Alan Dershowitz Takes On Thought Crimes And A Potentially Serious Constitutional Conflict [Video]

[VIDEO]  Alan Dershowitz was appearing on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” and the discussions were about the Russian collusion investigation and how it was morphing into an obstruction of justice issue. It is now obvious that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has developed no evidence to support a collusion case. Collusion, by the way, is not a crime. The case is now becoming a hunt for some sort of obstruction of justice. Can the President do that when only doing his job? Listen to the answers.


As Written and Reported By Frank Camp for the Daily Wire:

Appearing on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” renowned legal scholar Alan Dershowitz called into question the collusion investigation into President Trump.

take our poll - story continues below

Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?

  • Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Great American Republic updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: GA Democrat for Governor Stacey Abrams Attempts Election No-No

Referencing remarks made by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), co-host Pete Hegseth asked if an obstruction case is being built against the president, and that if such a case is being built, would it be “credible.”

Dershowitz replied:

I think the answer is yes, and no. I think that the special counsel is trying to build an obstruction case – that’s why he’s interviewing people who are witnesses to the alleged obstruction. But there’s no credible case because under the Constitution, a president cannot be charged for merely exercising his constitutional authority under Article II.

What Senator Blumenthal referred to is cases where a president destroys evidence – there’s no evidence of that. That’s what president Nixon did. Nixon was charged with obstruction of justice for ordering his underlings to lie to the FBI, paying hush money, and destroying evidence. President Clinton was charged with obstruction for allegedly lying to the grand jury [and] at a deposition. But if the president simply exercised his constitutional authority, namely firing an underling – which he’s entitled to do; telling the FBI not to investigate a particular person – which he is entitled to do; pardoning people – which he hasn’t done yet; thinking about maybe whether [we] should fire the special counsel – that’s not obstruction of justice under the Constitution………

THERE IS WAY MORE HERE KEEP READING:

Alan Dershowitz: ‘Creating Thought Crimes Out Of A President’s Motives Would Create A Serious Constitutional Conflict’ | Daily Wire

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.