Professor Dershowitz on the (double) standards of impeachment:
1998: Dershowitz on the impeachment of Bill Clinton: “It certainly doesn’t have to be a crime if you have somebody who completely corrupts the Office of the President and who abuses trust and poses a great danger to our liberty, you don’t need a technical crime.
2020: Dershowitz on the first impeachment of Donald Trump: “And if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”
usatoday.com, Jan. 30, 2020
2023:
Appeals Court UPHOLDS Arizona’s Mail-In Voting Laws, Blasts Dershowitz argument on behalf of AZGOP/Kelli Ward
“Now, Donald. The effort is just to get him.”
Dershowitz View #1: ‘Strong evidence’ contained in Trump indictment [#1]
The BBC says an interview with lawyer Alan Dershowitz after the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell did not meet its editorial standards.
Maxwell was found guilty of recruiting and trafficking young girls to be sexually abused by late US financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Mr Dershowitz used to be a lawyer for Epstein and has himself been accused of sexual abuse by one of the accusers.
He denies the accusation. But the BBC said he was not “an impartial analyst”.
Alan Dershowitz posts 31-minute defence video after Epstein documents unsealed“the newly released documents contained allegations that Mr Dershowitz forced a minor girl, named in court documents as Jane Doe 3, to have sex with him on several occasions”
Former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz issued an explosive response maintaining his innocence after a tranche of documents relating to his former client Jeffrey Epstein raised allegations that he took part in the late paedophile’s sex trafficking ring.
The highly anticipated release of sealed documents in the now-settled litigation between Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell renewed debate about the ties that high-profile figures — including former US presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, and Prince Andrew — had with the disgraced financier and convicted paedophile.
Although some of those names had already been linked to Epstein through previously released legal filings and the account of survivors of Epstein’s abuse, the filings unveiled on Wednesday shed light on the extent of the rampant abuse that took place at his homes and his secluded private island in the Virgin Islands, Little St James.
At the centre of some of the most serious allegations was Epstein’s former attorney Mr Dershowitz, who had claimed earlier this week while appearing on NewsNation that he wanted every last document and “piece of paper” to be publicly released – asserting that it would prove that he “did nothing wrong”.
However, the newly released documents contained allegations that Mr Dershowitz forced a minor girl, named in court documents as Jane Doe 3, to have sex with him on several occasions. The filings by attorneys for Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, in which Mr Dershowitz is named a total of 137 times, also allege that he witnessed other girls being abused. Mr Dershowitz previously denied allegations in 2015 that he had sex with an underage girl.
Alan Dershowitz ordered to pay limited sanctions in Arizona election case
Ex-Trump lawyer says evidence in indictment is like ‘a gun with Trump’s fingerprints on it’
Former Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz says that he will not represent Trump in this case
Retired Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz said that the indictment against former president Donald Trump that led to his arraignment on Wednesday is the most serious case against him, comparing it to “a gun with Trump’s fingerprints on it.”
Mr Dershowitz made the comments on Charlie Kirk’s show on Tuesday. Mr Dershowitz served as Mr Trump’s attorney during the former president’s first impeachment trial and also defended other celebrity clients such as OJ Simpson and Mike Tyson.
Mr Kirk, the founder and chief executive of the conservative youth organisation Turning Point USA, asked if Mr Dershowitz still thought that the indictment that came down last week and alleged that Mr Trump mishandled classified documents related to national security was the most serious one against the former president.
“And he said, I could have declassified this, but I didn’t, so it’s still secret,” Mr Dershowitz said. “And it has to do with a battle attack plan for Iran.”
Mr Dershowitz did not call the charges in the indictment a “smoking gun.”
“But it’s surely a gun with Trump’s fingerprints on it,” he said. “And his lawyers will have to explain that away. They may argue, look, it was just puffery. He didn’t really show them anything. He just waved it in front of them.”
Mr Dershowitz said that it seemed like Mr Trump knew he had not declassified the documents. He added that he would not represent the former president since he had done so during his first impeachment trial.
At the same time, Mr Dershowitz told Mr Kirk that Mr Trump was clearly targeted.
“They never would have come up with this piece of evidence if they had treated him equally under the law,” he said. “Remember the special prosecutor wasn’t asked to look into everybody who may have mishandled classified material. He was tasked only with getting Trump.”
Former Trump lawyer Alan Dershowitz bashes indictments against ex-president: ‘Worst case I’ve seen in 60 years of law’
“Now, Donald. The effort is just to get him.”
New York’s is the worst case I’ve seen in 60 years of law. Nothing to it under the law or under the fact. As to Florida? Search hard enough you can find evidence against anybody. I’ve seen stuffed fish on a plaque which says, ‘I’d still be swimming if I’d only kept my mouth shut.’ That’s the problem.”
Dershowitz, ‘Stop the Steal’ Lawyer Team Up for New Dominion Lawsuit
In a complaint reviewed on Friday, eight poll challengers in Michigan allege that the cease and desist letters they received from Dominion harmed and damaged them.
Asawin Suebsaeng, Senior Political Reporter
Adam Rawnsley, Senior Researcher
Updated Oct. 01, 2021
A key “Stop the Steal” attorney who tried, on Donald Trump’s behalf, to convince former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to help execute a coup and overturn the 2020 election is helping a group of Michigan poll challengers sue voting machine company Dominion Voting Systems.
And according to newly filed court documents, that Trumpist attorney, Kurt Olsen, is teaming up with celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz, a longtime Democrat who served on former President Trump’s legal defense for the 2020 impeachment trial. Dershowitz said in a brief interview on Friday afternoon that though he is not the lead attorney on this new class-action lawsuit, he described himself as an “adviser and consultant on the First Amendment issues of this case.”
“I consider this a part of the bigger-picture efforts, that includes my consulting on Mike Lindell and MyPillow’s cases,” he added. “I believe the election was absolutely fair, I believe President Biden is the legitimately elected president. But I think the issue should be debated and should not be censored. I believe Dominion is trying to suppress free speech.”
[Boldface added].
Even Dershowitz Took a Pass on Trump’s Big Tech Suit:
The suit has been called a fundraising “stunt” by many legal scholars and appears to have very little chance of success.
By Adam Rawnsley and Asawin Suebsaeng
July 23, 23, 2021
[Excerpts:]
Dershowitz has pitched in to advise a host of Trumpworld figures over the past few years in the course of their legal troubles. He’s supported Trump with constitutional arguments against impeachment and the Special Counsel’s Russia investigation, signed on to advise MAGA pillow magnate Mike Lindell and his lawyers in his fight against Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation lawsuits, and offered advice to Rudy Giuliani and his attorneys in the criminal investigation into possible unregistered foreign lobbying.
At the heart of Trump’s class-action suit against social media tech giants is the argument that the companies’ legal status “rises beyond that of a private company to that of a state actor,” according to complaints filed in the case, because of civil liability granted by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and pressure from congressional Democrats to remove right-wing election and COVID-19 misinformation.
Dec. 6, 2020, Dershowitz embraces the “Big Lie”: Lawyer and legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said there “certainly is probable cause” to investigate claims of voter fraud during the 2020 presidential election.
“There certainly is probable cause for investigating and looking further. Giuliani has made very serious accusations. The question is, which institution is designed, constitutionally, to look into it,” Dershowitz responded. “Is it the state legislature? Is it the courts? Is the clock running in such a way that there won’t be time to look into this? “He added that a panel should be created to look into any complaint about an election and fraud going forward.” washingtonexaminer.com, Dec. 6, 2020
Feb. 12, 2021, Dershowitz flips: “The election was not stolen”. Washington Journal, c-span.org
BREAKING: Appeals Court UPHOLDS Arizona’s Mail-In Voting Laws, Blasts AZGOP/Kelli Ward Arguments (READ Decision)
AZ Law
Arizona’s mail-in voting system is not unconstitutional, the Court of Appeals ruled today, blasting a lawsuit filed last year by the Arizona Republican Party and Chairwoman Kelli Ward. The unanimous decision upholds the previous dismissal of the case.
New legislator Alexander Kolodin had filed the case for the AZGOP, along with nationally-known law professor Alan Dershowitz. They were claiming that mail-in ballots violated the Arizona Constitution’s Secrecy Clause. Today’s decision notes that Kolodin tried to back off of their original position during both briefing and oral arguments, suggesting now that the Secrecy Clause requires a “secure restricted zone around a voter who fills in a mail-in ballot.”The 11-page decision then blasts through three arguments made by Kolodin and Dershowitz*: (1) a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a Tennessee law allowing a 100-foot no electioneering zone outside polling places (“That holding does not suggest – let alone direct – how we interpret the Arizona Constitution’s Secrecy Clause…. (I)ts suggestions are dicta and unpersuasive in this case.”); (2) the AZ law prohibiting so-called ballot selfies taken at polling places but not in voters’ homes; and (3) a previous AZ Supreme Court observation that mail-in ballots cannot be possessed by anyone other than the intended voter.
The Mohave County Superior Court judge dismissing the case was Lee Jantzen, and the unanimous decision was authored by Judge Cynthia Bailey.
Although Kolodin’s new status as a lawmaker would not prevent the law firm from appealing the case to the Arizona Supreme Court, the January 28 election of a new AZGOP Chair might.
*The Court lists Dershowitz as “pro hac vice counsel”, meaning that he is co-counsel approved to represent the plaintiffs/appellants in this case, but is not regularly admitted to practice in Arizona courts. In a companion case challenging another part of Arizona’s elections, filed in federal court, Dershowitz is currently making the claim that he should not be sanctioned because he was *only* “of counsel” and/or a legal consultant.
“The ballot is the only safety.”