The Courts Are Guilty of Failing to Do Their Job
The Court Didn't Officially Do This to the Voting Right Act, But Liberals...
The White House's Picture of Trump and King Charles III Induced a Glorious...
Following SCOTUS Decision, Louisiana Is Wasting No Time Redrawing Its Maps
VP Vance Had the Perfect Analogy for Tim Walz After He Tried to...
What to Watch Out for in This House Resolution Condemning the Latest Trump...
House Agrees to Senate-Backed DHS Funding Measure, But There's Still a Massive Hill...
GOP Senator Aims to Protect the Auto Industry From Chinese Intrusion...and He Got...
UCLA Is in Hot Water Over Free Speech, and Here's Why
More Than a Year After the LA Fires, Newsom Is Still 'Clarifying' the...
This Family Lost Their Daughter to an Illegal Alien, and This Is the...
Citizens Last: How the Democrat Party Stopped Pretending
Christians in Israel: The View of One Christian IDF Soldier
DOJ Weaponized Against Pro-Life Americans
Southern Poverty Law Center Labeled Me an Extremist. Now Everyone Can See the...
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