describe it as such. We make no apologies for seeking Fifth Amendment protection as so many law-abiding Americans have done throughout history.
In asserting this privilege on my client's behalf, I cannot reveal information protected by the attorney-client privilege. Doing so would violate my duty as a lawyer, the importance of which I need not explain to a committee with distinguished lawyers among its members and staff.
But, in fact, there is no need to reveal privileged information to establish Dr. Eastman's basis for Fifth Amendment protection. One need only look to the public record to understand why claiming the Fifth Amendment is a necessity forced upon Dr. Eastman.
I have detailed on pages 8 and 9 of my letter, which is now a part of the record, examples of statements from committee members and other voices of influence which made clear that Dr. Eastman has a legitimate fear of criminal prosecution.
I could offer many additional examples beyond those in my letter, but out of respect for this committee's time, I will limit myself to two further examples beyond what I've already put in the letter.
The first one: According to news reports, on December 1st a United States district judge, who herself has a background in Federal prosecution, stated during the criminal sentencing of a defendant charged with committing crimes on January 6th that the President, former President Trump, and others who spoke at the rally on the Ellipse that day, quote, "bear greater responsibility and should be held accountable," unquote. This from a judge in the very courthouse where over 600 people were criminally charged in connection with January 6th.
My second example, second and final example, is there is an active bar complaint against Dr. Eastman in California bearing on the exact subject matter of this deposition.
