We’ve just received word that two more conservative lawyers have fallen victim to specious attacks from the Left for their roles in pleading President Trump’s allegations regarding fraud in the 2020 election.
According to the legal news site Law 360 our friend Ken Klukowski and former Trump campaign attorney Ken Chesebro are the subjects of bar association complaints by the 65 Project, a Leftist lawfare group that has been targeting any attorney who assisted the Trump campaign in challenging the suspicious results of the 2020 presidential election.
The group urged bar officials in both Washington, D.C., and New York, where Klukowski and Chesebro are respectively admitted to practice, to launch formal inquiries into the attorneys' conduct and take disciplinary action as needed.
"Ken Klukowski and Ken Chesebro didn't just violate their oath. They wantonly disregarded it as they were active participants in the plot to overturn a democratic election in the service of Trump's Big Lie," said Michael Teter, who serves as managing director of the 65 Project.
According to the group's complaint against him, Klukowski assisted Jeffrey Clark, who served as head of DOJ's Civil Division under Trump, in trying to contest results in several states by drafting letters to state election officials claiming the department was aware of certain election irregularities.
For his part, Chesebro helped advise the Trump campaign's legal team alongside attorneys John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani in Trump's alternative electors claim, the group's complaint against Chesebro said.
According to reporting by Law 360, Klukowski came to work under Clark in December 2020 from the Office of Management and Budget and quickly became involved in efforts to fight the election results, according to the complaint filed against him. These efforts included Klukowski's drafting a letter to election officials in Georgia claiming that the DOJ had become aware of "various irregularities in the 2020 election for President of the United States," and that the agency had "identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states," the complaint says.
These complaints characterize the Trump challenges to the 2020 election as being “without evidence” but as Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections, Mollie Hemingway’s book length investigation of the 2020 election demonstrated, there is plenty of evidence of fraud and misconduct in the 2020 Georgia election.
Likewise, Dinesh D’Souza’s feature length documentary film 2000 Mules exposed widespread, coordinated voter fraud in the 2020 election, sufficient to change the overall outcome.
However, the evidence documented by Hemingway, D’Souza and others never got aired in court because the DC and state capital political establishments fought tooth and nail to prevent them from getting into court and getting a hearing.
The fact that the Leftist lawyers of 65 Project don’t agree with or don’t like the allegations of fraud and misconduct alleged by Klukowski and Chesebro doesn’t erase them from the record, nor does their mere disagreement with them nullify their validity – only a court hearing both sides in an adversarial proceeding before a neutral factfinder can do that, and to date no such proceeding has taken place.
And that’s exactly how Klukowski and Chesebro’s detractors want to keep it.
Far better, and safer for Washington’s Uniparty establishment, to render judgement against Trump, Klukowski and Chesebro on the editorial pages and TV talk shows and a rump committee of the House of Representatives than to give them their day in court where they have the right to present their evidence and their theory of the case and the authorities supporting it – however novel – unhindered.
Democrats are past masters at “lawfare” and making the process the punishment, so for offering their good faith advice to their client Klukowski and Chesebro are now being bankrupted answering an unprecedented campaign of “the process is the punishment.”
While the effects of this are deeply personal to Klukowski and Chesebro and their families, they should also terrify every American. Imagine for a moment finding yourself before the bar of justice in a politically charged case, only to discover that no attorney will represent you because you are unpopular with the power elite and your defense relies on novel and little-known arguments and authorities and no lawyer is willing to expose himself to the campaign of destruction that would surely be heaped upon him if he represented you.
That’s exactly the intent of the attacks against Klukowski and Chesebro, and that is why – whether you like or dislike Donald Trump – Americans of good conscience should flock to their defense. The alternative, if the lawfare against Klukowski and Chesebro succeeds, is a system of justice where only those who pose no threat to the established order get their day in court and only those arguments that are approved by the ruling elite get to be made in their defense.
We need more lawyers like Ken Klukowski and Ken Chesebro who represent their clients with all their vigor and talent despite the threats to their livelihood and wellbeing. If Klukowski and Chesebro are cancelled for representing Donald Trump, then modern America has truly divorced itself from our ancient ideas of the rule of law and we are left with a husk of false liberty in which only the martyr can be free. Such a result should be intolerable to conservatives and liberals alike.
Georgia election irregularities
January 6 Committee