Dershowitz: Trump Impeachment Invalid; Requires ‘Criminal-like Conduct’

Breitbart:

Constitutional scholar and criminal defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz rose to the defense of President Donald Trump at his Senate impeachment trial on Monday evening, arguing that the conduct with which Trump had been charged was outside what the Framers of the Constitution had considered to be impeachable offenses.

Dershowitz drew upon the successful 1868 arguments by former Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Curtis, who had dissented from the infamous Dred Scott decision and resigned from the Court in protest, and who later defended President Andrew Johnson in his impeachment trial, the first ever of any U.S. president.

Impeachment, Dershowitz argued, required “criminal-like conduct akin to treason and bribery.” He stressed: “This is the key point in this impeachment case … purely non-criminal conduct including ‘abuse of power’ and ‘obstruction of Congress’ [the charges against Trump] are outside the range of impeachable offenses.”

He said claims by Democrats like Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), who said the House could do what it wanted, were wrong: “It would place Congress above the law. It would place Congress above the Constitution. … would be for Congress to do what it is accusing the president of doing. And no one is above the law.”

Dershowitz said that the House impeachment managers had erred in arguing that the general fears of the Framers that a president would abuse his power could be substituted for the criteria written in the text of the Constitution itself, which sought a specific basis for impeachment and removal of judges and presidents. read more

11 Comments on Dershowitz: Trump Impeachment Invalid; Requires ‘Criminal-like Conduct’

  1. He’s talking to that marble wall behind him. The Dems are too deep into the rabbit hole to turn back now. That includes Bobble head Senator Susan Collins, Romney, Merkawski, etc.

    6
  2. This is a comment from the story at the Sentinel about Dershowitz’s historic defense of the Constitution. I couldn’t write a better synopsis:

    “Richard Anderson January 28, 2020 at 2:43 am

    Clear, concise, and correct. The test now is to observe how the Senate will vote, and to see where those who understand their path and duty stand against the emotional and irrational rabble that has brought mayhem to the floor. Democrats, RINO’s and women will be measured, so who will be found wanting at the bar of history?”

    It would have been forgivable if the entire Senate had jumped to its feet with echos of “Bravo!” at Dershowitz’s conclusion, but it was understandable they remain seated and quiet — in the same way a congregation holds its applause after a stirring rendition of Ave Maria.

    Though anti-climactic, Pat Cippolone reframed Dershowitz’s defense as a series of law school exam questions for the Senate to consider, the answers to which were obvious and final. To add my two cents to the commenter quoted above, it will also be obvious at this point which Senate “students” were paying attention and which are law school (i.e. Constitution) drop-outs. Must hand it to Cippolone, he boxed Romney and company into a very tight corner. Check mate.

    6
  3. I find it a little ironic that the very people who have lost their marbles now have to try to make their case in front of a solid marble wall!

    4
  4. “criminal-like conduct akin to treason and bribery.”

    you mean like winning an election against the most corrupt women in politics ever ?

    4
  5. @Abigal Adams, yes I did and he was Great, made perfect sense. But it won’t change Rhinos or Dems minds. They’re lost cause.

    4
  6. @Farmwife — I thoroughly disagree. Dershowitz’s defense of the Constitution was a lot more than “perfect sense.” It was one for the ages. More importantly, it deprived the RINOS and Democrats of their excuses or inane justifications. If they persist in this or any future attempts at impeachment — unless their charges *are* truly backed by hard evidence of high crimes or their kin — their battleship is sunk.

    3
  7. @Abigail Adams, I totally agree with you. But I doubt there’s anyone on the dem side that has the brains to understand what he was saying. They make me think of two year olds.

    1

Comments are closed.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!