'What they tried was insane': Conservative sets fellow right-wingers straight about Trump and Jan. 6

A conservative attorney who writes under the pseudonym A.G. Hamilton and who has written articles for the conservative National Review took his fellow right-wingers to task on Twitter Sunday for incorrectly framing special counsel Jack Smith's newest indictment of former President Donald Trump as a matter of "free speech."

In particular, Hamilton called out Trump partisans who argue that the former president is being indicted simply for making false claims about fraud in the 2020 election, when in reality he's being indicted for using those false claims as a basis to illegally overturn the certified results of the election.

"Regardless of the exact elements of the criminal charge, what Trump and crew attempted to do on Jan 6th was insane," he said. "The lying and conspiracies were the least of it."

He then pointed to attorney John Eastman's memo that falsely claimed then-Vice President Mike Pence had the power to singlehandedly reject election results, which Hamilton noted would make the American republic completely ungovernable.

READ MORE: 'Extremely bad omen' for Trump in Jan. 6 case dropped this weekend: former Watergate lawyer

To make his readers understand the faultiness of Eastman's reasoning, he asked them to imagine how they would feel if Democrats attempted to employ such a strategy in 2024.

"Under their plan... all Dems have to do is find random people to claim Biden won and that they are alternate electors in a few states and Kamala Harris would be able to disqualify the real electors in those states and declare Biden the winner," he wrote.

Hamilton also pointed to instances where Eastman himself seemed to admit that his legal theories would not hold up under scrutiny, which he said only made what the attorney was advocating even worse.

"Even though Eastman knows all of this is illegal nonsense that is essentially an attempt to destroy the Constitution and steal an election, his last argument is basically that the legality doesn't matter because they can just tell the courts they shouldn't get involved because it's a political question," he added.

Read the full thread here.