Remember When MSNBC Went Bananas Over This NHL Player Not Accepting a WH...
Teens Say AI Is Now Part Of Everyday Life–Many Parents Have No Idea
Joy Behar Thinks the SAVE Act Will Help Republicans Cheat in November
The Left Wants a Nuclear Family Meltdown
Tim Walz's Paid Medical and Family Leave Law Is Already Being Abused
Grand Rapids Mayor: People Should Be Made to Feel Shame for Having Guns
The Legendary Ending to President Trump's State of the Union
President Trump Just Responded to Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib's Outbursts at the...
JD Vance Reveals What He Saw From Democrats During the State of the...
Mamdani's NYC Flirts With Chaos
U.S. Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Michigan County’s $2,242 Tax Foreclosure on $194k...
Moreno Unveils Bill to Fine Welfare Recipients $100K for Sending Money Overseas
Feds Freeze $259M in Medicaid Funds to Minnesota Over Alleged Fraud
Florida Man Sentenced to 6 Years in Nationwide Bank Fraud Scheme
Memphis Woman Sentenced to Federal Prison for $560K COVID-19 Fraud Across 20 States
Tipsheet

Dershowitz Reacts to Criticism of His Latest Defense Presentation

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