According to Mediate, the possibility of a third indictment for former President Donald Trump regarding his involvement in the January 6 insurrection is being discussed, and one legal strategy being considered is blaming the lawyers who advised him at the time. Trump has claimed that he “did nothing wrong” during the events of January 6 and was “advised by many lawyers” at that time. The strategy would involve arguing that the lawyers were leading Trump’s actions, rather than the other way around.
The lawyers in question, John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani, have both faced scrutiny for their actions and statements related to the events of January 6. Giuliani admitted in a court filing that statements he made about election workers allegedly committing fraud in Georgia were false. Eastman, during his testimony before the January 6 Committee, admitted that he knew using then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election was illegal but pushed for it anyway.
However, the defense of “advice of counsel” may have its limits, as Trump listens to many other people besides his lawyers. Trump’s former lawyer, Tim Parlatore, suggested that a more comprehensive view of all the advice and information Trump received would be more effective in determining his state of mind.
Blaming others, including his lawyers, might backfire for Trump if he is found to have committed a crime. It is noted that such a defense has its limits, as a client cannot use the advice of counsel as a justification for committing illegal acts.
The attorneys were acting on Trump’s behalf. But in this legal strategy, Team Trump would argue it was the lawyers leading Trump, rather than the other way around.
“It is an argument the [former] president likes, and the team is on board with it,” one Trump adviser bluntly says, then somewhat ominously adding: “John [Eastman] and Rudy [Giuliani] gave a lot of counsel … Other people can decide how sound it was.”
To my mind, ‘advice of counsel’ is a much more narrow defense, whereas a more comprehensive view of everything that went into Trump’s state of mind, and would affect the mens rea element of it, is more effective. This would include all of the advice and the information that he received and was basing his decision on — not just the advice from the attorneys who were formally representing him.”
