Dershowitz: A Trump Indictment Would Be Blatant Election Interference

US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with members of the National Association of Police Leaders in the White House Cabinet Office in Washington, DC, July 31, 2020. (Photo credit: Anna Moneymaker-Pool/Getty Images)

Daniel Baldwin of OAN
2:35 PM – Thursday, June 8, 2023

Alan Dershowitz, an attorney and Harvard University professor, told One America News that the indictment of former President Donald Trump was clear election interference.


“What we are seeing is extraordinary justice for Donald Trump, an attempt to get Trump, take the vote away from voters, and leave it in the hands of Justice Department officials, jurors, lawyers and judges. It’s an attempt, I have no doubt,” said Dershowitz, author of Get Trump.

Federal prosecutors have reportedly appointed 45 people to Trump’s legal The president has been designated as the target of an investigation into the handling of classified material.

“If you get a letter saying you’re a target, it means you’ve been prosecuted,” Dershotis said. “Basically, if the prosecutor can’t convince the prosecutor that something is missing, something is wrong, or there is something new going on, there will be prosecution.”

45th The president denied that the letter had been sent.

Trump: “No one said I would be indicted. I didn’t do anything wrong and shouldn’t be indicted.” I have written In true social. “But I spent years, starting with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, the ‘no collusion’ Mueller report, impeachment hoax #1, impeachment hoax #2, the perfect Ukraine, etc., all of which I’ve seen in the weaponized judiciary. I assumed I was a target for the Department and the FBI. Phone calls and various other scams and witch hunts. A farce of judicial and electoral interference on a level never seen before. Republicans in Congress must make this a top priority!!!”

Federal prosecutors have suggested that obstruction of justice could be charged in a potential indictment against Trump. But Dershowitz argued that “people confuse obstruction of justice with illegal obstruction of justice.”

“Criminal defense attorneys obstruct justice every day,” Dershowitz said. “Legally, we assert the Fifth Amendment. We seek to conceal evidence under the Fourth Amendment. We effectively cross-examine witnesses. We invoke statutes and restrictions.We will do everything in our power to stop prosecutors from filing lawsuits.But it’s all legal.It’s protected by the Constitution.”

“You have to show corrupt motives to cross the line and commit criminal acts,” Dershowitz continued. “You have to show the destruction of evidence, the tampering of witnesses, things like that. I’ve never seen any evidence like that.”

Dershowitz says the line between constitutional and unconstitutional obstruction is often blurred.

“in my view, [obstruction of justice] It must be done intentionally and deliberately with corrupt intent,” Dershowitz said. “It’s not so easy to prove because the government has nothing to get into the defendant’s mind. They have to use circumstantial evidence.”

President Joe Biden is also under investigation by Special Counsel Robert Herr for his handling of classified material. Critics of Trump often argue that Biden’s situation is different from Trump’ The president’s legal team immediately cooperated with the government. Dershowitz fiercely refuted this argument.

“That’s Trump’s best argument,” Dershowitz said. “You get no points for cooperating and no demerits for not cooperating. In 60 years I have not cooperated with the government. When I think I will, I will, but my job is not to make the government’s job easier.My job is to make the government’s job much harder.”

The author of “Get Trump” also argued that President Trump’s indictment for handling classified material is not strong. President Trump claimed he had absolute authority to declassify.

“The question is, does he need to do anything?” Dershowitz asked. “Is it necessary for him to give some kind of blessing to the newspaper and say that he hereby declares you unclassified? Is it?”

According to the Harvard professor, it comes down to who has the burden of proof.

“Who has the burden of proof?” Dershowitz said. “If the government had to prove that [Trump] If not declassified, they lose.If [Trump] He’ll have to prove he did the declassification, but it’s going to be harder for him to win. ”

Dershowitz argues that the burden question shouldn’t be difficult to answer.

“There is no question that the government should be responsible for approving all elements of crime,” Dershowitz argued. “And one of the criminal elements is that the material remains classified. If it is declassified, it is not against the law. I think.”

Dershowitz said circumstantial evidence could change the equation. But he said there is no law requiring President Trump to announce or record the declassification of the documents.

“There is circumstantial evidence,” Dershowitz explained. “If there’s a rumor out there that he hasn’t told anyone that he’s declassified it, or that there’s a tape out there where he says, ‘I have this material that’s classified,’ circumstantial evidence.” can be used to prove that he declassified or that he was declassifying. Do not declassify. But who bears the burden depends on who bears the burden. Because whoever bears the burden will be very difficult to meet. ”

Dershowitz agreed to 45th The president said the indictment would ultimately be another form of election interference.

“I have the absolute constitutional right to vote against Trump for the third time,” Dershowitz said. “And I don’t want anyone to deny me that right by wrongfully prosecuting him.”

Stay up to date. Receive free breaking news straight to your inbox. Subscribe here.

Leave a Reply

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