“the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States”

  • There was never legally an attorney/client relationship between Trump and Eastman. An engagement letter, that explicitly said it became operative once signed, was never signed.
  • Eastman’s advice was not legal, or in anticipation of litigation, but was rather political advice not protected by the privilege.
  • Because Eastman used the Chapman University account he had no legitimate expectation of confidentiality, a requirement for the privilege. University policy, of which Eastman was made specifically and individually aware, explicitly made clear that any such emails were not confidential. Further, the policy required that emails used on the account be for educational purposes, not legal ones, and certainly not for the purposes of overturning a free election. A representative for the University testified Eastman’s use of the system for legal representation would be like “having contraband on our system.”
  • Because the emails were part of criminal schemes by Eastman, Trump, and other members of his campaign, the emails are subject to the crime/fraud exception to attorney/client privilege. When lawyers engage in criminal activities with their clients their communications related to such activity are not privileged.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store

Retired lawyer & Army vet in The Villages of Florida. Lifelong: Republican (pre-Trump), Constitution buff, science nerd & dog lover. Twitter: @KeithDB80