Alan Dershowitz on Impeachment

olliesmom

Hopefully he can save us from all the willy-nilly impeachments the Dems want to hand out like candy!


https://youtu.be/9cGk4BRHckA

SaveComment98Like4
Comments (98)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Of all the speakers from either side, he was the most compelling.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
THOR, Son of ODIN(2)

He made a great argument against impeaching Bill Clinton.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
olliesmom

He was the best!

I found him very easy to listen to, and understand what should be or shouldn't be grounds for impeachment. Hoping Republicans, for the future, and especially Dems, get a grasp of what impeachment is really intended.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

He did. The crats look totally insane. Just like a criminal under interrogation.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chipotle


6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

He made a great argument against impeaching Bill Clinton.

The republican controlled senate agreed.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
THOR, Son of ODIN(2)

Republicans have always been big on hypocrisy.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
olliesmom

Chipotle, if you would have listened to Dershowitz, he explained the Clinton impeachment. Might try to listen to him.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
graywings123(7)

I thought he was a terrible speaker. He never paused long enough to let his words sink in, even at the end of his sentences. I found it really hard to follow his thinking when he got into some of the historical stuff, and I was listening intently.

He posited that to be impeached, the President would have to commit a felony. But a talking head later made the argument: what if a President were inaugurated and then said, "I'm taking off for a vacation in Europe for a year" and then departs. An absent President could not be impeached for dereliction of duty under Dershowitz' theory.

And I believe he even said that he was an outlier with that theory.


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Bondi really nailed the crats. Just look at the propaganda against her. So predictable.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Nana H

I thought the argument that the President would have to commit a felony when Barr argues a President can't be investigated or charged with a crime to be a tad ironic.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

But a talking head later made the argument: what if a President were
inaugurated and then said, "I'm taking off for a vacation in Europe for a
year"

Is that it? Someone's imagination? What if???

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
olliesmom

He’s an outlier because he is truly bipartisan. He just didn’t want to throw his colleagues under the bus.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
olliesmom

Definitely shouldn’t be giving out pens to celebrate! What a dumb move!


Maybe that should have been in the Constitution under Impeachment for the House. Duh!

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

I found it really hard to follow his thinking when he got into some of the historical stuff, and I was listening intently.

Fortunately, you can avail yourself of the opportunity to watch/listen, pause, let it "sink in", and so on. Just use the link that was thoughtfully provided in the OP.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Mimou-GW

Laurence Tribe

@tribelaw

·56m

.

@AlanDersh said “even if a President commands the power of state to corrupt a future election, by seeking the intervention of a foreign power ... that's not something that impeachment would be appropriate for.” WRONG! That’s why we have impeachment!

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

Dershowitz has lost any credibility aligning himself with Trump and Giuliani. Starr was/is a total joke. Bondi—-you gotta be kidding. Sekulow’s on a par with Michael Cohen. Philbin has been the only one who seems intelligent and knows what he’s doing but then you have to question why he would sign on to this train wreck team.

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
paprikash

// too too funny

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

No propaganda against Bondi—-she accepted a check from the fraudulent Trump Foundation to drop the lawsuit against Trump U. Trump doesn’t even use his own money for bribes!

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

Dershowitz's fame is helping the guilty go free, no other reason for trump to hire him. No surprise trumpsters like the job he's doing. Too bad he'll lose this one.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Wow, you can tell the defense was really good just by the shots they are taking.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

It's easy to tell that most here have no background in the legal field at all, simply by reading. I imagine Dershowitz's presentation had plenty of minds spinning.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

I don’t see lawyers or law professors across the country agreeing with Dershowitz like the over 500 who signed a letter in December stating Trump had committed impeachable offenses.

.

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

I imagine Dershowitz's presentation had plenty of eyes rolling, that's more like it........in fact there's no need to imagine it, even his younger self would agree.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Thing is, Dershowitz seems to not know what "high crimes" means.

PS: his faulty definition is the foundation of his argument.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Do educate us.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Elvis, it feels like 99% of my efforts to do so (using varied resources & sources) have failed so I will leave it others to dig up the info.

The info on it is readily available using one's fav search engine. Thing is, there's no way to summarize it into a sentence or two.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

I don’t see lawyers or law professors across the country agreeing with Dershowitz like the over 500 who signed a letter in December stating Trump had committed impeachable offenses.

I just love these "but look at this list of signatures" articles. How many lawyers and law professors did not sign the letter? They're meaningless, but they sound good and always generate an article or two.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

How many lawyers and law professors did not sign the letter?

More fair to ask - Where's the list of 500 lawyers signing a letter of agreement stating that Trump had not committed impeachable offenses?...400? 200? 20?

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

Or 500 signatures backing up Dershowitz?

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Yikes, what planet does Schifty live on? He's speaking right now: "I think the American people understand juries. They have jury duty every year."

????!!! I've never been called for jury duty. DH has been called twice in his life.

Schifty is so accustomed to making stuff up, he doesn't even blink. Oh wait, he can't blink...

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Well, Dershowitz's defence that a president asking for a quid pro quo to help his election is not impeachable because his re election is in the 'public interest' was a weird and wacky twist.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

Looks like he’ll only be able to defend corrupt Republicans in the future.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
soupgirl53

Fyi, Dershowitz stated his theory on impeachment is not embraced by the bulk of the legal community. He is correct on that score.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Well, Dershowitz's defence that a president asking for a quid pro quo to help his election is not impeachable because his re election is in the 'public interest' was a weird and wacky twist.

ubro, I have to agree with you, it was weird that Dershowitz tried to introduce that rather strange take at this point in the procedure. At first I thought (?) he was trying to address the complicated question of mixed motivations - and I think that's a valid topic, and one we've touched here in our HT conversations. At least, miss lindsey and I have.

But if that's where he was going, either he let himself wander into a direction that was wasn't where he intended to go (and he ran out of time to clarify?) OR he was really introducing a legal opinion I didn't understand at all.

Fine for scholars to develop and introduce a novel opinion in an article...but who the heck does that in the middle of an impeachment proceeding?

I find him really helpful on Constitutional issues, and on impeachment in general...and on Trump's impeachment. I like listening to him, and reading his articles, and I respect his gracious communication style. But I'm flummoxed on this one.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Well, Dershowitz's defence that a president asking for a quid pro quo to help his election is not impeachable because his re election is in the 'public interest' was a weird and wacky twist.

It really doesn't matter because it never happened.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Another example of people opting for form over substance.

Dershowitz said the president had to commit a crime to be removed. Not only is that out of the mainstream view of constitutional scholars, it also doesn't fit with the facts:

a) when the Constitution was written, there was no US criminal code which came decades later, so clearly the framers expected impeachment a possibility without violation of a specific codified crime...why they left the nebulous definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

b) the criminal code was written for the average citizen and was not designed to include someone as unique as the president with the very special powers granted by the government to that person. As such, there are things a president can do which an average citizen can't including abusing the powers of that office for personal gain (such as with emoluments which is specified in the Constitution) or violating the oath of office.

c) trump *did* commit a crime including violating federal campaign finance laws and the impoundment act and the crime of extortion which is the flip side of bribery, which is explicitly included in the Constitution.

Not to mention that dershowitz disagrees with dershowitz who argued the opposite when it was dem in the impeachment sights.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

And this most outrageous defense of all, which truly sets the president up to be king...

“If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” asserted Dershowitz.

The law professor went on to say that if a president were to tell a foreign leader he was going to withhold funds unless his foreign counterpart built a hotel with his name on it and gave him a ­million-dollar kickback, “That’s an easy case. That’s purely corrupt and in the purely private interest.”

“But a complex middle case is: ‘I want to be elected. I think I’m a great president. I think I’m the greatest president there ever was. And if I’m not elected, the national interest will suffer greatly,’ ” Dershowitz said. “That cannot be an impeachable offense.” Source WaPo

So in other words, I'm king and I think it's in the best interest that I remain king, so anything I do to maintain my kingship can't be impeachable. So if that means voter fraud, rigging the election, illegal campaign contributions, violating election laws, using the power of my office to strong arm weaker nations into making up dirt on any political opponent, or use the justice department to investigate a politcial rival or anyone who dares defy or be disloyal to me? No problem. I'm a sitting president...you can't investigate me, you can't indict me, you can't impeach me.

And where are we on presidential term limits...you know that thing that the trumplicants always say the dems hair is on fire over? Well there it is boys and girls. It's in the nation's interest that I be president forever, so there you go. What was that Pres. Xi came up with? Ah yes, president for life. As trump put it: “He’s now president for life, president for life. And he’s great...And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot someday...”

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

GOP: Anything Donnie does is in the public interest... could have come from Putin himself.

What has been destroyed in this country in this short window of time won't be repaired in our lifetimes, we leave it on the heads of generations to come.


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
graywings123(7)

Dershowitz has jumped the shark.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Izzy Mn(4)

Thank you Annie for putting it out so clearly.

Dershowitz sounds good, very enthusiastic, as he makes his statements, until you actually listen to his words. It's like the old saying he could sell ice to Eskimos. Basically is saying Trump can't be impeached and indicted because he has free reign on anything he does. That's not a president, it's something else.


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

So in other words, I'm king and I think it's in the best interest that I remain king, so anything I do to maintain my kingship can't be impeachable.

That is the mentality of a Dictator.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Dershowitz loved Pompeo putting that pesky journalist down.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Sue 430

How can anyone believe any of his arguments after having heard him say that a president can do anything he wants to get re-elected and it can never be impeachable? This is so dangerous I can’t believe there hasn’t been more of an outcry.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

The ridiculous is the news of the day. It’s not even blinked at anymore. People just swallow the koolaid.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

It wasn't that long ago that the trumplicants in these threads were warning the dems that impeaching trump would so loosen the impeachment threshold that we'd rue the day we ever went there when it was a democratic president in office.

I will suggest the same to them...the gop is now so imperializing the presidency that no future president will ever be constrained by any law, and they will rue the day they opened this pandora's box. Don't believe me? Just apply all these arguments to a president hillary and see how you react to that one.

Especially since, an overzealous check of congress on the presidency, where the power is spread across many hands and more than one party is far less damaging to our constitutional republic than is concentrating all the governmental powers in the hands of one person...something that was anathema to the founding fathers and the principles upon which our nation was based. Yet that is precisely what this authoritarian president is arguing for and this gop is letting him get away with.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Tribe said it’s the old “l'état, c'est moi” defense.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

I will suggest the same to them...the gop is now so imperializing the presidency that no future president will ever be constrained by any law, and they will rue the day they opened this pandora's box.

I don't think the GOP is expecting to rue the day, I think they are expecting to stay in power indefinitely.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

If you ever wondered how freedoms were lost, this is it.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

Precisely ubro.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kitchenwitch111

Dershowitz also says that it’s not a sex crime if you keep your underwear on.

Now we might as well just put a crown on Trump’s orange head and call it done. We had a nice run, America.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Good point, ubro.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

Just as our founders intended.


4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Annie, I don't have the background to argue constitutional law, and your points a) and b) seem plausible. But I disagree with c), and I don't agree that Trump has committed a crime. If he has, why didn't the House Democrats charge him with those crimes?

The house has not charged Trump with violating federal campaign finance laws, violating the impoundment act, or extortion, or bribery, in their articles of impeachment. Why not?

Dershowitz is allowed to change his opinions on issues like any intelligent person who continues to study a topic. Obama changed his opinion on gay marriage, and there are countless other examples that are happily accepted by the left, and heralded as personal growth. The objection to Dershowitz changing his mind about whether or not a crime is needed is convenient, and seems very hypocritical to me.

Annie: I will suggest the same to them...the gop is now so imperializing the presidency that no future president will ever be constrained by any law, and they will rue the day they opened this pandora's box. Don't believe me? Just apply all these arguments to a president hillary and see how you react to that one.

I completely disagree with this, and I believe the opposite. The Dems' efforts to deprive Trump of his legal right to seek decisions in court, and to pretend that executive privilege doesn't exist or is nonsense, are a a blatant attempt to change the balance of power between the branches.

Pelosi has made her intentions clear to remove power from the office of the presidency, and that's the danger, not the opposite. She has even attempted to exert power over the Senate in a reckless and inappropriate manner.

The reason I'm not pleased with Dershowitz introducing a hard-to-follow (??) new theory in the middle of the impeachment hearing is well demonstrated by the comments here. Dershowitz is not saying that Trump is King, or dictator, but it was clear to me that's the football the Dems will grab and run with, as a result of his (I still say weird) comment. Now the left will jump the shark themselves, and start reaching conclusions not supported by his words.

That's politics for ya, and that's why I think he should have waited to introduce that theory outside of the Senate trial, if it's true this is something he's come to believe.

I'm interested to see if there's any attempt made to clarify it, by Dershowitz himself, or by counsel.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

Poor Dershowitz, he has either lost his mind or he hates what he is doing so much that he is deliberately sabotaging team trump's efforts. Let's see 500 legal scholars back him up on this latest pile of baloney.....or even 5?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

Prepare for dictatorship, brought to you by Trumpers and Republicans. Republicans in Congress know he committed an impeachable offense (many impeachable offenses) but want to stay in power so much or are so afraid of Trump they are willing to gaslight their constituents at every turn to do it, and protect Trump at any cost.


This is far worse than Nixon because it involves a foreign leader, but the crux is the same——Illegally trying to get dirt to get reelected. If Obama or Hillary did it the GOP would have impeached and removed in 10 minutes.


Dershowitz arguing that it’s OK for a president to do anything he wants if HE thinks it's in the best interest HE get reelected (and what president ISN’T going to think that?!) is absolutely insane. The framers, and even Nixon, are turning over in their graves.


And now, if the vote goes through for no witnesses, Republicans may as well take the Constitution to the Jefferson Memorial and light it on fire. America is lost.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ubro(2a)

Dershowitz is not saying that Trump is King, or dictator,

He is saying exactly that.


Let me follow the bouncing ball

Dershowitz is saying that it is ok for a POTUS to ask for foreign interference in an election aka cheating to win, and then it is up to the Dems to wait until that rigged election to try and vote him out.

Quite the convoluted stand.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kitchenwitch111

It is surprising to me that the RWers, who have always been about limited government power, especially when it comes to gun rights and their irrational “coming to get us” fear of government power, are supporting and celebrating the notion that the president has unlimited power.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

Well I guess if Obama indeed spied on Trump it was ok if he felt it was in the best interest of the country. Nice to be able to put that to rest.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Okey dokey, you guys have run running with that football, and say hello to the shark as you jump over him! Lol! Carry on...

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Dershowitz is saying that it is ok for a POTUS to ask for foreign interference in an election aka cheating to win,

Hillary and her following agree.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

Well I guess if Obama indeed spied on Trump it was ok if he felt it was in the best interest of the country. Nice to be able to put that to rest.

GOP needs to be careful about opening that Pandora's box. The next president gets to use whatever is set as precedent. And the next one, and the next one ....

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
cattyles

Joaniepoanie has it exactly right. Congrats, trumpers. Be careful what you wish for.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
foodonastump

Mudhouse - you can call it jumping the shark, but if that’s the justification that will let people sleep at night then that shark will be jumped far longer than you or I roam this Earth. You know Republicans would be out of their minds if this was used to defend a Democrat, as well they should be.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

The repubs are out of their minds to reject witnesses that could answer all of their questions, as they well should be.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

Dersh now saying he didn't say what he said, didn't mean what he meant.


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

A Straightjacket awaits Dersh once this is all over, he has lost it.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Hey look! Part of his speech! Without context! Who would've imagined?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Complete with the ever-present mind reading trick, lurker. They even know that Dershowitz didn't mean what he meant! (Whatever that means...) Lol.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

mudhouse: The house has not charged Trump with violating federal campaign finance laws, violating the impoundment act, or extortion, or bribery, in their articles of impeachment. Why not?

I don't know. I think they've made a big mistake in not doing so. The house is clearly not prosecutors out to get perps who violate the law...they are politicians who are making political calculation beyond just the legal ones. Apparently their political calculus was sooner rather than later.

The evidence that trump violated more than one law is extant in the public already....obstruction of justice as laid out by Mueller...an unindicted co-conspirator violating campaign finance laws as laid out in the case against cohen...emoluments clause violations both domestic and foreign...violating the impoundment act as laid out most recently by the GAO...and extorting Pres. Z of Ukraine for aid as was laid out in the impeachment hearings and looks to be supported by info that has come to light from parnas and bolton since the impeachment referral.

I can guess it's a matter of timing, knowing that trump would love to tie everything up in court for years...that was his MO as a private citizen and he's continued it into the presidency. Eg, where are his income tax returns and why was someone from his office interfering with the required IRS audit of his returns as president?

They've argued that speed was of the essence as trump is about to rig this election even more than he did the last one as this time, he not only has russia's support, but his access to power and resources as president that he never had available in 2016. (For example, he now has the power and the cooperative barr to launch any federal investigation into anything they want into anyone who emerges as a front runner against him.) Certainly it could be tied up in the courts for years just trying to force him to turn over the evidence and allow witnesses on the ukraine affair, let alone anything else he's been up to. (F'r instance, the saudi bailout of kushner's 666 building in exchange for US weapons technology...)


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

I wonder how supportive dershowitz will be when he comes to realize that trump is going to stiff him on his bill, just like he has his other lawyers....

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Iris GW

Trump is personally invested in being re-elected (otherwise he would not be running). Therefore, he can only be using extortion for personal gain. Therefore, while it is generally of interest to the public, the net effect is to benefit himself.

And that's what is wrong.

Again, if the DOJ needs to investigate Biden, they should do so. We should not be asking a foreign government for favors while we hold up their aid.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Dershowitz has gone off the rails. Who believes he got a massage at Epstein’s but kept his underwear on?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
queenmargo

LOL- thanks for the visual Kathy lol lol

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

No mind reading involved re Dersh——-we all listened and heard exactly what he said. Trumpers are buying his nonsense hook line and sinker instead of being ticked off as hell that he thinks you or anyone is that stupid!

Trump defense of bribing Zelensky:

He never said it

He said it but everyone is misunderstanding what he meant

He said it, but Ukraine got the aid so what’s the big deal

He said it but it wasn’t illegal or impeachable

He said it but it’s OK because it’s in the best interest of the country that he’s reelected so anything goes—-a president has NO boundaries or limits.

WTH?!

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Dershowitz would probably be under investigation himself if Epstein was still alive. They all owe one to Barr imho.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

It’s the “So What! Defense.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

queenmargo

LOL- thanks for the visual Kathy lol lol

"Biting my tongue" out of respect to the elderly posters here. Don't look at me, Kathy opened the towel, er, door.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Joaniepoanie

No mind reading involved re Dersh——-we all listened and heard exactly what he said

He's a bit cerebral for most. That said, I personally didn't find that Dershowitz suggestion particularly helpful in that, while it may have struck a chord with a few, it caused much misdirected hand-flapping. Net loss with that one. I think he forgets that he needs to talk down to the masses.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mudhouse

Me too Elvis. I think the "re-election best for the public interest" discussion was an unhelpful and unnecessary tangent for Dersh to pursue, but it doesn't affect my appraisal of his thoughts on the Constitution and impeachment in general.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ziemia(6a)

Who does this 'hand flapping' you often mention, elvis?

Is it meant to demean many of the Dems and liberals and conservatives who do not support Trump's actions?

(It does have some derogatory overtones when tossed around to describe folks so I always wonder. Though I'd guess you don't care.)

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Current Resident(z4 WI)

So am I understanding this correctly. A prez can do whatever he wants, violate laws, long standing ethics policies, constitutional separation of powers, anything .... with no accountability or oversight ..... as long as he, the prez, believes it to be in the best interest of the country

So in other words its not a crime if a Republican does it, because a Republican is committing the crime only because its supposedly in "the best interests of the country."

Riiigggghhhhtttt......

As George Costanze famously stated, "it's not a lie if you believe it." Maybe Mr. D. should put George Costanza on the legal team, since he seems to be throwing up every half baked argument he can, to see what sticks.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
vgkg (Va Z-7)

"No mind reading involved re Dersh——-we all listened and heard exactly what he said"

--------------

"He's a bit cerebral for most."

More like a cerebral hemorrhage after his days of brain pretzeling..

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Ziemia(6a)

Who does this 'hand flapping' you often mention, elvis?

That depends on the particular situation, obviously. Was that a trick question?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Current Resident(z4 WI)

So am I understanding this correctly. A prez can do whatever he wants, violate laws, long standing ethics policies, constitutional separation of powers, anything .... with no accountability or oversight ..... as long as he, the prez, believes it to be in the best interest of the country

I don't see a question mark, but that first sentence sounds like a question. Is it a question?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU-885118952

elvis, I thing the question was "Does Trump also have a pen and a phone?".

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Kathy

Was Dershowitz forced into defending Trump because of their Epstein relationship? Perhaps Trump is holding it over his head. If that’s the case I can see Dershowitz throwing out a ridiculous defense knowing the Trumpers would swallow it. They know Trump is guilty but they will let him off anyway. Cuz they can. It doesn’t have to be rational. It just has to be so convoluted it will be debated.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Current Resident(z4 WI)

So am I understanding this correctly. A prez can do whatever he wants, violate laws, long standing ethics policies, constitutional separation of powers, anything .... with no accountability or oversight ..... as long as he, the prez, believes it to be in the best interest of the country

I don't see a question mark, but that first sentence sounds like a question. Is it a question?

No answer, I'll assume it's a question. The answer is no. Some have conveniently misrepresented Dershowitz's statements.

Or: they didn't understand what Dershowitz meant. Like I said, too cerebral for some, he should have talked down more. Ah well.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
queenmargo

Speaking of talking down, did you see "The View" hags taunting Dershowitz on their show?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/the-view-alan-dershowitz-behar-goldberg

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
HU-885118952

I just saw it in passing, margo. The View has been trash for so many years now. It's a nasty woman echo chamber.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

elvis: Like I said, too cerebral for some, he should have talked down more.

Just remember this line the next time some liberal is referred to as elitist who talks down to trumplicans...

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

Yeah, well, you remember that a Trump supporter said it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
olliesmom

Margo, I watched The View yesterday-they were horrible!! I can’t imagine Sunny even being a prosecutor-she doesn’t seem that smart. Whoopi was downright rude! I don’t even know why Meghan McCain is on there. She has too many conflicts of interests.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Annie Deighnaugh

Trump will not be found guilty and thus will have the powers of a king with no checks and balances until he's out of office. The gop is seeing to that.

What does this mean for the coming election?

He can and will again use US foreign aid to strong arm other nations into doing his bidding, such as "investigations" into any of his political rivals. He can and will use the DoJ as his personal enforcers to investigate any and all political rivals that emerge between now and November.

And note that he need not find *anything* in these investigations...he only needs to publicize them:

  • years of "investigation" into obama's birth led nowhere
  • investigations into obama spying on trump tower led nowhere
  • years of investigation found *nothing* with regard to hillary's emails, but it tanked her in the election, esp after comey made that October announcement about the investigation that led nowhere that rudy giuliani mysteriously knew about ahead of time
  • his false allegations about the clinton foundation led nowhere -- unlike the investigations into his own fraudulent foundation
  • his allegations about hillary and the uranium one deal were shown by the DoJ to be completely false
  • trump showed zero interest in actually finding anything about biden...he only wanted Pres. Z to *publicly announce* an investigation and Z was even scheduled to do so on CNN before the WB came forward
3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Trump will not be found guilty and thus will have the powers of a king with no checks and balances until he's out of office.

The crats just don't understand. Trump is more powerful than a king and will never be reduced to that level.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Watching the rerun. Nod-off nadler is a moron. He appears to be on some type of stimulant.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

olliesmom

Margo, I watched The View yesterday-they were horrible!!

I've never watched it, as Behar is odious, and Whoopi is much better acting that real.

Whoever the light-brown haired one is, she is either incredibly stupid, or a pretty good actor

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
elvis

lurker111

Watching the rerun. Nod-off nadler is a moron. He appears to be on some type of stimulant.

Maybe he's back on diet pills. He's gonna ruin all those stomach restrictors they put in when he had that gastric bypass.

Save