Politics

Alan Dershowitz Hits Back at Elizabeth Warren

When you base your legal career on fake ethnic credentials, it shows.

Image Credit: Wikimedia, Sage Ross

Think of some epic mismatches.

Superman vs Catwoman.

This year’s KC Chiefs vs the Browns.

Trump vs the media.

But all those pale in comparison with the absolute unmitigated slaughter bound to ensue when a race hustling Bolshevik Democrat Senator like Elizabeth Warren goes up against a lawyer like Alan Dershowitz.

RELATED: GOP Brings Out Three Big Guns in Senate Trial of Trump

Will Elizabeth Warren be the Democrat nominee in 2020?

For Dershowitz, it would be like pistol whipping a blind rat. You’d think that Liz would retain the basic cognition not to trifle with a legal gunslinger who clears leather that quick. She should know his rep. They both taught at Harvard Law at the same time.

Maybe he just never made it over to her teepee.

However, happily for me, and us, sometimes wishes do come true. Sometimes leftist arrogance overcomes political judgment.

And that brings us to the thrust and inevitably successful parry in the case of Warren v Dershowitz.

Dershowitz’s presentation in front of the Senate during the Trump impeachment trial on Monday was received well by most. Even Democrats gave him reluctant praise for it. But not Liz. Oh no, her great legal mind found fault with Dershowitz’s reasoning. So, struggling up on her haunches and summoning all the gravitas a phony legal career can instill, she said to reporters on Monday, “His characterization of the law simply is unsupported. He is a criminal law professor who stood in the well of the Senate and talked about how law never inquires into intent and that we should not be using the president’s intent as part of understanding impeachment.”

Oh, poor Liz.

First Dershowitz responded with this.

Then this.

Point, set, game, Dershowitz.

RELATED: Bolton Manuscript Leaked, Romney and Collins May Vote Against the President

In case you forgot his general eloquence on the subject of impeachment, let us further edify you, “You cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like ‘quid pro quo’ and ‘personal benefit.’ It is inconceivable that the Framers would have intended so politically loaded and promiscuously deployed a term as ‘abuse of power’ to be weaponized as a tool of impeachment. It is precisely the kind of vague, open-ended and subjective term that the Framers feared and rejected,” said Dershowitz. 

The Senate trial resumes Wednesday.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette.

David Kamioner
meet the author

David Kamioner is a veteran of U.S. Army Intelligence and an honors graduate of the University of Maryland's European Division. He also served with the Pershing Nuclear Brigade and the First Infantry Division. Subsequent to that he worked for two decades as a political consultant, was part of the American Red Cross Hurricane Katrina disaster relief effort in Louisiana, ran a homeless shelter for veterans in Philadelphia, and taught as a college instructor. He serves as a Contributing Editor for LifeZette.

Join the Discussion

COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments