Defining deviancy down. Rudes: "Collusion is not a crime. It was over with before the election." pic.twitter.com/YHAj8SyZK1— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) December 16, 2018
This really is the Black Knight of legal defenses. "Tis but a scratch" as they squirt blood all over the place.
I dint git no law degree from Trump University and I ain't no 'fessianal lawyer like Rudy, but I reckon that maybe collusion is a crime. If you accept anything of value (like the many hours Sergei and Yuri spent hacking servers) in return for engaging in a secret agreement, wail, I dunno....
Think technically its conspiracy to defraud the United States. Collusion is shorthand. IMO Republican leadership knew about it (or should've) but we'll see what Mueller digs up.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/prime-beta/the-door-rudy-opened This is behind the prime paywall. Basically, Giuliani was on George S's show. He was answering a question about how long the negotiations on Trump Tower Moscow continued. He said through election day. Even worse, Giuliani clarified things later to CNN and said that in Trump's written answers he refused to say anything about events after election day, believing that time is covered by executive privilege. So for all we know, negotiations are happening right now. Bob Loblaw is like, damn, Giuliani, that's some stupid shit you're saying.
Flynn makes a statement. FBI says "you sure you don't wanna mention X, Y & Z?" Flynn - oh yeah, that's right. Thanks! They got the tapes, Dummy
@yossarian Dersh wraiths himself pretty bad here Wonder if he is on the payroll? He is making the kind of hopeless arguments only a defence lawyer can make. If he wasn't being paid why trash his own rep with such a poor quality argument? I then asked him if he was ever paid for anything by Trump.He took a LONG time to answer.He said he had never been paid by Trump. I said I hope that’s true, and admitted to being skeptical.Alan Dershowitz then called me a bigot - more specifically an anti-Semite.7/ pic.twitter.com/q4Di6X38v0— (((Evan Shapiro))) (@eshap) December 17, 2018
Flynn is the most outrageous of all IMO It should be clear at this point that sympathy for Michael Flynn is deeply misplaced. His conduct was outrageous and blatant. Period.— Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) December 18, 2018
He has zero morality. Just before he took Erdoğan's money and became a proponent of Turkey he was giving a public speech about how terrific the (supposed) anti-Erdoğan coup was and how it would usher in a secular, pro-West government. From his behavior, it was always inevitable he would become a traitor to the United States. And from his lawyers' comments in court, I still don't think he gets it. Maybe the judge doesn't either.
This is fascinating analysis from Empty Wheel Putting together various things we now know, the FBI interview was the chance for Flynn to simply state that he had spoken with Kislyak and even to say why, or just say he wouldn't discuss it - as it was POTUS business. After all, within a week or so, Flynn would be NSA and Trump President. It was not secret the new Admin wish to pursue a different policy. Why not just say so? Instead he felt compelled to lie in order to conceal Trumps involvement. Again - Why? MIKE FLYNN STEPS IN IT: IN A BID TO FEED THE FROTHY RIGHT, HE LEADS TO RELEASE OF DAMNING NEW DETAILS SHOWING HE LIED TO PROTECT TRUMP And it is unbelievably damning, in part because it shows the degree to which Flynn’s lies served to protect Trump. The 302 shows how the FBI Agents first let Flynn offer up his explanation for his conversation with Kislyak. He lied about the purpose for his call to Kislyak on December 29 (he said he had called to offer condolences about the assassination of Russia’s Ambassador to Turkey) and he lied about the purpose of his call about Israel (he claimed he was, in part, doing a battle drill “to see who the administration could reach in a crisis” and in the process tried to find out how countries were voting on the Israeli motion; Flynn denied he had asked for any specific action). Then, after the Agents specifically asked whether he recalled any conversation about the Obama actions, Flynn doubled down and claimed he did not know about those actions because he was in Dominican Republic. https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/12/...new-details-showing-he-lied-to-protect-trump/
Judge Napolitano gives his breakdown. Trump might already be under sealed indictment: “The DOJ has three opinions on this. Two say you can’t indict a sitting president, one says you can, but all three address the problem of ‘What do you do when the statute of limitations is about to expire?’ “All three agree in that circumstance, you indict in secret, keep the indictment sealed, and release it the day he gets out of office.” You can’t let a person go scot free because they happen to be in the White House.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...o-indicted-russia-michael-cohen-a8688441.html
I doubt he's on the payroll. Two things about him, he will take the "defense lawyer" position 99 percent of the time no matter how quixotic it may seem; he loves attention and if he was just another Trump basher, he wouldn't be getting as much attention.
Need him to be a dee-fense lawyuh of these heah U-nited States I reckon. He's on the wrong side of history. That's why no one wants to be near him on Martha's Vineyard.
But he would dispute the way you're framing the issue. He'd argue that zealously defending the rights of the accused (any accused) and fighting prosecutorial over-reach is never the wrong side of history. Whether Trump is actually guilty doesn't matter as much to him.
As I said: NEW: Mueller is preparing court filings that are expected to detail Trump associates' offers to roll back sanctions on Russia. https://t.co/nVKH32pyOA— Noah Shachtman (@NoahShachtman) December 18, 2018 For all its complicated details and twists, the main Russia story seems quite simple. The Russian government offers Trump business opportunities, intervenes in elections on his behalf, and promises not to spill any of the dirt that they've collected on him. In return, the Trump campaign - and later, the Trump transition - expresses their willingness to lift sanctions. Once the feds got Flynn, it became unlikely that the Russians could ever collect on their side of the deal. That helps explain the urgency with which Flynn was pursued during the very early days of the Trump administration, and why the specific matters that Flynn lied about were seen as crucial ones by US counterintelligence.
I agree if he was actually in court of course But as a professor seems to be wraithing. Just making bad arguments for publicity
Yeah I know his schtick. But this isn't a wrongly accused, poor A.A. defendant with shady govt. evidence.
It does not matter, if you are a defense lawyer, even if you know your client is guilty, you still do not want the prosecutor to circumvent the law. For publicity and he seems to be a zealot for defense attorneys. If you really do think that the government is violating the constitution or the law, you should speak up, it does not matter if they are violating it against a child molester or worse, Donal Trump. Not that I agree with him, but I assume that is what he thinks he is doing. Now, you are the one that wanted Obama to cancel the election, so respect for the constitution or democratic norms is not something that I think you have, at least not as high as Dershowitz in regards of defendant rights.
I think he's so distrustful of govt overreach (he hates the special counsel law) that he's almost cornered into defending Trump. It's absolutist nonsense IMO.
He'd disagree that the zealotry should only encompass the courtroom. Again, I'm not saying I agree with him. Just speculating as to his thought process, and I'll admit it's speculation. Taking his class for one semester as a 1L only gives me slightly more insight than the average Joe --- slightly.
But don't you love how anyone who calls Dersh on his bullshit is a "bigot?" Not like the guy called him a "money-grubbing, lying Jew bastard" or anything, he just acted skeptical when he gave a long pause before denying he was being paid by Trump. What the hell does his religion/background have to do with that? There are enough instances of real racism, Antisemitism, anti-whateverism out there that by playing that card in the event of any slight totally diminishes the impact of when this kind of bigotry does occur. And it does, all too often.