I hope Epstein made videos
There have been suggestions that Epstein made secret videos of all the men who had sex in his houses and planes. I hope he did and they are all revealed, because they will prove I am not among them. I hereby waive any right of privacy in Epstein videos.
Swetnick affidavit should be thoroughly investigated by the fbi and her alleged witnesses named and questioned. If perjured, there should be consequences.
Warren doesn’t understand the law.
My former colleague, Senator Warren, claims she could not follow my carefully laid out presentation that everybody else seemed to understand. This says more about Warren than it does about me. (1 of 2)
It is unconstitutional to use the 25th Amendment to circumvent impeachment provisions. The 25th can be used only if POTUS is physically or psychiatrically incapacitated. Any other use is unconstitutional. I challenge anyone to argue differently.
The only non partisan expert witness has been Professor Turley. It’s been 3 against 1, but thus far the 1 has been more objective and persuasive than the 3.
The Republicans should have challenged Professor Feldman’s assertion that “abuse of office" is a constitutional basis for impeachment. These words do not appear in the Constitution and such vague criteria were rejected by the Framers.
Kavanaugh owes an enormous debt to
@MichaelAvenatti
, who may have turned the tide in his favor by diluting Ford’s compelling accusation with an implausible story.
All civil libertarians who care about non partisan justice should support a new trial for Roger Stone based on this new information about a biased juror. Let’s hear from real, non partisan, civil libertarians.
The facts they presented were radically different from the facts presented in court. Live coverage of criminal trials serves as an important check and balance against the deliberate distortions of biased media commentators.
Tribe so afraid of the Senate hearing my constitutional arguments that he actually says, I “should not be allowed” to make them. Is that the American way?
I challenge my critics – especially those who are deliberately misinterpreting my arguments – to a Lincoln/Douglas-type town hall debate in which name calling is prohibited and intellectual arguments must be responded to with other intellectual arguments. (MTC)
Do
@Morning_Joe
and
@morningmika
have the guts to invite me on their show to rebut their ridiculous misrepresentations of my views or are they afraid to have their audience know the truth?
.
@MichaelAvenatti
may now have an ethical obligation to withdraw Swetnick’s affidavit, since she contradicted material portions of it in a tv interview.
Those who watched the actual Rittenhouse trial on television should not have been surprised at the not guilty verdict. But those who got their information about the trial from biased commentators on CNN or CNBC may well have been shocked and surprised.
(3 OF 3)
If Warren knew anything about criminal law she would understand the distinction between motives – which are not elements of crime—and intent, which is. It’s the responsibility of presidential candidates to have a better understanding of the law.
Comey said it never occurred to him there could be connection between Weiner and Hillary C.
Did the head of the FBI not know W was married to HC top aide? Duh!
Lying to the FBI is only a crime if the lie was “material”. If the FBI already knew the answer to the question— if they have tapes— and ask it only to elicit a lie, should that lie be deemed material?
There must be zero tolerance for anti-Semites, whether they are David Duke or Louis Farrakhan. No one should associate with either. The suppression of that photo is disgraceful.
Being on the Supreme Court is a privilege, not a right. But being disqualified based on a false accusation of a crime would be a violation of the fundamental right to fairness.
The anti Semitic cartoon published by the
@nytimes
is a symptom of a deeper problem on the left. It’s acceptable to many on the left to employ anti Semitic tropes as long as they’re directed against Israel. Anti Zionism is becoming an acceptable cover for anti Semitism
(1/2) I’m reveling not whining. I’m proud of taking an unpopular, principled position that gets me shunned by partisan zealots. It’s not about me. I couldn’t care less about being shunned by such people. It’s about their unwillingness to engage in dialogue.
The Managers lies about me will hurt their credibility with Senators who actually heard what I said. The Senators know I never said that a President can commit any crime as long as he believes his election is in the public interest. Yet the Managers persist in telling that lie.
She also willfully mischaracterized what I said, claiming that I spoke about “intent.” I challenge her to find that word anywhere in my presentation. I talked about the difficulty of discerning mixed motives. (2 of 3
Cynthia Nixon may run for Gov of NY. She has collaborated with Israel haters Jewish Voice for Peace and Vanessa Redgrave in boycotting Israel. Do not support her bigotry.
The
@nytimes
owes its readers more than an apology. We are to entitled to an investigation and explanation: how did the anti Semitic cartoon get published? Who approved it? What steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence?
The anti Semitic cartoon published by the
@nytimes
is a symptom of a deeper problem on the left. It’s acceptable to many on the left to employ anti Semitic tropes as long as they’re directed against Israel. Anti Zionism is becoming an acceptable cover for anti Semitism
STATEMENT REGARDING PROFESSOR DERSHOWITZ’S ROLE IN THE SENATE TRIAL - Professor Dershowitz will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal. (1of 2)
The Democratic witnesses have wrongly said that Congress cannot move forward because President Trump has resisted Congressional subpoenas. Of course they can. Simply go to court and get a judicial order.That is the proper course, not impeachment for invoking separation of powers
The targeted killing of Soleimani was a lawful, proportional preemptive military action against a combatant enemy who had killed and was planning to kill Americans. See my book: Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both ways.
Professor Carlin’s partisanship was evident in her testimony. Would she have made the arguments she made if Hillary Clinton had been elected and were being impeached on similar grounds ? Does she pass the “shoe on the other foot” test? (1 of 2)
They characterized my argument as if I had said that if a president believes that his re-election was in the national interest, he can do anything. I said nothing like that, as anyone who actually heard what I said can attest.
The open ended criteria for impeachment proposed by the Democratic experts are dangerous and place Congress above the law. That’s why the Framers demanded specific criteria that sound of crime, rather than “abuse of office.”
Presidents cannot do anything illegal in order to get re-elected. But nor can their lawful behavior be turned into a criminal or impeachable offense just because it was motivated in part by electoral considerations. Lincoln, Obama examples. Please answer THAT!
The presumption of innocence is real and important. It cannot be invoked selectively only for certain crimes. If you reject it for one, you reject it for all.
(2/2) It’s bad enough when college students demand trigger warnings and safe spaces to avoid hearing views with which they disagree. But it’s worse when it comes from professors and media people. It’s a dangerous sign of the times.
Taking advantage of the fact most of their viewers didn’t actually hear the senate Q and A, CNN, MSNBC and some other media willfully distorted my answers. More to Come
Tribe is trying to sensor my arguments . The headline of Tribe’s article says it all: “Trump’s lawyer shouldn’t be allowed to use bogus arguments on impeachment.”
When the FBI already has a recording of a meeting, and asks whether that meeting occurred, a false answer is not material to the investigation. The only reason to ask that question is to test the witness, not to learn information. Morality tests are not the proper role of the FBI
The targeted killing of Soleimani was a lawful, proportional, preemptive military action against a combatant enemy who had killed and was planning to kill Americans. See my book: Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways.
I challenge my accusers to tweet a direct accusation against me so I can sue them for defamation. They won’t because they know they they made up the story for money and I will prove they committed perjury.
The Democratic experts are seeking to “amend” the impeachment provisions of the constitution by adding criteria that were expressly rejected by the framers.
You’re not only a bigot. You have no understanding of the constitutional right to counsel. I didn't represent Epstein in his settlement, only in his criminal case. I’m proud to have done so & will continue to represent even the most despised accused, as the constitution mandates.
Bigot? You're calling me a big
@AlanDersh
?
Why don't you go back to representing your pedophile client Jeffrey Epstein.
Did you help him with the settlement today?
I'll continue to press a single standard of Justice and due process for everyone, as I did for the Clintons and as I do for the numerous people/causes I represent pro bono. I'll not be deterred by the cynical mocking of those who do nothing for anyone.
Some Democrats pursuing the impeachment of President Trump are trying their hardest to pin an impeachable crime on the commander-in-chief, according to law Professor Alan Dershowitz.
The House Managers in their closing argument persist in their deliberate lies, claiming again that I argued that a president can do anything — even commit crimes— if he believes his election is in the public interest. That is a willful lie, as watching my answer will prove. (MTC)
.
@AlanDersh
has no credibility left bc he is a hack for Trump. And I am happy to put my record over the last 7 months up against his. While my allegations and predictions have been proven correct time and time again, he has been concentrating on his Martha's Vineyard invites.
(3of 3) He is participating in this impeachment trial to defend the integrity of the Constitution and to prevent the creation of a dangerous constitutional precedent.
The vast majority of indictments and guilty pleas obtained against Americans by Mueller have not been for substantive crimes relating to his mandate: namely, to uncover crimes involving illegal contacts with Russia.
Excerpts from a letter to me:
I was reading your book yesterday at the beach, when some guys …asked me about the book …so I told them that I had a great deal of respect for the author…
Without warning, I was slugged and punched in the face.
Ageism is becoming rampant. Instead of responding to my arguments, he accused me of senility. He won’t debate me because this old man is a helluva lot sharper than he is. Shame on you for bigotry against the elderly.
Jesus
@AlanDersh
has gone senile in defense of Donald Trump. The House/Senate impeachment process is supposed to be like a trial but not limited to criminal law. The House “indicts” as a Grand Jury, the Senate convicts if the charges are proven.
Watch my senate speech and hear me repeatedly say that a president CAN be impeached if he commits crimes or criminal -like conduct— even if his motive was to help his reeelection. (MTC)
That’s a lie. My wife & daughter were with me the one time I flew to the island, years before Guiffre met Epstein and years before he was suspected of wrongdoing. Show me a flight log that has me going to island without my wife. You can’t because there isn’t any.
Antisemitism from the hard right is also inexcusable, but the center right generally condemns it. The center left too often gives hard left Antisemitism a pass, especially if it is disguised as anti-Zionism. See Omar, Farrakhan, Desmond Tutu.
The
@nytimes
owes its readers more than an apology. We are to entitled to an investigation and explanation: how did the anti Semitic cartoon get published? Who approved it? What steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence?
Hypocrisy and bigotry go hand in hand, and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib is the poster person for both. If she is the "new face" of the Democratic Party, we Democrats should begin worrying.
I challenge my friend Larry Tribe to a debate on: Does the Constitution permit a president to be criminally charged with obstruction for merely exercising his article 2 powers to fire and pardon. Do you accept?
My retired former colleague seems proud of playing devil’s advocate here. But this is no game. I think he should be deeply ashamed of helping legitimate the closest thing we have to the Devil Incarnate with so absurd and dangerous an argument
Read what I wrote. Mueller crimes fit into 3 categories: process crimes that occurred after he was appointed; financial crimes unrelated to Russia investigation; crimes by non Americans.
(5) Imagine how little you *and* your audience have to know about the facts of the Trump-Russia case for you to say something like what
@AlanDersh
said. It's so counterfactual that it makes me ashamed to share a profession with Alan. Lawyers are supposed to be *better* than this.
Tribe’s call to consider impeaching President Reagan demonstrates how promiscuously he and others deploy the vague term “abuse of power” against political opponents, and why it is not a constitutionally permissible criteria for impeachment.
Watch my answer that the media mischaracterizes as saying a president can do anything illegal as long as he is motivated by a desire to be re-elected. I don’t say that and Schiff doesn’t say I said it—until the media deliberately distorted my answer. (MTC)
There is no inconsistency between what I said during the Clinton impeachment and what I am saying now. I said then that there doesn’t have to be a “technical“ crime. I have said now there must be “criminal-like” conduct, or conduct “akin to treason and bribery.”
My friend
@Judgenap
, whose views I respect, disagrees with my views on obstruction of justice. Why don’t we have a rational, thoughtful debate so viewers can hear both sides of this important issue.
I will not make a final decision who to vote for until Election Day. I like Joe Biden but no one can take my vote for granted. I said I “could “ vote for Biden, not that I would. I don’t like what Biden said to JStreet about Israel. I could never vote for Sanders
By threatening Israel, President Biden is encouraging Hamas to fight on and not compromise or return hostages. There can be no cease-fire without return of hostages and by rewarding Hamas for its October 7 barbarisms, they are assuring repetitions.
I recall
@AlanDersh
last year told me I should go ahead and accuse him so he could sue me for defamation. I accuse
@AlanDersh
of knowingly and repeatedly having sex with minors associated with Jeffrey Epstein. Your move, Alan.
#Discovery
Dear
@AlanDersh
: I have attended classified briefings & reviewed classified materials. There is no other way to say this: You have no idea what you are talking about.
As a professor, you should know better than to make statements when you are missing large pieces of information
Today Pres Trump commuted the excessively unjust sentence of Sholom Rubashkin to the 8+years he has already served. Dems & Repubs asked him to commute. He did the right thing.
I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex? 1/
The new McCarthyism comes to Harvard. The firing of Dean Sullivan reminds me of the bad old days when lawyers were fired for representing communists, gay people, civil rights demonstrators and women seeking abortions.
The American public would be informed better by a debate than by childish epithets such as those that are being hurled at me by partisan pundits, academics and politicians. Please respond if you accept.
The expert witnesses should be cross examined by opposing counsel instead of just being thrown softballs by counsel on their side. Cross examination is essential to test witnesses. Otherwise the witnesses are just lecturing about their preexisting views.
I challenge my false accusers to stop hiding behind the litigation privilege and accuse me in public so I can sue them and prove they are lying for money.
How many profs would sign if the nominee were a left female who was similarly accused and similarly responded? How many complained about Ginsburg’s injudicious statements?
"...some have argued that the US should not recognize Jerusalem b/c it will stimulate violence by Arab terrorists. No US decision should ever be influenced by the threat of violence.Terrorists should not have a veto over US policy." My latest for
@thehill
Under the House Managers quid pro quo theory — to which I was responding — any president who took any action with the mixed motive to promote the national interest and ALSO to promote his re-election interests, would be impeachable. (MTC)
.
@AlanDersh
What happened to you? You used to be revered and respected. You are now seen as nothing more than a Trump sycophant and a hack for the GOP & Fox News. Anytime they need someone to do their bidding, they trot you out. Those mar-a-lago invites & cookies must be amazing.