused Biden of sparking an Easter controversy by implementing a ban on religious symbolism on eggs during the annual White House Easter Egg Roll—but left out a key detail. In reality, the 146-year-old event had implemented a ban on religious iconography decades ago.

The Daily Caller article was subsequently amended, archived, and replaced with a brief notice.

“Following the publication of this article, the Daily Caller became aware of additional context that undercut the central assertion of this article and its newsworthiness,” the publication wrote. “The ban of religious symbolism on eggs as part of the White House Easter egg art contest has been longstanding, dating back decades, and the Biden administration did not make any modifications to this rule. While the Caller did not explicitly state at any point that the rule was new, this additional context rendered the main thrust of the article misleading to readers, who could reasonably have come to the conclusion that the rule was new.”

“With that additional context included, the news value of the article was significantly diminished, leading the senior leadership at the Caller to the decision to retract,” the notice continued. “We sincerely regret the error and are taking the necessary steps to ensure similar mistakes can be avoided in the future.”

It was just another attempted attack on the president by conservatives after they berated him for recognizing Easter alongside the Transgender Day of Visibility, which has been celebrated on March 31 since 2009 but happened to align with the major Chrisitian holiday this year.

According to Fox News contributor Kayleigh McEnany, Donald Trump doesn’t deserve such a high bond in his New York civil fraud trial because his was a “victimless crime,” and not nearly as bad as Sam Bankman-Fried’s or Bernie Madoff’s.

Speaking on Fox News Tuesday, Trump’s former press secretary lamented that Madoff’s bond was at $10 million, despite his conducting “the largest Ponzi scheme ever, or at least among them.” She also complained that Bankman-Fried’s $250 million bond was the highest ever until Trump’s civil fraud case.

It’s not a surprise that the former president would enjoy favorable coverage from Fox News, as well as his former press secretary. But Trump’s civil fraud case is hardly a victimless crime: He defrauded banks and taxpayers to the tune of millions of dollars, which he has shamelessly even admitted to reporters in the past. His financial dealings have also resulted in big penalties: In 2018, the Trump Foundation was shut down due to misuse of charity funds.

It seems that as the 2024 election approaches, Fox News will bend over backward to protect Trump’s image, despite the various criminal and civil charges against him, and make every attempt to trash President Biden and the Democrats.

Trump and his co-defendants owe more than $464 million in the bank fraud case, but the former president successfully posted bond Monday night. The bond will prevent the state attorney general from seizing his assets while Trump appeals.

Stock in Donald J. Trump has—literally and figuratively—taken a nosedive.

On Monday night, it emerged that the only group willing to loan Trump a dime to cover the $175 million bond from his New York bank fraud trial is a company owned by the so-called “king of subprime car loans,” billionaire Don Hankey.

Hankey owns Knight Specialty Insurance Company, the group that underwrote Trump’s bond, and is also believed to be the largest shareholder in Axos Financial, according to MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin. Axos is no stranger to lending Trump a hand with his financial woes, either. In 2022, the financial institution refinanced more than $50 million of Trump’s loans on Trump Tower and Trump National Doral Miami, according to documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics.

Hankey told Forbes that Knight initiated the deal with the criminally charged GOP presidential nominee, and explained that Trump had used both cash and investment-grade bonds to secure the money with his insurance company. Hankey added that he had never met Trump but had been a supporter of his previous campaigns.

“This is what we do at Knight insurance,” Hankey told Forbes on Monday. “I’d never met Donald Trump. I’d never talked to him on the phone. I heard that he needed a loan or a bond, and this is what we do. So, we reached out, and he responded.”

Trump and his co-defendants still owe more than $464 million in the case, but the bond—which comes ahead of Trump’s Thursday deadline—will keep New York Attorney General Letitia James from seizing his real estate assets while he appeals the case. It’s unclear how long the case will take to appeal, but that won’t stop the interest on his disgorgement from accruing at a rate of more than $111,000 a day.

* This headline has been updated to reflect the correct Trump trial.

Michigan Representative Tim Walberg’s remarks last week urging Israel to deal with Gaza like “Hiroshima and Nagasaki” has drawn swift condemnation, with several Democrats calling the Republican’s comments extreme and shocking. But some Democratic lawmakers have been noticeably silent.

Twenty-two Democrats voted in November to censure Michigan Representative Rashida Tlaib, the only Palestinian American member of Congress. Tlaib was punished for supposedly “promoting false narratives” about Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel and allegedly calling for the destruction of Israel for using the phrase “From the river to the sea.” Walberg himself also voted to censure Tlaib, saying in a statement that he “will not support the right to call for a violent genocide.”

How do those 22 Democrats feel about Representative Walberg’s comments, which outright allude to dropping nuclear bombs on Palestinians in Gaza?

Journalist Marisa Kabas reached out to those Democrats for her newsletter, The Handbasket, to see if they would weigh in on Walberg’s comments and whether they believed he should be censured. Only three responded: Representatives Ritchie Torres from New York, Greg Landsman from Ohio, and Brad Schneider from Illinois. While they all condemned Walberg’s remarks, only Landsman said he would vote to censure Walberg.

It’s a clear double standard, especially since pro-Palestinian activists point out that “From the river to the sea” has to do with the Palestinian right to self-determination between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

Walberg’s spokesman, Mike Rorke, said that the congressman’s remarks were taken out of context, stating that “he clearly uses a metaphor to support Israel’s swift elimination of Hamas, which is the best chance to save lives long-term and the only hope at achieving a permanent peace in the region.”

So far, there has been no discussion among members of Congress to censure Walberg, nor has there been any criticism from within his own party. The only pushback from a right-leaning figure has come from former Representative Justin Amash, who is currently running for the Republican nomination for Michigan’s seat in the U.S. Senate.

“The people of Gaza are our fellow human beings—many of them children trapped in horrific circumstances beyond their individual control. For him to suggest that hundreds of thousands of innocent Palestinians should be obliterated, including my own relatives sheltering at an Orthodox Christian church, is reprehensible and indefensible,” Amash, who is Palestinian American, said on X (formerly Twitter) on Saturday.