John Eastman email exchange reveals acknowledgement of illegality

Emails between former Chapman law professor John Eastman and Greg Jacobs, the legal counsel for then-Vice President Mike Pence, reveals Eastman’s culpability in the U.S. Capitol insurrection. Graphic by HARRY LADA, Art Director

A March 8 court-filing from the House of Representatives select committee investigating the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol confirms former Chapman law professor John Eastman’s culpability in the insurrection and a broader scheme to commit election fraud — though he is not currently the subject of criminal investigation.

Evidence presented by the committee to support this allegation includes an email exchange between John Eastman —  who was a member of former President Donald Trump’s legal team simultaneous to his employment at Chapman — and Greg Jacob — the former legal counsel for then-Vice President Mike Pence. All of Eastman’s correspondence was sent from his Chapman email address.

The series of emails indicate that Eastman counseled Trump to advise Pence, who presided over the counting of the electoral college, to reject the votes of certain electors from swing states in favor of dueling slates of electors.

“This is huge, as it now looks like (Pennsylvania) Legislature will vote to recertify its electors if Vice President Pence implements the plan we discussed,” Eastman wrote to Jacobs Jan. 5. 

The next morning at 10:44 a.m. — the day of the insurrection — Jacob questioned the constitutionality of Eastman’s suggestions. Eastman responded at 1:33 p.m., approximately 20 minutes after rioters began combatting law enforcement at the Capitol, calling Jacobs “small minded.”

He added that presidents in the past have ignored “minor” statutory requirements, with the implication that the same could be done in this case. According to the select committee, this assertion demonstrates that Eastman was likely aware that the actions he proposed were illegal. 

Jacobs responded again at 12:14 p.m., as Trump urged his supporters to convene at the Capitol and make their voices heard. The email heatedly claims Eastman’s “bullshit” is the reason the Capitol is under attack and criticizes the audacity of upheaving an electoral process that has been followed for 130 years.

“(Statutes enacted by Congress) cannot be set aside except when in direct conflict with the Constitution that our revered Framers handed us,” Jacobs wrote to Eastman. “And very respectfully, I don’t think that a single one of those Framers would agree with your position either.”

Though Jacobs subsequently apologized for his explicit language, he remained adamant in his rejection of Eastman’s ideas. He sent a follow-up email to Eastman at 1:05 p.m. after being escorted to a secure location away from the Capitol.

“Respectfully, it was gravely, gravely irresponsible for you to entice the President with an academic theory that had no legal viability, that you well know we would lose before any judge who heard and decided the case,” Jacob wrote to Eastman. “The knowing amplification of that theory through numerous surrogates, whipping large numbers of people into a frenzy over something with no chance of ever attaining legal force through actual process of law, has led to where we are.”

At 2:11 p.m., rioters breached law enforcement and began scaling the walls of the Capitol, and Pence was escorted out of the building within ten minutes. At 2:25 p.m, Jacobs received another response from Eastman. 

“The ‘siege’ is because YOU and your boss (Pence) did not do what was necessary to allow this to be aired in a public way so the American people can see for themselves what happened,” Eastman wrote.

Eastman, whose emails from the period leading up to and immediately following the riot were subpoenaed by the committee, previously said he believes he did not use his university email in his work as Trump’s legal counsel but could not confirm this fact. 

The subpoena was served to Chapman Jan. 18, but the former Chapman faculty member had sought a temporary restraining order to block these documents from being produced to the committee. Eastman argued that he should be protected by attorney-client privilege and attorney work-product privileges.

This is a developing story. Follow The Panther on social media and at www.thepanthernewspaper.org for updates.