By Rich Moniak
On Jan. 6, 2020, Rep. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, attended the Save America rally in Washington, D.C. But by virtue of being a public figure, he was not one of the ordinary citizens described by the Republican National Committee as being “engaged in legitimate political discourse.”
I’m not referring to Eastman’s connection to the Oath Keepers, the anti-government militia whose leaders have been indicted for seditious conspiracy related to the insurrection at the Capital. Rather, as an elected official who swore to uphold the Constitution, he had greater responsibility to due diligence than an ordinary citizen. He failed that test miserably on the matters in question that day.
Like many Republicans across the country, Eastman wasn’t satisfied after more than 60 lower court challenges failed to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Along with about 40 elected officials from nine other states, he signed onto an amicus brief in support of the Texas lawsuit that asked the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate the electoral college votes in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
That fact that case was dismissed meant nothing to him. He thinks the courts are part of country’s ruling class that’s constructed a political narrative meant to suppress the pursuit of truthful evidence.
Eastman himself thinks the facts supporting Joe Biden’s election victory are “utterly uncompelling.” But apparently that’s based on little more than some self-professed experts, such as a psychologist who told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson that Google search engines shifted “a minimum of six million votes” to Joe Biden.
Eastman became convinced that Donald Trump won the state of Georgia after watching five hours of testimony before its Senate Subcommittee on Elections. He wrote the “contempt” shown by election officials who testified “demonstrated an iron-clad case that a cover-up took place.”
On Jan. 5, he proposed a “remedy” in which Congress would invite “those states where both Biden and Trump have claimed victory … to immediately certify the winner of their state, or the fact that they are unable to do so.”
First, the states certified the election results a month before he wrote that. And candidates don’t get to claim victories, election officials announce the winners. More importantly, he was insinuating Vice-President Mike Pence had the authority to reject the valid election certifications submitted weeks earlier.
That unconstitutional plan to overturn the election is now being scrutinized by the U.S. House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection. Given Eastman’s Oath Keepers affiliation, it’s natural to wonder if he hoped it would succeed in halting the certification after that planned failed.
While explaining why he won’t resign his Oath Keepers membership, Eastman wrote that he “would have intervened to stop the violence on January 6th” if he could have. Bizarrely, that’s what he claims Ashli Babbitt, the military veteran killed that day, was attempting to do. It’s as if the video evidence showing her among the rioters breaking the glass on a door separating them and House Speaker’s hobby doesn’t exist. And that there’s no evidence of her falling after being shot while attempting to climb through the door.
None of this necessarily warrants the Select Committee calling him in to testify. But it does suggest he’s violated his oath to defend the Constitution.
Edward ReBrook, IV, a West Point classmate of Eastman’s and defense attorneys for Charlottesville “Unite The Right” defendants, offers further evidence of his unfitness for office. Eastman is “a white supremacist and a Holocaust denier” ReBrook wrote in an opinion published by The Midnight Sun. But he also warns that Eastman is “a highly skilled rhetorician and a master of communicating in coded language” who can create “just enough deniability to evade being labelled” as such.
Given the serious nature of such accusations and his statements related to Jan 6., I think the legislature has a responsibility to question Eastman under oath. And to call witnesses who support his removal from office as well as those who wish to defend him.
Indeed, Eastman ought to welcome the opportunity to defend himself against such charges. And to reveal to the Legislature the evidence supporting his statement that the 2020 election was “fundamentally dishonest.” Refusing to do would be a cowardly act unbecoming of a West Point graduate.
• Rich Moniak is a Juneau resident and retired civil engineer with more than 25 years of experience working in the public sector. Columns, My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire. Have something to say? Here’s how to submit a My Turn or letter.
