Link to Zerohedge

Click the link to read the article.

Basically, no criminal statutes meeting. He explains why. Basically, if there was any type of after the fact "collusion" in this meeting it wasn't criminal and was just a political sin.

Excerpt:

But former Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz, a constant voice of reason throughout the post-election hysteria, says all of the discussion of "treason" on the left is nothing more than wishful thinking. As Dershowitz reasonably points out, while the act of actually stealing or hacking information is illegal, "seeking to obtain the work product of a prior hack would be no more criminal than a newspaper publishing the work product of thefts such as the Pentagon Papers and the material stolen by Snowden and Manning."

He really seems to be the only sane voice that gets any mainstream media attention. It must be incredibly frustrating for him.

(07-13-2017 07:47 AM)solohawks Wrote:  He really seems to be the only sane voice that gets any mainstream media attention. It must be incredibly frustrating for him.

Do you really think that little of Prof. Jonathon Turley?

I was not aware of him.

Any fool that utters this claim either on this board or in Congress is an absolute dolt.

Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

Got your aluminum hat on today?

(07-13-2017 05:49 AM)Jugnaut Wrote:  Link to Zerohedge

Click the link to read the article.

Basically, no criminal statutes meeting. He explains why. Basically, if there was any type of after the fact "collusion" in this meeting it wasn't criminal and was just a political sin.

Excerpt:

But former Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz, a constant voice of reason throughout the post-election hysteria, says all of the discussion of "treason" on the left is nothing more than wishful thinking. As Dershowitz reasonably points out, while the act of actually stealing or hacking information is illegal, "seeking to obtain the work product of a prior hack would be no more criminal than a newspaper publishing the work product of thefts such as the Pentagon Papers and the material stolen by Snowden and Manning."

I've said precisely the same thing, and I'm nowhere near on his level on the issue. It's common sense.

I hope that people who are calling this "treason" are using that word as hyperbole and don't actually mean it.

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

No. He is like my Son in Law that despises Trump but as an attorney understands that these claims are idiotic due to lack of evidence and Constitutional standing.

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

What's the zip code in lala land anyway?

What's the mg dosage that is required to stay there as well?

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

Oh, man.

Yea, the long tenured law professor from Harvard is taking little bundles of money to misrepresent or misinterpret the law.

How many hundreds of millions is he being paid off with?

(07-13-2017 05:30 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

Oh, man.

Yea, the long tenured law professor from Harvard is taking little bundles of money to misrepresent or misinterpret the law.

How many hundreds of millions is he being paid off with?

The payoff must be yuge!

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

I have yet to see him defend Trump in any way except pointing out the lack of legal standing of the lunacy coming from the left, and in doing that he's defending the rule of law more so than defending Trump.

(07-13-2017 06:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

I have yet to see him defend Trump in any way except pointing out the lack of legal standing of the lunacy coming from the left, and in doing that he's defending the rule of law more so than defending Trump.

What a novel concept

Sadly, Alan Dershowitz is one of the last of a dying breed. A jurist doctorate who gives a public diagnosis uncolored with personal bias. I don't agree with some of his personal stances but I respect the hell out of him.

(07-13-2017 11:25 AM)fsquid Wrote:  I hope that people who are calling this "treason" are using that word as hyperbole and don't actually mean it.

Ask Estrogen Tim Kaine. He said it first.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(07-13-2017 06:07 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-13-2017 05:30 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(07-13-2017 10:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Someone is paying this guy off. He was critical of Trump on aloy of stuff but since March this guy is fill throated defense on everything Trump. Money talks

Oh, man.

Yea, the long tenured law professor from Harvard is taking little bundles of money to misrepresent or misinterpret the law.

How many hundreds of millions is he being paid off with?

The payoff must be yuge!

I heard he bought a brand new Honda Civic Hybrid yesterday and his husband got a Cooper Mini.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I don't really know what the hubbub is all about. So the media is saying that Jr. is guilty of treason for wanting info on Killary? IF the woman had called the NYT instead of Jr. the Times would be calling it a giant "SCOOP". What's there to be guilty of? Nothing. You don't think Killary and the DNC including that queer Timmy would be salivating if someone had called them saying the same thing? If you're a Liberalturd and say no then you're lying which would be normal.

In case it went over your head a story like this is regarded as a scoop in the newspaper business. I know, I've seen enough TMC to learn that.