ALAN DERSHOWITZ

[berryberry]

Dershowitz calls out the rigged Georgia case as a sham

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Al Gore, his legal team and I tried to find uncounted presidential votes, lobbied officials and fought in the courts in 2000. The only difference now? The candidate's name is Donald Trump... That's why this prosecution is an outrage

Alan Dershowitz is a lawyer, Harvard Law School Professor and author of 'Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law'

Electoral challenges have long been part of American history.

Only now are they being criminalized.

I was one of the lawyers involved in objections to Florida's presidential vote in 2000.

A margin of less than 600 ballots determined that Governor George W. Bush rather than Vice President Al Gore won the state and, thus, the electoral college vote.

I was convinced then and I am convinced now that this result was wrong.

No one was indicted, disbarred, disciplined or even much criticized for those efforts, yet here we stand today.

President Donald Trump and 18 other defendants has been charged with election fraud, conspiracy, racketeering and more, under a law designed to take down criminal organizations, known as the RICO Act.

Should Al Gore have been charged in 2000?

What about me?

I represented the voters of Palm Beach County, many of whom voted by mistake for Pat Buchanan rather than Gore because of the infamous butterfly ballots and hanging chads that prevented their votes from being accurately counted.

During the course of our challenges, many tactics similar to those employed in 2020 were attempted.

Lawyers wrote legal memoranda outlining possible courses of conduct, including proposing a slate of alternate electors, who would deliver our preferred election results to Congress.

Now, Trump and his attorney Rudy Giuliani, along with others, are accused of conspiracy to commit forgery and false statements for drafting their list of alternate electors.

In 2000, Florida state officials were lobbied to secure recounts in selected counties in which we thought the tally would favor us. We were trying to find at least 600 votes that would change the result.

This new indictment features Trump's phone call with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, which was captured in an audio recording. In the conversation, Trump asks Raffensperger to 'find' 12,000 votes.

In my mind, this call is among the most exculpatory pieces of evidence. Trump was entitled as a candidate to ask a Georgia state official to locate votes that he believes were not counted.

In 2000, attempts were made to influence various Florida officials to recount the votes.

Now, the former president's request that Georgia's Republican Speaker of the House reconsider the count is being charged as soliciting a public official to violate his oath.

But if similar behavior was legal in 2000, how could it be illegal in 2023?

.
.
.

Conspiracy and RICO violations are specific 'intent' crimes. In order to secure a conviction, prosecutors must prove a personalized agreement to join a criminal activity.

That will be an incredibly difficult case to make, especially regarding Trump himself who — to my knowledge – has never wavered from his belief that the election was stolen.

He is wrong, but again, that is not enough to prove him guilty.

The First Amendment and general criminal law principles protect the right to be wrong, especially if that right is based on an honest mistake or belief.

.
.

The fundamental truth of this indictment is that if the evidence of specific crimes were compelling, there would be no need to charge under the onerous 'intent' requirements of RICO and conspiracy laws. The proof is not compelling, because these electoral challenges have precedent.

Once again, as with the preceding three Trump indictments, the law is being stretched to its limits in order to snare a former president.

'Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime,' is the infamous Soviet-era boast attributed to Joseph Stalin's chief of the secret police.

Is this really what our country has become?

When prosecutions are rooted in the fickle ground of politics and not the solid rock of justice everything will crumble.

[DNinja69]

Joseph Stalin's chief of secret police? So Dershowitz has reviewed the evidence? Interesting spin to try and defeat serious charges of misconduct by arguing the charges are not 'specific' enough.

Dershowitz did say he expects convictions. Then again his entire commentary on this case is not objective in any way he is a devoted Trump supporter who recently released a book titled:

“Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law”

Who would expect him to speak out on these charges any other way?

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

Joseph Stalin's chief of secret police? So Dershowitz has reviewed the evidence? Interesting spin to try and defeat serious charges of misconduct by arguing the charges are not 'specific' enough.

Dershowitz did say he expects convictions. Then again his entire commentary on this case is not objective in any way he is a devoted Trump supporter who recently released a book titled:

“Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law”

Who would expect him to speak out on these charges any other way?

Oh you are talking about the same Alan dershowitz who supported Hillary in 2016? That Trump supporter?

[El-mo]

Originally Posted by chizzy

Oh you are talking about the same Alan dershowitz who supported Hillary in 2016? That Trump supporter?

Maybe he’s talking about the Alan Dershowitz who was literally on Trump’s legal defense team for the 2020 impeachment. That Trump supporter.

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by El-mo

Maybe he’s talking about the Alan Dershowitz who was literally on Trump’s legal defense team for the 2020 impeachment. That Trump supporter.

Lawyer not supporter elmo. He isn't doing it for free
There's a difference

[Jacuzzme]

He’s repeatedly, every interview I’ve seen at least, stated that he’s never voted for Trump nor will he in the future. He is one of the few democrats with a moral compass, who happens to be a brilliant lawyer that’s not afraid of being canceled by being honest. He’s already got fuck you money, I’d assume that’s a factor.

[El-mo]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

He’s repeatedly, every interview I’ve seen at least, stated that he’s never voted for Trump nor will he in the future. He is one of the few democrats with a moral compass, who happens to be a brilliant lawyer that’s not afraid of being canceled by being honest. He’s already got fuck you money, I’d assume that’s a factor.

Moral compass? You’re talking about a guy who frequented Epstein island.

For the last decade, his grift has been spouting all the right wing talking points while claiming to be a liberal, so that conservatives can say “look, even liberal Alan Dershowitz agrees”.

[Jacuzzme]

He’s an actual liberal, which is closer to libertarian than democrat or republican. Rather than pretend he’s something he’s not, why not say, specifically, where his analysis is wrong.

[Devo]

I'm a Libertarian, he is NOT closer to our beliefs than a REAL Republican, we share many of the same beliefs, but, there is a very sharp divide in how those beliefs should be applied, abortion for example.

That said, Dershowitz, and Turley are a few of the Democrats which I can actually respect because they are very Democratic, but absolutely fair when speaking about the application of the law.

Admit it, when he was trying for find votes in FLA, you were chearing him, and, when he defends someone doing the same thing, you are ready to crucify him.

Which shows two things, the typical we love you when we need you, or, your better off hung in a jail cell when your usefulness has passed, or worse, you may say something bad about us which is typical of the radical left, and being completely two faced when you are discussing any possible sanctions on your enemies, not political foes, but ENEMIES to be KILLED if possible.

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by chizzy

Oh you are talking about the same Alan dershowitz who supported Hillary in 2016? That Trump supporter?

Yeah, the comments from the leftists show just how out of touch they are.

Dershowitz has never voted for Trump
Dershowitz supported Hillary in 2016
Dershowitz detailed all he did looking for votes for Gore in 2000

One would have to have major TDS to think Dershowitz is a Trump lackey. What he is is an HONEST democrat focused solely on the law. Something apparently ill informed leftists can't comprehend

[DNinja69]

Gentlemen the word used was supporter. At no point did I mention vote or any claim to that effect so you are connecting dots to suit your own agenda. Deeshowitz has been steadfast in his support of Trump and continues to take the former Presidents side on charges stemming from the 2020 election. For some of you who lack the ability or desire to think outside your partisan box I see Dershowitz is a good example of someone who doesn't let himself be herded that way. His declarations regarding the charges against Trump are consistent with those expressed in the book he has out. If a former attorney for the Biden clan wrote a book I would expect them to do the same.

[Jacuzzme]

He’s a “supporter” of the constitution and just, equal application of the law. If the same horseshit was being pulled on a democrat, he’d be supporting them. Dershowitz is the embodiment of Lady Liberty and her blindfold. There should be many many more like him.

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

He’s a “supporter” of the constitution and just, equal application of the law. If the same horseshit was being pulled on a democrat, he’d be supporting them. Dershowitz is the embodiment of Lady Liberty and her blindfold. There should be many many more like him.

Correct - the only thing Dershowitz "SUPPORTS" is the constitution and fair and equal application of the law

If anyone thinks he is a Trump Supporter, they would be extremely ill informed and likely pushing a TDS filled leftist agenda

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

He’s a “supporter” of the constitution and just, equal application of the law. If the same horseshit was being pulled on a democrat, he’d be supporting them. Dershowitz is the embodiment of Lady Liberty and her blindfold. There should be many many more like him.

This..... to say "Trump supporter" is not accurate in any sense of the wording.

[DNinja69]

Keep reading from the script fellas. Our current system is literally banking on you doing just that so follow along and march to the beat it is your choice.

If I were to tell you that my business took on Bernie as a client and during those years he was a candidate not only spoke out for him in the media but wrote a book outlining what the DNC did to squash his candidacy you would absolutely tag me a Bernie supporter though I voted for Trump in the primary and again in the general election.

Dershowitz does not work for a firm that told him to represent Trump. He made that choice. Someone with his political leanings working to further the career of a Republican is a statement of support and I appreciate him for it and wish more people would be able to see the value in those good people on 'the other side' but in order to do that you have to take Red or Blue colored shades off and think for yourself.