‘Alternative Law:’ Constitutional Scholar On The Dershowitz Defense Of Trump | All In | MSNBC
Articles,  Blog

‘Alternative Law:’ Constitutional Scholar On The Dershowitz Defense Of Trump | All In | MSNBC


  • David J

    Just put yourself in Lev Parnas' shoes for a moment.. Just imagine that you were a loyal Trump servant. You became a loyal MAGA hat wearing, book burning, Trump cultist. You partnered with Rudy, and went to Ukraine to help carry out Trump's bribery scheme. And you even put yourself in legal jeopardy for Trump by funneling tons of Russian money into his Super-pac, and then you get caught, arrested, and indicted. Then you turn on the TV to see your cult leader, the man you loved and admired, the man that you risked everything for, announce to the world, that he's never met you, and has no idea who you are. 😲  How would you feel? 😄

  • David J

    So what Dershowitz is trying say here, is that a president can do anything, from bribery, obstruction of justice, abuse of power, to shooting someone on 5th Ave, BUT….. if he lies about a b. job, then he must be impeached and removed from office immediately. If you don't think about it, it almost makes TOO much sense.

  • Jim Huntley

    Having Alan Dershowitz's cuts both ways. He has defended a lot of bad people (OJ SImpson, Jeffrey Epstein, and Harvey Weinstein). He Has name recognition going for him. I hope his opinion is sliced and diced and exposed for being ludicrous.

  • Chronic Crypto

    Trump hired his staff from fox news. Plain and simple. Dershowitz has been on fox news for months now putting in his application to be Trump's defense attorney.

  • Luis Avila

    If anything Trump has been successful on, is on turning great men into wakos, Rudy Giuliani is the best example and now this Dershowitz man

  • lexas

    Trump's defense, as usual, is not going to concern itself with trivial things like facts or truth or the law, its all about putting together sound bites for his deeply stupid and gullible base to consume on Fox 'News.'

  • Russian Bot

    "obstruction of congress"? Every American president has been guilty of "obstruction of congress". The word is called VETO! Every president does and has the power and right to veto a bill he thinks is bad for the country sent to him by the Senate! THE CONSTITUTION VERY CLEARLY GIVES HIM THAT POWER AND RIGHT TO DO IT!

  • Florida Crypto R

    Great points from the professor. I do believe Congress needs the state Statutes / federal codes printed up with what the professor mentioned ready to go for the chief justice to review in hand while Trump's Attorneys try using their false claims.

  • Eric Short

    Trump must have pictures of Dershowitz in very compromising positions. No other reason for him to make such legally asinine arguments.

  • Ignacio Mosqueira

    A constitutional scholar and a tv host being silly and having fun. It makes me sad to be a liberal. It really does. This is the textbook definition of cognitive dissonance. The POINT is that you can't prove abuse of power if you can't say what that really means. Get it through your thick skulls. Trump may well have crossed the line in the sense of a sensible choice for a president but it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove he was acting in his own interests and not in the interests of the United States as interpreted by HIM. Now I am not a lawyer but I'm obviously smart enough to explain things to you.

  • Johnny B

    By using high Profile Attorneys such as Mr. Dershowitz, the republican't supporters of this "potus" have negated any Argument that trump wasn't afforded an adequate defense.

    I thought from the beginning that trump, his Cohorts and his Supporters couldn't possibly be as STUPID as they were Constantly showing themselves to be.

    I was Absolutely Right . . . they're even more Stupid!!

  • chucky

    Dershowitz ??? do you mean the pervert Epstein friend who screwed little girls on his island of sin??? this guy should be in jail, not representing the president in an impeachment trial.. jeeesuz fekking christ this is disgusting that he is even on the streets

  • Marc Emson

    Well, Trump lives in his own alternate reality so him hiring "Deer-Show-itz" to spout "alternative laws" aka LIES as defense it's just more swamp in Trump's cult.

    It must stop.
    Before "Idiocracy" arrives to America for real.

  • Marcos Juarez

    Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, and Pam Bondi are out to defend Trump and it would be a nightmare for Trump during the Senate trial.

  • madhabitz

    I always recognize someone of my own generation by their use of the words "wacko" and "bizarro." Heh… hearing Professor Tribe utter them was especially fun. 😉

  • Si Señor

    WAIT… HOLD ON!….. Lets talk about Putin taking Alaska. I think 💭 that is important. Can we throw in Missouri and Mississippi in the mix? Just asking.

  • Diana Stokes-Harmon

    He is saying no crime has been commitmented you idiots need a crime with abuse of power, you need a crime with obstruction of Congress. Those to titles by themselves is not enough to impeach a sitting President. Our forefathers saw you coming!

  • Terncote

    No. Give Alaska to British Columbia, Canada. You can have the bottom third of Alberta.

    But we know Trump wouldn't give up Alaska. He needs all the petrochemical reserves he can muster to run his gas-lighting campaign.

  • 13thAMG

    By that same logic Clinton getting a BJ and being an adulterer (as is Trumpy Dumpty) and lying about it is not an impeachable offense.

    Great system, geniuses.

    You Americans ran from Tyranny to Dictatorship.

    How's that working out for ya, dickheads?

  • Phylum

    Seems like MSBNC are placing two ‘old hands’ having an age old spat and using the USA and the Constitution to promote same. Sick.

  • Russian Bot

    Honestly, How many people here actually believe Trump will be removed from office by the Senate and will NOT be re-elected in November????? Step up…. step up….. step up and make your voices heard!

  • SpecialFX50 SpeciakFX50

    This guy they chose to have up here has been feuding with Alan for years… Students at Harvard know these two fight all the time.. They don't say that here. Lawrence always takes the opposing side just to argue and they have been doing this for years and now hes on thsi show doing it. This is not what he teaches his own students though… This is such a sham.

  • MVVpro

    The final Trump defense argument will be something like "What is law anyway? Or justice? Do words have a real meaning? I rest my case."

  • Casey Nova

    Prof. Dershowitz asserts that the president must have violated a federal criminal statute in order to commit an impeachable offense. Prof. Tribe says that Trump did commit crimes (notwithstanding that there were no such statutes when the impeachment clause was written). That's a reasonable argument on both ends. What I think is clear, however, is that when a president commits acts which by their nature compel Congress to investigate whether an impeachable offense is at issue, the framers did not limit or qualify the power of the House to make its own findings and reach its own conclusions. The framers seemed to presage that trial in the Senate would be a political affair, although Senators would swear an oath of impartiality. Since McConnell, Graham, and Paul have all declared in advance that as jurors they're working for the defense and have no intention to stage a fair trial. it is purely political. There can be no justice. We will never know if Trump should have been removed from office.

  • BartJ583

    Trump has already been acquitted. The lawyers he hires aren't here to defend him, they are here to tell the GOP voters what they want to hear.

  • SpecialFX50 SpeciakFX50

    There are three crimes that are impeachable and when the impeachment power was put in the cinstitution it was open ended but it didn't stop there. There were arguments that caused revisions is what Alen said. By saying there was no laws at the very beginning is stupid because eveyone knows over time laws came into play and the the imoeahcment rules changed and got mideified into something everyone agree on.. Dirshowits stated that they could have changed it very easily and they didn't. They decided on three offenses that were criminal to impeach the president on or like crimes is what he stated on that show …so he covered actions that were not crimes but like crimes. . What he's doing here is pretending Alan didn't say that….He either has wax in his ears, working for CNN so he's lieing like we saw when CNN lost a lawsuit for fake news or he should not be teaching anymore because he's mentally impaired.. I personally think he's a dishonest jealous a hole talking to another dishonest a hole.

  • badboy6969949

    the set of facts must first be proven to amount to a crime, absent a law defining the persecutees necessary to prove a crime, there is no crime. if the law doesn't say it's against the law it isn't.

  • antony michael

    The "Law" is clear on this matter!

    Federal Election Campaign Law:-

    Soliciting or Receiving:-

    "It shall be unlawful" for an individual who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government, including the "President, vice President, and Members of Congress", to
    "solicit or receive a donation" of "money or other thing of value" in
    connection with a "Federal, State, or local election", while in any room
    or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or
    employee of the United States, "from any person".

  • SpecialFX50 SpeciakFX50

    It's not called Felony Bribery. They changedt it the articles to not include Bribery, but on obstruction of congress and abuse of power and these are not impeachable.. Does this guy not follow what's going on? Here he is giving his expert opinion on what he thinks they should be doing and not what they have already submitted to teh senate He cannot be charged with Bribery so give it up,, they already turned the articles in and bribery is not one of them..So Lawrence here is wacko. The finger points right at him..Alan can only speak on the constitution he said he's not there to defend the president, but he is offering facts of the constitution which happens to defend the presidnet so thi lawrence guy has got that wrong too because he's not there to be his defense. he got that wrong as well.

  • Thomas Jackson

    I wrote a very extensive essay to explain why the facts in the impeachment case describe crimes, but I will give a synopsis. I count six felonies in all, but some might have multiple counts. Here are the crimes

    Embezzlement. The president withheld funds for an other than lawful purpose. That's misappropriation of funds,. Or embezzlement. or theft. The president embezzled funds in order to use them to commit further crimes.

    Fraud. The president employed various individuals and an organization to perpetrate a fraud. Fraudulent representations were made to foreign officials in order to communicate to them that the president had the authority to withhold funds, when he had no such authority. These false representations are fraud. The president committed embezzlement and fraud in order to commit further crimes.

    Extortion. The purpose of the fraudulent representations about the president's authority was that they were intended to be used as a threat. The president threatened to cut off aid to an ally fighting a war unless the ally president performed official duties for Trump.

    Bribery. Trump solicited specific bribes. Trump committed embezzlement, fraud, extortion and bribery in order to commit further crimes.

    Racketeering. Trump combined his office with a corrupt organization for the purpose of committing crimes.Giuliani's law firm has been engaged in numerous schemes of organized felonies.

    Campaign Finance felonies. This is the bribe that Trump wanted. Trump wanted a foreign power to abuse the powers of their office, in order to commit felonies with Trump in the US.

    The House Democrats call ALL that garbage pile of crimes: Abuse of Power.
    Trump couldn't have committed these crimes unless he was president.

    The entire purpose of all of these crimes was to defraud all of the people with false claims that his political opponent is corrupt. Right on cue, Russian hackers from the GRU hacked Burisma.
    Starting to sound familiar?

  • SpecialFX50 SpeciakFX50

    This professor got confused by Hayes and argued against what Hayes here said to do at the trial as strategy on accident when he said the facts are dead wrong, lol he just disagreed with Hayes when they tried to stay on the same page.. what morons!!.. Alan is way sharper than these two nut jobs because he is a real trial lawyer and can think on the spot and this guy can't even listen to Hayes the anchor and get it right ..He's just a guy in a class room with a book and thats it. Alan rip him apart if he came on the show..

  • James Champaco

    It takes a person like trump to normalize "alternative truths" and "alternative law"…..45 presidents later and this is what you trumpets support?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *