The Midterm Campaign Will Be 'America Is Awesome vs. America Is Awful'
Why Karoline Leavitt Ripped Into CNN's Kaitlin Collins Yesterday
PLATT-inum Deal: We're Getting Oil and Gold From Venezuela Now
Did the Lizard People Write This? WaPo's Editorial on the DHS Shutdown Is...
The Crazed Man Who Went on a Stabbing Spree on I-495 in VA...
Yeah, About Those Dancing Frogs at the Dems' Alternate SOTU Circus
Fairfax Is the Real State of the Union for Democrats
Trump's Way of War
‘Luigi: The Musical’ Is More Than Tasteless — It’s a Warning
Virginia's Lt. Gov. Was Asked About the Woman Murdered by an Illegal Alien....
Patriotic Students Are Fed Up With Their Anti-ICE Classmates
Legal Expert Calls Spanberger's Judicial Warrant Demand Unreasonable, Unnecessary
It Looks Like an Iranian Drones Hit Azerbaijan
The War Department Has Released the Names of Two Additional Heroes Killed in...
Operation Epic Fury Is Sendings Shockwaves Through Beijing
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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement