The D.C. Bar skirted its rules dictating how to fairly open a disciplinary investigation to target and potentially disbar Trump-era Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark, new documents obtained by The Federalist reveal.
During his brief tenure as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin sought information about the D.C. Bar’s weaponization of its punishment process against Republican lawyers. His letters to the D.C. Bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) and the bombshell replies he received not only confirm the legal licensing association’s lawfare against Clark was inspired by a sitting Democrat senator, but also expose the D.C. Bar for trying to cover up its partisan motives.
In a February 7 letter to the D.C. Bar’s Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton P. Fox III, Martin asked the association to produce proof by February 21 that “you are even-handed in your policies” and explain how the Bar handles “clearly politically motivated attacks that come from certain ‘public interest’ groups.”
“This would include something that explains how you limit the targeting of individuals who you may disagree,” Martin noted.
Martin was referring to Clark, who was charged by the legal licensing association in in July 2022 with “attempted … conduct involving dishonesty” and “attempted … conduct that would seriously interfere with the administration of justice.” Clark was also named as one of the 19 “co-conspirator” targets in Democrats’ wide-ranging election indictment in Georgia and even had his house raided by the FBI.
The investigation into Clark appeared to be inspired by a report forwarded to Hamilton’s office on October 7, 2021 by the chief counsel for oversight on the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. The 394-page document alleged Clark played a key role in a plot to “wield [the] DOJ’s power to override the already-certified popular vote.”
The Trump-era DOJ official did not commit a crime when he drafted a letter to Georgia officials noting the DOJ “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the [2020] election in multiple States, including the State of Georgia.” In fact, Clark chose not to send the letter after facing objections from his DOJ superiors and a pivot from then-President Donald Trump.
Accompanying the report, however, was a letter from Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin who urged the Bar that Clark’s actions “may constitute serious professional misconduct under the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct.”
“Based on the Report’s findings, I respectfully request that the Office of Disciplinary Counsel open an investigation to determine whether Mr. Clark, who is a member of the D.C. Bar, violated applicable D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct and should be subject to disciplinary action,” Durbin wrote.
The Bar’s ODC previously considered whether a person bringing a complaint had “had personal knowledge of the underlying facts” about a situation before choosing to investigate it. In its March 13, 2025 letter to Martin, the ODC board led by Chair Bernadette C. Sargeant claimed this rule did not mean it “was required to receive firsthand information to begin an investigation,” but admitted that first-hand knowledge does affect case docketing.
It wasn’t until January 19, 2023 that the ODC board officially added a rule amendment, which was introduced in 2022 after the investigation into Clark began, to clarify that anyone who files a complaint will be notified of “its conclusion as to whether the allegations) in the complaint satisfy [the] docketing criteria.”
“Since this amendment to the Board Rules, ODC does not decline to docket a complaint because the complainant lacks personal knowledge of the alleged misconduct,” the letter continued.
In a March 28 follow-up to Chief Judge of the D.C. Court of Appeals Anna Blackburne-Rigsby, Martin noted that Fox had “publicly said that he would not open investigations without personal knowledge of activity but then contradicted that when the complaint came from a public official without personal knowledge.”
“This is confusing and counterproductive,” Martin continued.
Martin also noted that Fox’s alleged “mob-like language” threatening to “ratchet up” consequences for Clark only fueled his suspicion that the ODC counsel “is compromised regarding his investigation of Jeff Clark.”
It doesn’t help Fox’s case that the ODC reinstated convicted FBI Russiagate forger Kevin Clinesmith while he was still on probation and slow walked a misconduct complaint against former First Son Hunter Biden.
In a supplemental filing on May 16, Clark’s legal team also argued ODC’s case against him should be dismissed “because it was opened in violation of the D.C. Bar’s longstanding policy not to proceed to docket complaints received by those lacking first-hand knowledge,” or at least stayed until Martin closes his weaponization review. They also requested “all documents related to U.S. Attorney Martin’s inquiry into ODC in connection with Mr. Clark’s case be ordered discovered and placed into the record of this case.”
“No witness with first-hand knowledge of Mr. Clark’s conduct filed a complaint against Mr. Clark,” the supplemental states. “Instead, this matter began with a document subpoena that Mr. Fox issued immediately after receiving a complaint letter filed by Senator Dick Durbin.”
They note that the ODC notified Clark of a complaint docketed against him “before that amendment had even been conceived by its drafters.”
This isn’t the first time the DC Bar and its allies have circumvented due process to damage Clark’s case.
In December 2023, Clark’s attempts to obtain the public election integrity documents key to his defense were stonewalled by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the DOJ. In February 2024, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that Clark did not have to comply with an ODC subpoena that would violate his executive, law enforcement, deliberative process, and attorney-client privileges, as well as deprive him of his Fifth Amendment rights.
Despite the ongoing plot to strip him of legal credentials, Clark secured a spot in the second Trump administration as acting Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) administrator. His primary job is to ensure federal agencies comply with President Donald Trump’s executive orders and prioritize the Republican’s America First agenda when crafting agency rules.
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.
Jesus Christ is King
Comments are closed.