I suppose that the next "Narrative" for "corporate" media (and the women of The View) will have to chew on will be the "not all" Immunity: whether it's an "Official Act" as President or was it a "Personal Act? Once again, unashamed ignorance will be on display.
I appreciate Attorney Dershowitz because he is a steward of the law and his political affiliation comes second to that stewardship.
Since President Trump's First Impeachment trial, we all saw the heat that Attorney Dershowitz had to endure from the Radical Left Pontiffs, Democrats as well as Mainstream Media. But he would not be intimidated.
Truth does not require explanation. Truth is its own Shield🛡️ and Buckler and Attorney Dershowitz wore his Truth for all to see.
Dersh, you are 100% correct. I think however, if Biden drops out, no matter who Democrats put forward will be a loser. It'll all look like an act of complete desperation, a gong show. If Biden stays, he will lose. Between a rock and a hard place for your party.
Unfortunately Dems were so desperate that they allowed trash like AOC and Bowman and Tlaib to take prominent place in the party and now they are screwed if Biden drops out. And the whole country is too.
Democrats were digging a hole for Trump by making their VP choice 4 years ago but fell into it themselves. They now “can’t leapfrog over women of color” no matter that she’s an imbecile. Identity politics are going to bite them in the ass. I can’t believe the desperate choices! Betting on an old man showing signs of dementia even then and an empty bag, no substance broad. What a picture! In a vibrant nation of 250 million!
FINALLY, Alan Dershowitz podcasts about something he has first-hand knowledge of: getting immunity for strongly suspected serial felony activity. Dershowitz, like Trump, had a lot of help and needed it. When the Epstein case exploded into the headlines of the Miami Herald, Dershowitz was revealed by allegations to be dick and finger-deep in serial sexual rape/interstate trafficking of statutorily protected children. He was apparently according to an accusation sampling the goods, like drug dealers sometimes do, often to their detriment. That particular allegation claimed Epstein teased Dershowitz into disrobing and having some kind of statutorily illegal physical contact So how was he going to avoid criminal indictment when the Miami Herald and other mainstream media plastered the name "Dershowitz" all over their printed and televised editions? Although the accusations were based in a number of interstate areas, Florida was first to begin a police investigation. The Palm Beach Police Department started, investigating inter alia four particular co-conspirators and others, including Dershowitz as Epstein's BFF, his personal attorney for decades and his intellectuäl trophy for display at Epstein's meetings with megarich zionists as well as the sexually deviant guys Epstein wanted control of or information from . The Police Chief dug up lots of dirt.
Then the FBI took over the investigation. The internet has a video of the Palm Beach Police Chief's objections to the takeover, obviously fearing political influence on the post-Ruby Ridge and Waco FBI. And that fear was realized. US district attorney Alex Acosta complained that Dershowitz and others put him under an enormous strain of pressure. This was likely the same kind of pressure Mossad put on Fatou Bensouda and her husband to prevent an ICC war crimes prosecution.. Acosta claimed additionally that he was told to "lay off" because the Epstein project of providing underage children for sexual penetrations with varying objects was actually an intelligence and influence gathering operation run by an intelligence organization.. The result was that Alan Dershowitz, the pillar of Harvard Law School, mandarin of Marthas Vineyard and America-wide TV celebrity, the Woody Allen of the legal community, was granted FULL IMMUNITY FOR ANY AND ALL ACTIVITIES CONNECTED TO EPSTEIN'S CHILD SEX PROJECT. There was of course still civil liability, but Dershowitz avoided that too, first with a long PR media campaign ( he claimed the children were "prostitutes"), then a flurry of intrusive bargaining chip designed defamation lawsuits against the child accusers AND their attorneys and finally when none of those worked against the last accuser, Dershowitz arranged a huge hush money payoff (lawyers interested in this arrangement can read a feature article in New Yorker magazine, as I recall, issue for July 29, 2019). The result is that not a single one of the child sex allegations against Dershowitz has been tested in either criminal or civil court.. The immunity grant stopped the FBI investigation in its tracks. Most of the children were never interviewed. Senator John Kennedy asked FBI director Wray three weeks ago in a Senate hearing if the FBI investigation connected to Epstein was "ongoing". Wray refused to answer.
Alan seems to say that there's a clear point between "targeted assassination of a foreign terrorist" and "murdering your political opposition" where it becomes legally obvious that the President has crossed the threshold into unprotected acts. I'm not so sure.
The President can murder a foreign terrorist overseas. The President can murder an overseas US citizen who has been designated as a foreign terrorist (Obama did). The President has the authority to protect America from invasion or insurrection, to protect our system of government from being overthrown. He has the authority to designate people and groups as terrorists and to wage armed conflict against enemies of the United States. If Joe Biden decides that Donald Trump is an enemy of the United States and a terroristic threat and on that basis chooses to send a Hellfire Missile after him while he's playing golf in Scotland? Could he be prosecuted for it? I'm honestly not sure.
Note, I'm not saying he wouldn't face political consequences. He would certainly be impeached. But could he be prosecuted? Once you make it possible for the President to designate American citizens as foreign adversaries and assassinate them overseas, the bright line that Alan sees between public and private acts starts to get blurry. To paraphrase the old adage: "one man's political candidate is another man's terrorist." A theory the Democrats seem to be determined to test by calling Trump a "threat to democracy" and a "dictator in waiting".
Should not motive be considered when distinguishing between official and private acts, given that President is instructed in Article II to “Take Care that the Laws are faithfully executed.” In the period of Time between Election Day and Certification Day, he made contacts with the States and had contingent electors made ready because of the controversies in 7 States. So what was he doing? Was this a selfish act like it was for candidate JFK, or following the historical precedents of President Grant in 1876? And why was neither the candidate, who was elected, nor sitting President Grant prosecuted for this action?
Are you alarmed that virtually all democrat lawyers, are condemning the USSC even though they know that the President cannot be criminally charged for exercising his Constitutional or Statutory power and discretion. Frankly, the most vocal are leftist Jewish lawyers.
I suppose that the next "Narrative" for "corporate" media (and the women of The View) will have to chew on will be the "not all" Immunity: whether it's an "Official Act" as President or was it a "Personal Act? Once again, unashamed ignorance will be on display.
I appreciate Attorney Dershowitz because he is a steward of the law and his political affiliation comes second to that stewardship.
Since President Trump's First Impeachment trial, we all saw the heat that Attorney Dershowitz had to endure from the Radical Left Pontiffs, Democrats as well as Mainstream Media. But he would not be intimidated.
Truth does not require explanation. Truth is its own Shield🛡️ and Buckler and Attorney Dershowitz wore his Truth for all to see.
Dersh, you are 100% correct. I think however, if Biden drops out, no matter who Democrats put forward will be a loser. It'll all look like an act of complete desperation, a gong show. If Biden stays, he will lose. Between a rock and a hard place for your party.
Unfortunately Dems were so desperate that they allowed trash like AOC and Bowman and Tlaib to take prominent place in the party and now they are screwed if Biden drops out. And the whole country is too.
Democrats were digging a hole for Trump by making their VP choice 4 years ago but fell into it themselves. They now “can’t leapfrog over women of color” no matter that she’s an imbecile. Identity politics are going to bite them in the ass. I can’t believe the desperate choices! Betting on an old man showing signs of dementia even then and an empty bag, no substance broad. What a picture! In a vibrant nation of 250 million!
FINALLY, Alan Dershowitz podcasts about something he has first-hand knowledge of: getting immunity for strongly suspected serial felony activity. Dershowitz, like Trump, had a lot of help and needed it. When the Epstein case exploded into the headlines of the Miami Herald, Dershowitz was revealed by allegations to be dick and finger-deep in serial sexual rape/interstate trafficking of statutorily protected children. He was apparently according to an accusation sampling the goods, like drug dealers sometimes do, often to their detriment. That particular allegation claimed Epstein teased Dershowitz into disrobing and having some kind of statutorily illegal physical contact So how was he going to avoid criminal indictment when the Miami Herald and other mainstream media plastered the name "Dershowitz" all over their printed and televised editions? Although the accusations were based in a number of interstate areas, Florida was first to begin a police investigation. The Palm Beach Police Department started, investigating inter alia four particular co-conspirators and others, including Dershowitz as Epstein's BFF, his personal attorney for decades and his intellectuäl trophy for display at Epstein's meetings with megarich zionists as well as the sexually deviant guys Epstein wanted control of or information from . The Police Chief dug up lots of dirt.
Then the FBI took over the investigation. The internet has a video of the Palm Beach Police Chief's objections to the takeover, obviously fearing political influence on the post-Ruby Ridge and Waco FBI. And that fear was realized. US district attorney Alex Acosta complained that Dershowitz and others put him under an enormous strain of pressure. This was likely the same kind of pressure Mossad put on Fatou Bensouda and her husband to prevent an ICC war crimes prosecution.. Acosta claimed additionally that he was told to "lay off" because the Epstein project of providing underage children for sexual penetrations with varying objects was actually an intelligence and influence gathering operation run by an intelligence organization.. The result was that Alan Dershowitz, the pillar of Harvard Law School, mandarin of Marthas Vineyard and America-wide TV celebrity, the Woody Allen of the legal community, was granted FULL IMMUNITY FOR ANY AND ALL ACTIVITIES CONNECTED TO EPSTEIN'S CHILD SEX PROJECT. There was of course still civil liability, but Dershowitz avoided that too, first with a long PR media campaign ( he claimed the children were "prostitutes"), then a flurry of intrusive bargaining chip designed defamation lawsuits against the child accusers AND their attorneys and finally when none of those worked against the last accuser, Dershowitz arranged a huge hush money payoff (lawyers interested in this arrangement can read a feature article in New Yorker magazine, as I recall, issue for July 29, 2019). The result is that not a single one of the child sex allegations against Dershowitz has been tested in either criminal or civil court.. The immunity grant stopped the FBI investigation in its tracks. Most of the children were never interviewed. Senator John Kennedy asked FBI director Wray three weeks ago in a Senate hearing if the FBI investigation connected to Epstein was "ongoing". Wray refused to answer.
Alan seems to say that there's a clear point between "targeted assassination of a foreign terrorist" and "murdering your political opposition" where it becomes legally obvious that the President has crossed the threshold into unprotected acts. I'm not so sure.
The President can murder a foreign terrorist overseas. The President can murder an overseas US citizen who has been designated as a foreign terrorist (Obama did). The President has the authority to protect America from invasion or insurrection, to protect our system of government from being overthrown. He has the authority to designate people and groups as terrorists and to wage armed conflict against enemies of the United States. If Joe Biden decides that Donald Trump is an enemy of the United States and a terroristic threat and on that basis chooses to send a Hellfire Missile after him while he's playing golf in Scotland? Could he be prosecuted for it? I'm honestly not sure.
Note, I'm not saying he wouldn't face political consequences. He would certainly be impeached. But could he be prosecuted? Once you make it possible for the President to designate American citizens as foreign adversaries and assassinate them overseas, the bright line that Alan sees between public and private acts starts to get blurry. To paraphrase the old adage: "one man's political candidate is another man's terrorist." A theory the Democrats seem to be determined to test by calling Trump a "threat to democracy" and a "dictator in waiting".
I thoroughly enjoy the honesty and brilliant insights of the Dersh show. Wishing you health to 120.
AOC has no idea of Law
Should not motive be considered when distinguishing between official and private acts, given that President is instructed in Article II to “Take Care that the Laws are faithfully executed.” In the period of Time between Election Day and Certification Day, he made contacts with the States and had contingent electors made ready because of the controversies in 7 States. So what was he doing? Was this a selfish act like it was for candidate JFK, or following the historical precedents of President Grant in 1876? And why was neither the candidate, who was elected, nor sitting President Grant prosecuted for this action?
Are you alarmed that virtually all democrat lawyers, are condemning the USSC even though they know that the President cannot be criminally charged for exercising his Constitutional or Statutory power and discretion. Frankly, the most vocal are leftist Jewish lawyers.
Send in Seal Team 6!