This Administration is attacking anyone who stands with Trump. When you switch party or agree with him you are targeted. That alone shows me they are capable of deceit. In those books on your shelf, somewhere must be a line that calls this a criminal act and a reason to remove them from running this Country.
Professor, millions of us don't consider Trump's attempt to challenge the election was wrong-headed. Any alleged crime of his pales in comparison with the crimes committed by his accusers. Can you not ever say Merrick Garland's activity is wrong-headed, at the very least? Or give a descriptive adjective to the names of the rogue prosecutors who are actually wrecking the possibility of an honest 2024 election?
I don’t consider that President Trump was trying to overturn the election. My perception of him between November 2020 and January 2021 (before Jan6) was that he was advocating for himself and his voters in the belief that he had won. Anything less would be less than sufficient, and less than expected.
Re: Jan6, he did manage to prepare the Capitol for the assault, and informed the Speaker. At 3:30, he told the crowd to leave. Time to finish the transition and pack.
Overthrowing an election is a violent act. Advocacy for oneself and others is not.
Much depends on the legal standard used. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't work as well as "show me the man and I'll find you the crime" for putting down the opposing political party.
It's hard to draw any other conclusion, especially after the contorted NY indictments.
Isn't the bar association part of the problem? I don't recall seeing any bar association protest the earlier targeting of attorneys (via the Lincoln Project and others) or the charging of the attorneys here. They let all this happen because they are captured, plain and simple. God forbid that freedom-loving, Constitutional-believing people should have access to competent legal representation nowadays.
They are captured by the 66 Project, a group formed to refer attorneys who represent President Trump to the Bar (the crime) for loss of license. Explains his small, but sharp, legal staff.
I saw a video of in court proceedings where the defense lawyer was trying to get the state prosecutor (GA in this case) to cough up exculpatory evidence. I do not understand how this is allowed to go on. I have read this is also the case for J6er's who languish in prison 2 years now for some. Is there something about the law that allows some evidence to be held back from defense or am I misunderstanding what is happening?
I know this is tangential, but I have tried to understand this on my own and cannot sort it. If you would consider covering this sort of thing - even in a general way - I would appreciate it.
I can't decide whether our legal system is an out of hand wildfire or this is just a small brush fire.
This Administration is attacking anyone who stands with Trump. When you switch party or agree with him you are targeted. That alone shows me they are capable of deceit. In those books on your shelf, somewhere must be a line that calls this a criminal act and a reason to remove them from running this Country.
Professor, millions of us don't consider Trump's attempt to challenge the election was wrong-headed. Any alleged crime of his pales in comparison with the crimes committed by his accusers. Can you not ever say Merrick Garland's activity is wrong-headed, at the very least? Or give a descriptive adjective to the names of the rogue prosecutors who are actually wrecking the possibility of an honest 2024 election?
I don’t consider that President Trump was trying to overturn the election. My perception of him between November 2020 and January 2021 (before Jan6) was that he was advocating for himself and his voters in the belief that he had won. Anything less would be less than sufficient, and less than expected.
Re: Jan6, he did manage to prepare the Capitol for the assault, and informed the Speaker. At 3:30, he told the crowd to leave. Time to finish the transition and pack.
Overthrowing an election is a violent act. Advocacy for oneself and others is not.
Much depends on the legal standard used. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't work as well as "show me the man and I'll find you the crime" for putting down the opposing political party.
It's hard to draw any other conclusion, especially after the contorted NY indictments.
How many bananas now!?
Isn't the bar association part of the problem? I don't recall seeing any bar association protest the earlier targeting of attorneys (via the Lincoln Project and others) or the charging of the attorneys here. They let all this happen because they are captured, plain and simple. God forbid that freedom-loving, Constitutional-believing people should have access to competent legal representation nowadays.
They are captured by the 66 Project, a group formed to refer attorneys who represent President Trump to the Bar (the crime) for loss of license. Explains his small, but sharp, legal staff.
I agree.
You need to watch Dinesh D'Souzaʻs film 2000 Mules.
I saw a video of in court proceedings where the defense lawyer was trying to get the state prosecutor (GA in this case) to cough up exculpatory evidence. I do not understand how this is allowed to go on. I have read this is also the case for J6er's who languish in prison 2 years now for some. Is there something about the law that allows some evidence to be held back from defense or am I misunderstanding what is happening?
I know this is tangential, but I have tried to understand this on my own and cannot sort it. If you would consider covering this sort of thing - even in a general way - I would appreciate it.
I can't decide whether our legal system is an out of hand wildfire or this is just a small brush fire.
Thank you, Professor Dershowitz. You have taught me so much.