It's Going to Be a Great Year
What the Hell Is Going on in Iran?
This Might Have Been the Creepiest Line in Zohran Mamdani's Mayoral Address. And,...
A German Woman Reportedly Wanted to Livestream How Safe It Was to be...
Here's the Image That Led to an Awkward Moment for This ESPN Host...
Investigating Fraud Is Now ‘Harassment,’ According to Democrat Prosecutors
The Minnesota Congressional Delegation Is Demanding Answers and Accountability From Tim Wa...
'Locked and Loaded:' President Trump Issues Warning to Iran As Anti-Regime Protests Enter...
Hospital Horror: Afghan Migrant Arrested After Brutal Attack on UK Nurse
Kathy Hochul Just Did a Major U-Turn on Taxing Tips
Does the Minnesota Fraud Scandal Go All the Way to the Somali Government?...
Peace Through Strength: Venezuela’s Maduro Suddenly Ready to Negotiate
The ‘Warmth’ of Collectivism Comes With a Body Count — Conservatives Respond to...
Journalist Who Exposed $100M Somali Daycare Fraud Says He’s Now Getting Death Threats
While America Watched the Border, the Cyber Front Exploded
Tipsheet

Dershowitz Reacts to Criticism of His Latest Defense Presentation

AP Photo/Richard Drew

Constitutional lawyer Alan Dershowitz argued in his presentation in the Senate on Wednesday that if a president believed his re-election was in the "public interest," then whatever quid pro quo he might be accused of is moot. Democrats and the media mocked the Harvard law professor and tried to discredit him. According to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), he and his colleagues couldn't roll their eyes hard enough while Dershowitz was speaking.

Advertisement

The lawyer and Trump defense team member responded on Twitter with a few clarifications about the motives that may drive a president to act the way he or she does.

For his third point - that helping own's re-election effort is not necessarily akin to corruption - Dershowitz used the policies of the 16th president of the United States as precedent.

Dershowitz shared a few more excerpts from his argument. For example, he asked the jurors to consider a what if scenario. What if President Obama decided to break his promise to bomb Syria for their chemical weapons attack because it would have cost him Democratic votes?

Advertisement

Related:

IMPEACHMENT

The lawyer used these hypotheticals to conclude that the Framers "did not intend impeachment for mixed motive decisions that contain an element of personal partisan benefit."

"Critics have an obligation to respond to what I said, not to create straw men to attack," Dershowitz tweets in closing.

Some Republican senators like Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) defended the lawyer to explain that "he was talking about rooting out corruption." And that, she said, is in the public interest.

Democrats have been hammering for more witnesses, but that effort appears to have been effectively stopped. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appears to have the votes needed to block that effort, end the trial, and acquit the president.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement