Derschowitz: If Trump Was Impeached For Bribery, Extortion, Issue Would Be ‘Very Different’ | MSNBC

Trump team lawyer Alan Derschowitz discusses Sen. Lamar Alexander's statement about why he will not be supporting witnesses, but saying he believed that Democrats did prove Trump's 'quid pro quo' with MSNBC chief legal analyst Ari Melber. He says that what the House impeached the president for were not impeachable, and that 'the issue would be very, very different' if Trump was impeached for bribery or extortion, but they "didn't have the votes" to do so. Aired on 1/31/2020.
"» Subscribe to MSNBC:

MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, Meet the Press Daily, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace, Hardball, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and more.

Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com:
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter:
Find MSNBC on Facebook:
Follow MSNBC on Twitter:
Follow MSNBC on Instagram:

Derschowitz: If Trump Was Impeached For Bribery, Extortion, Issue Would Be ‘Very Different’ | MSNBC

44 comments

  1. Dershowitz is a f joke. An old dried up grape who want to be relevant when he is fading into history as a fart in the wind. . Im disgusted with the hobby pedophil.

  2. Lest we forget: Derschowitz has a lot to lose. Didn’t he attend the parties offered by the dead pedophile? Isn’t it self interest that he now twist the law to protect dt?

    1. @Mike Fernandez #DonTheCon Was Aslo Present During Many Of His Escapades, Regardless Of Whether Or Not His Name Was On The Manifest Of Those Flights To Epstein’s Perverted Getaway.

    1. Harvard U is there to breed more of the same. It’s only the very rich that can attend and of course nepotism, legacy enrolments and quid pro quo are the enrolment prerequisite.

    2. @Sux_2_B_U Point by point please elucidate the legal points that form your conclusion that dershowits is right. You are free to refer to legal precedents.

    1. @David Hale If you expect somebody to prove to you that your president is a zero morals ,con artist,wanna be dictator in process of altering democracy in this country,you are no wise than a second grader,because a third grader would have no problem seeing all these.

    2. Mag and you throwing insults in with your arguments makes you look worse. A child trying to make themselves look intelligent without making a intelligent argument. Insults to make you feel superior while making a point does nothing but cheapen and weaken that point.

    3. Box Jabber still with your nonsense I see. Well there’s nothing more for me to say to you. Your talking in circles.
      It’s redundant and pathetic. You’ll believe what you want regardless of how many times someone explains it to you.
      Just a puppet repeating the same nonsense over and over.

  3. But that’s *exactly* what he’s impeached for, dimwitt.

    That and for having obstructed the House Investigation at every turn of course.

    1. ​@Sux_2_B_U – I am sure that you do not know any smart people or any honest people. You also are ignorant and gullible. You believe all of the lies that the republitards tell you and they tell you TONS of lies.

    2. Douchowitz is as much of a moral coward as his client, and is completely intellectually dishonest as well (and a terrible interviewee, interrupting constantly, picking meaningless fights with the interviewer and other guests, talking over people… he acts more like an ambulance chaser who advertises on daytime TV than a former Harvard law professor). He even just instinctively lies when he doesn’t have any reason to, like the number of senators who came to chat with him after his now infamous defense argument; first it was 15, then a handful, then some, then a few, then a small group, it changes in every interview he gives!

      And an example of his intellectual dishonesty, in using the Lincoln example, there was no guarantee at all at which party the soldiers given voting furloughs would vote for, a pretty basic fact despite what he claimed, and Lincoln took all kinds of drastic measures, such as suspecting habeas corpus indefinitely, because he was more even than a war-time president, he was desperately trying to hold the union together in the face of an armed insurrection that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans! You can’t judge Trump’s self-serving actions against things Lincoln did, the whole idea is just another GOP figleaf, as are his constant assertions that he’s a Democrat, lol. What a putz, oy yoy yoy.

    1. Idylchatter – That is not a bad idea. I am going to go down to the county office a file as a candidate in the next election!! Then ANYTHING I do will be legal as long as I say that it is in the public interest!!! Traffic tickets are small time!! I can rob banks!! I can steal NEW cars right off the lot!! I can do ANYTHING!!!

      THE JUSTIFICATION IS RIGHT HERE!!!
      “and if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest that can not be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment”

      Alan Doucheowitz 29 January, 2020

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.