Quantcast
Connect with us

Trump apologist Alan Dershowitz now claiming Democrats cannot investigate Kavanaugh for perjury

Published

on

If Democrats win the House of Representatives in November, they will have the ability to hold Republicans accountable for a number of scandals that have been ignored with all three branches of the government under GOP control.

With the majority comes the committee chairmanships, which means subpoena power. Some Democrats have already suggested that the rushed and politically sensitive investigation into Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh could be at the top of the list, as either focusing on the multiple sexual assault allegations brought forward against Kavanaugh or perjury charges related to his statements about never drinking to the point of memory impairment.

ADVERTISEMENT

Alan Dershowitz, the retired Harvard Law professor who has become Trump’s chief legal apologist, writing a book about why the president cannot be prosecuted even if he colluded with Russian intelligence to steal the 2016 election, has now taken up Kavanaugh’s preemptive defense in a Fox News op-ed.

Dershowitz, who identifies himself as a “liberal Democrat,” nevertheless says that the “damage” to our country will continue if Democrats win control of the House of Representatives and “conduct a revenge inquisition” of Kavanaugh’s alleged wrongs.

“What I don’t want to see is a Democratic House abuse its authority by conducting vengeful impeachment proceedings against Kavanaugh,” he writes. “Such an investigation would simply be partisan payback for Kavanaugh’s confirmation.”

Democrats also couldn’t legally do it, Dershowitz argues.

“It is unlikely that Congress has the power to impeach a sitting justice for alleged offenses he may or may not have committed while a private citizen and a teenager,” he writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

But what about lying to Congress? Also no, says the former Harvard professor.

“Democrats may try to move it forward by alleging that the grounds for impeachment include perjury committed by nominee Kavanaugh in his testimony at his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing… But that would be a ploy, somewhat akin to the phony perjury grounds used to impeach President Clinton.”

The Trump-supporting “liberal Democrat” then says that Democrats should give up and let Kavanaugh do what he wants.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The time has come to move forward and not look backward,” Dershowitz writes.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

WATCH: Protesters celebrate as Chase Bank was set ablaze during Portland protests

Published

on

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump alerts ‘active-duty U.S. military police’ for possible deployment to Minnesota: report

Published

on

President Donald Trump's administration is contemplating using active-duty U.S. troops in an attempt to quell the protests in Minneapolis, the Associated Press reported early Saturday morning.

As unrest spread across dozens of American cities on Friday, the Pentagon took the rare step of ordering the Army to put several active-duty U.S. military police units on the ready to deploy to Minneapolis, where the police killing of George Floyd sparked the widespread protests," the AP reported.

"Soldiers from Fort Bragg in North Carolina and Fort Drum in New York have been ordered to be ready to deploy within four hours if called, according to three people with direct knowledge of the orders. Soldiers in Fort Carson, in Colorado, and Fort Riley in Kansas have been told to be ready within 24 hours. The people did not want their names used because they were not authorized to discuss the preparations," the AP explained.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

John Roberts joins liberals as Supreme Court rejects challenge to Newsom’s COVID-19 limits on California church attendance

Published

on

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday rejected an emergency appeal from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, California. The San Diego area church tried to challenge the state's limits on attendance at worship services:

The church argued that limits on how many people can attend their services violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and had been seeking an order in time for services on Sunday. The church said it has crowds of 200 to 300 people for its services.

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image