The D.C. Bar's disciplinary panel found that former Trump Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark violated ethics by promoting conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election, including smart thermostat theft.
Just days before the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, former President Donald Trump considered selecting Clark, an environmental lawyer without criminal law experience, as interim attorney general. Trump reversed course when his Justice Department appointees warned of mass resignations.
Clark, who risks disbarment, testified before the panel for two weeks, frequently citing his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. The D.C. Bar's full board of professional responsibility will review Thursday's preliminary conclusion before the Circuit Court of Appeals rules on Clark's bar status.
The disciplinary panel had to decide: Was Clark spreading spurious conspiracy theories about major voter fraud to assist Trump win a second term? Could Clark really believe his conspiracy theories?
During closing arguments Thursday, Clark's disbarment counsel, Hamilton Fox, argued that Clark could not accept those election lies because they had been repeatedly disproven.
“He had no rational basis to believe it,” Fox said. "I can't see into someone's mind, but when they repeatedly say something when all the evidence is to the contrary, I believe they're intentionally dishonest."
"I suppose there's an exception for someone deranged, but I'm not claiming Mr. Clark is deranged," he replied. A sensible individual who claims the moon rises in the west despite abundant evidence to the contrary is purposefully dishonest.”
Clark brought a procession of election doubters to give election conspiracy theories an intellectual spit-shine and openly dispute whether Joe Biden won the election, much like Trump would do in his trials. A frequent guest on MyPillow founder and election denier Mike Lindell's network and a Pennsylvania activist whose "research has achieved a remarkable level of national salience among the far right, despite being replete with errors," according to Votebeat, were among them.
In evidence last week, an environmental law expert disagreed with Clark's view of his “client” as a government attorney. Last Friday, Clark testified that his “client” was Trump, not the American people (as most Justice Department lawyers do).
follow for more upates.