Are you smarter than Alan Dershowitz?

[Jitss617]

Yea...


And OJ didn’t do it

Hes a democrat lol

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

So if I produce a Harvard or Yale lawyer that says differently, what does that do to your OP?

For example...

Donald Trump's "Civil War" quote tweet is actually grounds for impeachment, says Harvard Law profressor

Schools produce both the wise and the ignorant. Your link defines the latter, since the "professor" made a false statement, then proceeded to conjure a legal excuse - itself nonsense - to condemn the person to which he attributed the false statement.

 

[Auld Phart]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

So if I produce a Harvard or Yale lawyer that says differently, what does that do to your OP?

For example...

Donald Trump's "Civil War" quote tweet is actually grounds for impeachment, says Harvard Law profressor

you take a link that spells professor 'profressor' seriously?

 

[CowboyTed]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

He wasn't a Clinton supporter.. He just thought Trump was a scum bag...

I respect his opinion... But this is not a legal matter but a political process... You could not break the law and get impeached, you loose your job...

Example: A secret security agent has an affair with Melina Trump. He has not broke the law but do you think he is keeping his job?

 

[shockedcanadian]

I don't think it's about the constitution, it's about the global socialists. I'm starting to think, with the Supreme Court most likely in play in 2020, they would have tried to impeach any successful GOP President.

A win by Trump nullifies the political influence of billions of dollars by many global billionaires and strengthens the U.S Republic. They need a patsy in there desperately.

An impeachment all but assures the Dems win in 2020 as so many GOP supporters will be disenfranchised and angry. You might as well call yourself the United Nations of America then, as that is who you will be answering too (lead by China of course).

This would have been hyperbole if not for the protests, screaming celebrities and efforts to destroy Kavanaugh. It's clear the global socialists have a dire plan, Trump is the sole defender of capitalism and U.S liberty. Another win and it knocks the socialists back quite a bit. Especially as other nations assert their sovereignty as well.

 

[Muhammed]

Absolutely.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

Alan Dershowitz is 81 years old and senile. At this stage, anyone is more of a constitutional expert than Dershowitz.

But he was an expert and the smartest man in the world when he agreed with your politics. Show proof he is senile. You have none!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

So if I produce a Harvard or Yale lawyer that says differently, what does that do to your OP?

For example...

Donald Trump's "Civil War" quote tweet is actually grounds for impeachment, says Harvard Law profressor

Is that professor a Republican and a Trump supporter? Dershowitz is a Democrat and Clinton supporter. Plus Dershowitz is renowned. It would be like me saying, Michael Jordan believes you need to follow a certain regimen of diet and skills training to be a great hoops player. And you respond with, what if I quote Harrison Barnes and he disagrees. Barnes is an NBA player too and played for UNC. Most would agree that Jordan's opinion carries more weight. Stop being obtuse.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

He wasn't a Clinton supporter.. He just thought Trump was a scum bag...

I respect his opinion... But this is not a legal matter but a political process... You could not break the law and get impeached, you loose your job...

Example: A secret security agent has an affair with Melina Trump. He has not broke the law but do you think he is keeping his job?

He literally said he was a Clinton supporter. Never said that Trump was a scum bag. If you're going to troll GTFO out of my thread. Loser.

 

[rightwinger]

The Democrats have nothing beyond media to help them concoct their stories.

What exactly is concocted?

They are using Trumps own words

 

[rightwinger]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

So if I produce a Harvard or Yale lawyer that says differently, what does that do to your OP?

For example...

Donald Trump's "Civil War" quote tweet is actually grounds for impeachment, says Harvard Law profressor

Is that professor a Republican and a Trump supporter? Dershowitz is a Democrat and Clinton supporter. Plus Dershowitz is renowned. It would be like me saying, Michael Jordan believes you need to follow a certain regimen of diet and skills training to be a great hoops player. And you respond with, what if I quote Harrison Barnes and he disagrees. Barnes is an NBA player too and played for UNC. Most would agree that Jordan's opinion carries more weight. Stop being obtuse.

He was renowned until OJ

Then he lost his credibility

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Yea...


And OJ didn’t do it

You made my point you dumb Leftist. OJ did do it and Dershowitz and the team were great attorneys and made sure the jury found him not guilty.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Alan Dershowitz, a recognized expert on the constitution, Harvard professor, Democrat and a Clinton supporter states there is not enough to impeach.

So the people on this board regardless of party, who are for impeachment, explain how you’re more of an expert than he is on this topic.

Thank you.

So if I produce a Harvard or Yale lawyer that says differently, what does that do to your OP?

For example...

Donald Trump's "Civil War" quote tweet is actually grounds for impeachment, says Harvard Law profressor

Is that professor a Republican and a Trump supporter? Dershowitz is a Democrat and Clinton supporter. Plus Dershowitz is renowned. It would be like me saying, Michael Jordan believes you need to follow a certain regimen of diet and skills training to be a great hoops player. And you respond with, what if I quote Harrison Barnes and he disagrees. Barnes is an NBA player too and played for UNC. Most would agree that Jordan's opinion carries more weight. Stop being obtuse.

He was renowned until OJ

Then he lost his credibility

No, dumbass. He gained credibility because he defended the system and convinced the jury there was reasonable doubt. Attorneys don't defend people they defend the system. Sometimes the job sucks.

You Democrats turn on your own so quickly when they dare disagree with your dogma, you loser, are case in point. Now give me another smiley. That is all you're good for.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The democrats and the MSM always abide by that old country lawyer trope, "say something 3x and someone believes it". So the propaganda arm of the democrat party, aka the MSM keeps blaring the false charges against Trump hoping that someone else would believe it. Then their fake pollsters put up more disinformation.
Dershowitz would be on my list of witnesses for the Trump defense, calling the impeachment articles bullshit.
No GOP senator would dare vote to remove Trump, or they are gone in the next primary.

The charges are NOT false, and Trump has already admitted he did this. His claim is that there was nothing wrong in his request.

But keep repeating the Troll Farm talking points. We've noted that the Kremlin and the White House are both working off the same set of talking points in their media on the impeachment. Amazing how that happens so often. Putin says something and then Trump repeats it.

So you claim to be smarter than Dershowitz when it comes to the law. What are your credentials?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The Democrats have nothing beyond media to help them concoct their stories.

What exactly is concocted?

They are using Trumps own words

No they are interpreting Trumps words to fit their false narrative.

Trump: I like the color red.

Democrats: Trump is a communist as red is their color.

Democrats are idiots. You're case in point.

 

[rightwinger]

Yea...


And OJ didn’t do it

You made my point you dumb Leftist. OJ did do it and Dershowitz and the team were great attorneys and made sure the jury found him not guilty.

Dershowitz delivered for those who pay him

Now, conservatives pay him

 

[debbiedowner]

Text of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The 'Travis Translation' of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, the Vice President, and other officers of the United States, can be kicked out of office (impeached) if they are found guilty of double-crossing (betraying) the country, offering people money or getting money to do something dishonest, or other really big crimes.

Article II Section 4 - Impeachment

 

[Auld Phart]

Text of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The 'Travis Translation' of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, the Vice President, and other officers of the United States, can be kicked out of office (impeached) if they are found guilty of double-crossing (betraying) the country, offering people money or getting money to do something dishonest, or other really big crimes.

Article II Section 4 - Impeachment

WTF is Travis?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Yea...


And OJ didn’t do it

You made my point you dumb Leftist. OJ did do it and Dershowitz and the team were great attorneys and made sure the jury found him not guilty.

Dershowitz delivered for those who pay him

Now, conservatives pay him

Who is paying him? What are you talking about. He has said on numerous occasions that if this were Clinton he would say the same thing. He defends the constitution not the people. Your U of Buffalo education was a waste of time.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Text of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The 'Travis Translation' of Article 2, Section 4:
The President, the Vice President, and other officers of the United States, can be kicked out of office (impeached) if they are found guilty of double-crossing (betraying) the country, offering people money or getting money to do something dishonest, or other really big crimes.

Article II Section 4 - Impeachment

So you're more on expert on this than the person who teaches constitutional law and has written numerous books on the subject matter? What are your credentials?