Rachel Maddow Shows There Are Convenient Exceptions to ‘No One Is Above the...
‘Dying’ for Attention: Protesters Unleash the Undeniable Power of Passively Lying on the...
No Need to Hire a Comedian When AP ‘Journalist’ Unintentionally Provides Biggest Laugh...
Andrew McCabe Says Case Against Judge Hannah Dugan is Solid but Arrest Was...
Rachel Maddow and Jamie Raskin Reveal the Dem Party’s New DEI - Dramatic...
Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panelists on why President AOC Would Be a Nightmare...
Another Night Surrounded by Democrats, Scott Jennings Attends the White House Corresponden...
Ontario Must Pay for Man to Have a Vagina Constructed While Leaving His...
Social Worker Has Absolute Meltdown Over Student Loans
Democrats Keep Proving Me Right (and I Hate It)
County Attorney Requiring Prosecutors to Consider Race When Offering Plea Deals
Hello, Gaslight! Democrat Jason Crow Earns EPIC Ratio for Lying About What His...
Susan Rice Goes on a Rant About White Male Christian Cisgender Macho MAGA...
J.K. Rowling Wants THIS Video Saved for Future Generations to See How Stupid...
Conor McGregor Expresses His Support for Irish Marchers Against Mass Immigration
Premium

'Unconstitutionally vague and dangerous': Alan Dershowitz fact-checks his fellow law professors

As you know, Wednesday’s meeting of the House Judiciary Committee was a marathon of law professors giving their views on impeachment. As Twitchy reported, Harvard’s Noah Feldman has a history of tweets calling the president’s actions — even a tweetstorm — impeachable, reaching all the way back to just two months after President Trump’s inauguration. And Stanford’s Pamela Karlan joked about how she had to cross the street rather than walk past the Trump hotel.

Ben Shapiro sums it up nicely:

The whole circus was clearly partisan, which bothered Harvard Law School’s Alan Dershowitz, who has been live-tweeting the hearing and fact-checking some of his fellow law professors. This thread’s a little long, but it’s worth the read:

Maybe the Democrats can’t ram this through as quickly as they’d hoped.

Democrats can’t even nail down just what high crime President Trump supposedly committed. Bribery? Extortion? Obstruction of justice? Quid pro quo?

Checks and balances — they’re there for a reason.

He’s exactly right, except for calling them “witnesses” — like many who testified before the House Intelligence Committee, none of them witnessed anything. But yes, all we’ve seen today is lecturing from their preexisting partisan standpoints.

As the Democratic candidates for president have clearly demonstrated, there’s a lot of the Constitution they’d like to tear up, all because Hillary Clinton lost and AR-15s are scary-looking.

More on that in another post.


Related:

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos