Dershowitz is hopping mad
I wouldn’t want to tussle with an angry, fired-up Dershowitz. The MSNBC guys in this video (don’t know their names) try to counter with their talking points, but to no avail.
Of course, this interview occurred before NBC had to eat crow and take back the story that Cohen was wiretapped, so the whole “if they’re wiretapping him there must have been a really serious offense!” argument on the left is now moot. But Dershowitz’s anger isn’t moot; he’s absolutely correct about the wrongness of finding an available crime in order to “get” the target, rather than the other way around. It’s especially bad when the target is the president of the US and you are his political enemy:
I love the irony of the reference to Tom Winter at the end there, called in to “clear this up.” Winter is the guy who broke the story and then had to walk it back.
Neo, did you embed the wrong video?
(No need to preserve this query. ;>) )
Julie near Chicago:
I’m not sure what you mean.
Dershowitz was reacting prior to the news that there was no wiretap, as I said in the post, but his point is applicable to the entire special prosecutor investigation—-which, like so many of these things, is designed to “get” someone rather than to investigate a crime with probable cause. Dershowitz is generally against special prosecutors, unless the basis for appointing one is very strong. The danger of their investigations turning into politically motivated witch hunts is too great. I agree with Dershowitz.
Show me the man, I’ll show you the crime. – Beria
I can’t find Che’s quote, but it was of the point “execute him today, we can have the trial tomorrow”.
I have always considered Dershowitz to have a high degree of integrity. I enjoy seeing him tear into the talking heads. He is a lone voice from the left standing up for principles that every concerned citizen should believe in.
Media: We must oppose Trump in every possible way.
Trump: The media is an opposition party.
Media: HOW DARE YOU
Neo, did you catch Dresh on howie this pm. They talked about judge Elis & the court proceedings & judges remark. No one in America should have unfettered power. Also dersh will write a piece in response to Nancy Gardner (?) Who did a opinion piece in NYT, *how dare people criticize Mueller ?
I saw Caputo’s lament about what they have done to him with even less justification.
I sent some money to his GoFundMe thing,
I have been listening for the second time to Buchanan’s book, :Nixon’s White House Wars.” The similarities are interesting.
The woman is Judge Nancy Gertner dersh calls her a fair weather civil libertarian, she is anti trump so now anti civil rights.
@Mike, TX for the reminder on a go fund me for caputo, if they gave for millionaire Mc Cabe time for Trump people to do likewise for this guy
Neo, I was talking about the video on the home page (this is the comments page). Emily Litella “Nevermind” is there in the Dersh posting. I had thought it was here as well, but as of now it’s definitely Dersh — but still Emily on the home page.
Julie
https://libertyunyielding.com/2018/05/04/reminder-the-mueller-investigation-is-neither-due-process-nor-the-rule-of-law/
“Russiagate has no crime at its core. It wasn’t a crime for Donald Trump to win the 2016 election.
That makes the Mueller probe, at most, a fishing expedition for “intelligence” that might support an alternative theory about the electoral outcome — an alternative, that is, to the blindingly obvious theory that Trump won because he gained enough political support in the requisite states to achieve a victory in the electoral college.
The “collusion” theory assumes, without justification, that it would have required “Russian interference” and Trump’s collusion in it to bring about a Trump victory. If it doesn’t make that assumption, then what is all this even about?
…
A straight counterintelligence probe of Russian activity could have been undertaken by the federal agencies without putting a single Trump campaign official under oath. If something came of that, something implicating a Trump official, appropriate action would then be indicated, and something tangible — like an indictment on a crime related to “interference in the 2016 election” — would actually happen.
The hybrid “investigation” we have gotten instead, which quite clearly aims to put as many Trump associates under oath as possible, may be “interesting.” But it is not a rule-of-law use of the power of prosecution. It is not due process.
Rather, it is a case of slapping a prosecutorial badge on an evidence-free, tendentiously-premised theory based in political disgruntlement.
A true intelligence probe would know when to cut its losses for lack of yield. In any case, it could function like a vendetta for years without harming the innocent through legal harassment, because it wouldn’t have prosecutorial power.
A true law-and-order probe, mindful of judges and appeals courts, would manufacture process crimes solely in pursuit of actual underlying crimes (e.g., to leverage cooperation that could prove crimes and convict perpetrators).
Mueller’s probe is neither. That’s why it is so profoundly dangerous and wrong. It’s the power of the state, being wielded without the most basic constraints and restraints of the rule of law.
It cannot stand. This model of weaponized state power must not remain a possibility in our future. The only positive outcome will be if the Mueller probe — the whole process surrounding it — becomes the torpedo that hits its own launch platform. We may at least hope for that.”
It’s older than that:
(Yeap, the very same Richelieu that Alexandre Dumas used as antagonist in D’Artagnan and the Three Musketeers two centuries later)
Jean De Arc got the same from the Vatican Clerics.
All the clerics that pronounced her guilty and also innocent, were English. No French clerics were allowed. The war she was part of was a claim war over whether the King of England would be the King of France.
A perfect example of corrupt humans using an even more corrupt religious control scheme for power and greed and fame. That never gets old nor does it ever change.
Professor Eugene Volokh has pointed out that all those thousands of Federal felonies constitute a de facto bill of attainder.
The Left to the Right: You’re full of hatred and bigotry and superstition.
How does the The Left handle Trump? With hatred and bigotry and fear.
Ymar Sakar Says:
May 5th, 2018 at 10:26 am
Jean De Arc got the same from the Vatican Clerics.
* * *
I made a study of the Maid of Orléans some years ago, and discovered that one of the reasons we have the relatively copious records of her trials, and some small modicum of due process, is that the clerk recording the testimony refused to change the records or suppress them (or acts to that effect; it’s been decades since I did the research).
Just thought I would bring that up because of the Judge Ellis connection today.
The Inquisition ended up burning a lot of their trials and persecution records. The Vatican recently said that most of their sealed records on this stuff, when they opened the vaults, were gone. It’s kind of embarrassing for them since a lot of their victims were Christians. Kind of hard to push the Vatican as the Universal Catholic Church based upon the authority of the “Vicar of Christ” that mediates between the Messiah and humanity, with that looming over people’s head. It’s even more embarassing than the USA deals with nazis in Operation Paperclip or with Japanese bio warfare scientists.
Jean De Arc also had many French loyalists and clerics that redid the trial. That would have duplicated much of the records too in the process. And it would have been duplicated outside the hands of the Dominican faction of Vatican torturers.
“That would have duplicated much of the records too in the process. And it would have been duplicated outside the hands of the Dominican faction of Vatican torturers.”
Just like emails are forever …
Well, it will work until all metal technology vaporizes in the Eternal Flames of the End, at least.
Nobody knows what I am talking about of course.
Heavens rolled up like a scroll??