Alan Dershowitz who has become one of the biggest defenders of President Trump has gotten bogged down in figuring out how best to do it. The reason Alan is doing this is because he is hoping Trump will put him on as one of his lawyers. Trump having seen his act has enough good sense to let him keep trying to join his team without ever letting it happen. This, of course, makes Alan try all the harder losing his credibility which for many he never had any in the first place. I wonder how many know Alan never tried a felony case in his life to a jury by himself. What kind of litigator is he pretending to be?
Anyway Alan’s new lie is that you cannot be charged with lying to the FBI unless your lie is material to its investigation. Here’s what he said: “All I’m saying is you need materiality, and the fact that it wasn’t a crime is at least one argument that it may not have been material. I think on balance probably it was material. That raises the question of why did Flynn lie? I think Flynn lied because he didn’t know it wasn’t material.”
It’s tough to say “it was material” and “it wasn’t material” in subsequent sentences. Trump tweeted after hearing Alan Dershowitz argument: “A must watch: Legal Scholar Alan Dershowitz was just on
@foxandfriends talking of what is going on with respect to the greatest Witch Hunt in U.S. political history. Enjoy! “
It is clear what Alan is trying to obfuscate things. Flynn has already pleaded guilty to having lied to the FBI so whether it is a crime or not in his case has gone by the board. As we know, it didn’t matter to General Flynn. He pleaded guilty because he got a good deal like Murderman, Benji, or Two Weeks on the other potential charges he and perhaps his son were facing. So to wrap it all up agreed to plea to lying to the FBI. So Alan’s sort of double talking through his hat.
As an aside Alan says of General Flynn, “A witness such as Flynn who has admitted he lied – whether or not to cover up a crime – is a tainted witness who is unlikely to be believed by jurors who know he’s made a deal to protect himself and his son.” You’d think Alan never heard of John Connolly’s conviction, Whitey Bulger’s conviction, etc. although my recollection is that he knew quite a bit about them.
As mentioned Dershowitz is on a pathetic search for a job on the Trump team. One reason he has no chance is none of Trump’s lawyers want him around. They like having him out there as a free lancer mad dog snapping and biting at Mueller and not having to feed him. Alan doesn’t understand that Trump can never bring him on because it will bring up their connection to Jeffrey Epstein.
That doesn’t mean the Trump lawyers are not pulling a lit bit of Dershowoff themselves when it comes to Mueller. John Dowd one of Trump’s lawyer, the one who said he send out the tweet where it appeared Trump admitted to obstruction of justice. I guess he realized no one would believe of the over 9,000 tweets Trump sent since announcing for president the only one incriminating him was not sent by him. So he changed his tune and tweeted that: “president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer under [the Constitution’s Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case.” Too bad that wasn’t the law when Richard Nixon was president.
The argument though will be if the president cannot obstruct justice then any investigation by Mueller into obstruction by the president is a wrongful abuse of Mueller’s power. It is a short distance from there to say no special prosecutor can investigate the president setting up Mueller for removal.
Dershowoff comes back to suggest, “Number one, the president is entitled to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who to prosecute, and who not to investigate, and who not to prosecute. The president doesn’t even have to appoint an attorney general. The president essentially can run the Justice Department, if he chooses to do that.” That of course is the nonsense one would expect from someone never a prosecutor. Title III involving wiretaps requires an attorney general. I’m sure there’s thousand of other legislative provisions also referring to one. When you hear such transparently false information you must understand people are getting desperate.
Although it has never happened before in our history where a president is said to have the ability to tell the Justice Department who not to prosecute or investigate, if you follow Alan’s logic then if the president had that power he can immediately within that power shut Mueller’s investigation down.
What then is the recourse. Didn’t Nixon try something like that? There the recourse was a legitimate congressional investigation. But what if Congress is in the bag? What if the attitude of Congress is expressed by the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) who in questioning FBI Director Christopher Wray suggested “It does appear to me that, at the very least, the FBI’s reputation as an impartial, nonpolitical agency has come into question. Even the appearance of impropriety will devastate the FBI’s reputation. We hope to hear from you today about an action plan for making sure this never happens again.’ (my emphasis)
Goodlate suggests the FBI is compromised. If so how can Mueller who relies upon them not be compromised. If you don’t see the groundwork being laid for Mueller’s firing then you are not paying attention.