ADVERTISEMENT

Trump Indictment Fails Crucial Test: Dershowitz

derek_tiger

Varsity
Dec 20, 2009
1,016
1,702
113
Bah! What does HE know? He's just another idiot Harvard Law Professor... :rolleyes:

Alan-Dershowitz-1200x818.jpg.webp


The federal indictment against former President Donald Trump fails a crucial test, law professor Alan Dershowitz says.

“It doesn’t meet what I call the Richard Nixon standard, which was very clear obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, paying bribes,” Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said on Newsmax on June 9 after the indictment was unsealed.

“This is too close a case to bring against the man running for president, against the incumbent president,” Dershowitz added.

Two paragraphs in the indictment do appear to meet the standard of the planned prosecution of former President Nixon, according to the law professor.

‘Highly Confidential’ Plan

Those paragraphs refer to Trump allegedly showing an unidentified writer, publisher, and staff members a “highly confidential” plan to attack a country.

U.S. General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was quoted in a news story on July 15, 2021, as fighting to stop Trump from ordering an attack on Iran.

Six days later, Trump showed the writer and publisher what he described as a “plan of attack” from the same general.

“Isn’t this amazing? This totally wins my case, except it is like, highly confidential,” Trump is quoted as saying in the indictment.

“As president, I could have declassified it. Now I can’t but this is still a secret,” he was also quoted as saying.

The indictment charges Trump with various crimes, including illegally disclosing national defense information.

‘Will Have to Be Explained’

“We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.

Trump “may claim he didn’t show it to them, just kind of waved it in front of them as part of bragging but that’s something that will have to be explained,” Dershowitz said. “When you have a tape in the voice of the defendant himself it’s hard to dispute, so I think this is a serious indictment on these two charges. Everything else I think was exactly what we expected,” he also said.

Trump said after the indictment was released that he is innocent and accused the government of corruption. He shared posts on social media noting that a number of top officials possessed classified information, such as former President Bill Clinton, but were not charged.

‘One Set of Laws’

Special counsel Jack Smith, whose presented charges against Trump were approved by a grand jury, said in prepared remarks from Washington that “Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced” and “violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

He added, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.”

Trump has said that he declassified documents before leaving office. Presidents have the power of declassification.

Dershowitz, who represented Trump during one of his impeachment trials, said in an op-ed that one question is whether Trump actually declassified the documents.

“If he claims he did, it will be up to the government to challenge that assertion. It could do so in several ways. It could offer evidence designed to disprove Mr. Trump’s claim. But proving a negative—in this case, that he did not declassify the documents—is always difficult,” Dershowitz wrote.

“In the usual criminal prosecution, the government has the heavy burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” he added later.

Smith said the indictment outlined serious crimes but also noted that Trump and an aide who were charged “must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.”

Link
 
  • Like
Reactions: BamaFan1137
Bah! What does HE know? He's just another idiot Harvard Law Professor... :rolleyes:

Alan-Dershowitz-1200x818.jpg.webp


The federal indictment against former President Donald Trump fails a crucial test, law professor Alan Dershowitz says.

“It doesn’t meet what I call the Richard Nixon standard, which was very clear obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, paying bribes,” Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said on Newsmax on June 9 after the indictment was unsealed.

“This is too close a case to bring against the man running for president, against the incumbent president,” Dershowitz added.

Two paragraphs in the indictment do appear to meet the standard of the planned prosecution of former President Nixon, according to the law professor.


‘Highly Confidential’ Plan

Those paragraphs refer to Trump allegedly showing an unidentified writer, publisher, and staff members a “highly confidential” plan to attack a country.

U.S. General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was quoted in a news story on July 15, 2021, as fighting to stop Trump from ordering an attack on Iran.

Six days later, Trump showed the writer and publisher what he described as a “plan of attack” from the same general.

“Isn’t this amazing? This totally wins my case, except it is like, highly confidential,” Trump is quoted as saying in the indictment.

“As president, I could have declassified it. Now I can’t but this is still a secret,” he was also quoted as saying.

The indictment charges Trump with various crimes, including illegally disclosing national defense information.


‘Will Have to Be Explained’

“We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.

Trump “may claim he didn’t show it to them, just kind of waved it in front of them as part of bragging but that’s something that will have to be explained,” Dershowitz said. “When you have a tape in the voice of the defendant himself it’s hard to dispute, so I think this is a serious indictment on these two charges. Everything else I think was exactly what we expected,” he also said.

Trump said after the indictment was released that he is innocent and accused the government of corruption. He shared posts on social media noting that a number of top officials possessed classified information, such as former President Bill Clinton, but were not charged.


‘One Set of Laws’

Special counsel Jack Smith, whose presented charges against Trump were approved by a grand jury, said in prepared remarks from Washington that “Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced” and “violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

He added, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.”

Trump has said that he declassified documents before leaving office. Presidents have the power of declassification.

Dershowitz, who represented Trump during one of his impeachment trials, said in an op-ed that one question is whether Trump actually declassified the documents.

“If he claims he did, it will be up to the government to challenge that assertion. It could do so in several ways. It could offer evidence designed to disprove Mr. Trump’s claim. But proving a negative—in this case, that he did not declassify the documents—is always difficult,” Dershowitz wrote.

“In the usual criminal prosecution, the government has the heavy burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” he added later.

Smith said the indictment outlined serious crimes but also noted that Trump and an aide who were charged “must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.”

Link
LOL

Nauta dooms him - but isn’t even mentioned. Plan B= He will be personally convicted with Trumpsky as an accomplice. He had no privilege no security clearance. He is going to prison for life.

I understand that you want to HOPE for the possibility to disregard prima facie recorded evidence … but it ain’t happening. Too many attorneys have flipped using the crime fraud exception to avoid AC privilege.

He’s fvcked.. get used to it.
 
Bah! What does HE know? He's just another idiot Harvard Law Professor... :rolleyes:

Alan-Dershowitz-1200x818.jpg.webp


The federal indictment against former President Donald Trump fails a crucial test, law professor Alan Dershowitz says.

“It doesn’t meet what I call the Richard Nixon standard, which was very clear obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, paying bribes,” Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said on Newsmax on June 9 after the indictment was unsealed.

“This is too close a case to bring against the man running for president, against the incumbent president,” Dershowitz added.

Two paragraphs in the indictment do appear to meet the standard of the planned prosecution of former President Nixon, according to the law professor.


‘Highly Confidential’ Plan

Those paragraphs refer to Trump allegedly showing an unidentified writer, publisher, and staff members a “highly confidential” plan to attack a country.

U.S. General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was quoted in a news story on July 15, 2021, as fighting to stop Trump from ordering an attack on Iran.

Six days later, Trump showed the writer and publisher what he described as a “plan of attack” from the same general.

“Isn’t this amazing? This totally wins my case, except it is like, highly confidential,” Trump is quoted as saying in the indictment.

“As president, I could have declassified it. Now I can’t but this is still a secret,” he was also quoted as saying.

The indictment charges Trump with various crimes, including illegally disclosing national defense information.


‘Will Have to Be Explained’

“We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.

Trump “may claim he didn’t show it to them, just kind of waved it in front of them as part of bragging but that’s something that will have to be explained,” Dershowitz said. “When you have a tape in the voice of the defendant himself it’s hard to dispute, so I think this is a serious indictment on these two charges. Everything else I think was exactly what we expected,” he also said.

Trump said after the indictment was released that he is innocent and accused the government of corruption. He shared posts on social media noting that a number of top officials possessed classified information, such as former President Bill Clinton, but were not charged.


‘One Set of Laws’

Special counsel Jack Smith, whose presented charges against Trump were approved by a grand jury, said in prepared remarks from Washington that “Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced” and “violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

He added, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.”

Trump has said that he declassified documents before leaving office. Presidents have the power of declassification.

Dershowitz, who represented Trump during one of his impeachment trials, said in an op-ed that one question is whether Trump actually declassified the documents.

“If he claims he did, it will be up to the government to challenge that assertion. It could do so in several ways. It could offer evidence designed to disprove Mr. Trump’s claim. But proving a negative—in this case, that he did not declassify the documents—is always difficult,” Dershowitz wrote.

“In the usual criminal prosecution, the government has the heavy burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” he added later.

Smith said the indictment outlined serious crimes but also noted that Trump and an aide who were charged “must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.”

Link
Maybe as a side topic- so it doesn’t get lost…

Do you think that the co-conspirator ( Nauta) goes to prison for life - or takes immunity and flips on 2 time Defendant Trump??

Remember “Individual two” ( Michael Cohen) went to Otisville in Stormy Round 1 while “ Individual One ( David Dennison) skated through his POTUS term but would be reprocecuted. AS I SAID… was that phenomenal prophecy??

Predication : Trumpsky will throw Nauta under the bus as he did Mark Meadows, Rudy , Cohen and Allen Weisselberg and all of his other attorneys promising a pardon that will never come.

This is also a trap that Smith has set for Trump appointed judge Aileen Cannon. If she treats the charges procedurally differently in ANY way ( she did that in previous filing about the search warrant)… Smith will smash her in the 11th Circuit and have her removed.

~ORACLE~
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pops Masterson
Bah! What does HE know? He's just another idiot Harvard Law Professor... :rolleyes:

Alan-Dershowitz-1200x818.jpg.webp


The federal indictment against former President Donald Trump fails a crucial test, law professor Alan Dershowitz says.

“It doesn’t meet what I call the Richard Nixon standard, which was very clear obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, paying bribes,” Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said on Newsmax on June 9 after the indictment was unsealed.

“This is too close a case to bring against the man running for president, against the incumbent president,” Dershowitz added.

Two paragraphs in the indictment do appear to meet the standard of the planned prosecution of former President Nixon, according to the law professor.


‘Highly Confidential’ Plan

Those paragraphs refer to Trump allegedly showing an unidentified writer, publisher, and staff members a “highly confidential” plan to attack a country.

U.S. General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was quoted in a news story on July 15, 2021, as fighting to stop Trump from ordering an attack on Iran.

Six days later, Trump showed the writer and publisher what he described as a “plan of attack” from the same general.

“Isn’t this amazing? This totally wins my case, except it is like, highly confidential,” Trump is quoted as saying in the indictment.

“As president, I could have declassified it. Now I can’t but this is still a secret,” he was also quoted as saying.

The indictment charges Trump with various crimes, including illegally disclosing national defense information.


‘Will Have to Be Explained’

“We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.

Trump “may claim he didn’t show it to them, just kind of waved it in front of them as part of bragging but that’s something that will have to be explained,” Dershowitz said. “When you have a tape in the voice of the defendant himself it’s hard to dispute, so I think this is a serious indictment on these two charges. Everything else I think was exactly what we expected,” he also said.

Trump said after the indictment was released that he is innocent and accused the government of corruption. He shared posts on social media noting that a number of top officials possessed classified information, such as former President Bill Clinton, but were not charged.


‘One Set of Laws’

Special counsel Jack Smith, whose presented charges against Trump were approved by a grand jury, said in prepared remarks from Washington that “Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced” and “violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

He added, “We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.”

Trump has said that he declassified documents before leaving office. Presidents have the power of declassification.

Dershowitz, who represented Trump during one of his impeachment trials, said in an op-ed that one question is whether Trump actually declassified the documents.

“If he claims he did, it will be up to the government to challenge that assertion. It could do so in several ways. It could offer evidence designed to disprove Mr. Trump’s claim. But proving a negative—in this case, that he did not declassify the documents—is always difficult,” Dershowitz wrote.

“In the usual criminal prosecution, the government has the heavy burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” he added later.

Smith said the indictment outlined serious crimes but also noted that Trump and an aide who were charged “must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.”

Link


We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.


Yet your source seems to think that the Cult collective - (emphasizing the “WE” where he includes himself) really shat the bed - showing off- or even DISCUSSING classified information .

The greatest nightmare of all is this lunatic even having classified knowledge to disclose to anyone without consequences.
 
We’re going to have to hear an exception from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how we can justify having shown to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran,” Dershowitz said on Newsmax.

None of the people shown the document held a security clearance, U.S. authorities say.


Yet your source seems to think that the Cult collective - (emphasizing the “WE” where he includes himself) really shat the bed - showing off- or even DISCUSSING classified information .

The greatest nightmare of all is this lunatic even having classified knowledge to disclose to anyone without consequences.
Just a bump as a gentle reminder of an incoming fail. Place holder.

You know that his Chief of Staff, AG and VP will testify against him . Right?

They are RINOS too or Libs. Which one?
 
Just a bump as a gentle reminder of an incoming fail. Place holder.

You know that his Chief of Staff, AG and VP will testify against him . Right?

They are RINOS too or Libs. Which one?
Are they testifying? Or are they testifying against him? You read these things on Maddow’s website or Vox which causes you to lie about things a lot.
 
Are they testifying? Or are they testifying against him? You read these things on Maddow’s website or Vox which causes you to lie about things a lot.
They are on the list of 84 witnesses that the Defendant is not to communicate with.
They have given depositions to the grand juries and provided their communications.

You really aren’t keeping up.

There is bulletproof evidence now with him, Nauta and Document 19 on video AT HIS DESK with a witness. That’s all they need. That’s why you saw the venue switch from DC to FL. Jack Smith doesn’t have a single **** to give.

He is fvcked… pick a new nominee
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pops Masterson
There is bulletproof evidence now with him, Nauta and Document 19 on video AT HIS DESK with a witness. That’s all they need. That’s why you saw the venue switch from DC to FL. Jack Smith doesn’t have a single **** to give.

He is fvcked… pick a new nominee
How many times does everyone here have to tell they do not want him as nominee, president or anything else. Are you this fvcking retarded or is your reading comprehension that terrible ?
 
They are on the list of 84 witnesses that the Defendant is not to communicate with.
They have given depositions to the grand juries and provided their communications.

You really aren’t keeping up.

There is bulletproof evidence now with him, Nauta and Document 19 on video AT HIS DESK with a witness. That’s all they need. That’s why you saw the venue switch from DC to FL. Jack Smith doesn’t have a single **** to give.

He is fvcked… pick a new nominee
Safe to say you don’t understand law, so I will school you for a minute.

Not one of those people you just wanked it to has said, “I’m going to testify against Donald Trump.” A testimony is nothing more than an agreement to tell the truth under oath. A testimony can be given in deposition, but a person can’t be deposed without both sets of attorneys present.

So your wet dream is nothing more than just that.
 
How many times does everyone here have to tell they do not want him as nominee, president or anything else. Are you this fvcking retarded or is your reading comprehension that terrible ?
I keep telling you, I don’t know him from Adam but I’d swear…

782a643a-baf5-4b99-a66a-67882dab03c0_text.gif

just a few years older
 
Safe to say you don’t understand law, so I will school you for a minute.

Not one of those people you just wanked it to has said, “I’m going to testify against Donald Trump.” A testimony is nothing more than an agreement to tell the truth under oath. A testimony can be given in deposition, but a person can’t be deposed without both sets of attorneys present.

So your wet dream is nothing more than just that.
Yea.. I kinda get it LOL here’s what I know for sure.
Smith isn’t going to put anyone on his list unless there is evidence to support a key allegation - including videos and , texts and documents.

That would include evidence that has already been vetted as valid by a district judge , special master, appellate court and SCOTUS- All GOP btw- UNANIMOUS . . Actually he doesn’t need any witnesses with the evidence compiled.


He’s fvcked with only Document 19
 
  • Love
Reactions: Pops Masterson
They are on the list of 84 witnesses that the Defendant is not to communicate with.
They have given depositions to the grand juries and provided their communications.

You really aren’t keeping up.

There is bulletproof evidence now with him, Nauta and Document 19 on video AT HIS DESK with a witness. That’s all they need. That’s why you saw the venue switch from DC to FL. Jack Smith doesn’t have a single **** to give.

He is fvcked… pick a new nominee

My neighbor is constantly blowing debris from his yard into mine. My neighbor voted for Biden.

Suck on that.

None of the above is true but I'm trying to learn your love language.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David_Dennison
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT