Renowned lawyer Alan Dershowitz has expressed skepticism about the ability of special counsel Jack Smith to substantiate a crucial component of his case against former President Donald Trump.
Smith recently obtained a superseding indictment against Trump, a development that follows a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Trump's immunity claims related to a prior indictment. This previous indictment was also secured by Smith and was linked to Trump's attempts to contest the 2020 presidential election results. Dershowitz has suggested that Smith will face a significant challenge in proving that Trump was aware of his defeat to then-Vice President Joe Biden in 2020.
As reported by the Daily Caller, Dershowitz questioned the government's ability to prove Trump's knowledge of his loss. The indictment charges that Donald Trump knew, knew and believed that he had actually lost the election. Hows the government gonna prove that? Dershowitz queried. He never said that to anybody. He never wrote that anywhere. Did he ever think it? I dont know. Did he say it on a phone call that was illegally overheard? I doubt it.
Dershowitz, who has had conversations with Trump on this matter, expressed his belief that Trump lost the election. I have spoken to President Trump about this, Dershowitz revealed. I think hes wrong. I think he lost the election, fair and square. Now Im not talking about the influence of Russia and all kinds of things external, but in terms of the counting of votes, thats just what Im talking about now, I think he lost Georgia, I think he lost Arizona and I think he lost enough states so that Joe Biden was officially and correctly elected president of the United States."
He further argued that if Trump genuinely believed he had won, his actions would be protected by the First Amendment, Article Two of the Constitution, and the Twelfth Amendment. He compared Trump's situation to historical election disputes, such as the 2000 presidential election between Al Gore and George W. Bush, the 1876 election between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden, and the 2016 election between Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Dershowitz concluded by expressing doubt about the prosecution's chances of success. I think its an uphill fight for the prosecution to win this case. Now they will win it, its not uphill in the District of Columbia. They could have indicted him, for you know, eating a salami sandwich and a jury in the District of Columbia will convict, Dershowitz stated. Well wait and see what the instructions are, whether the instructions require the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt based on evidence not based on surmise but based on hard evidence that Donald Trump actually knew and believed that he had lost the election and he just was lying.
The question that remains is whether the prosecution can provide concrete evidence to prove that Trump knowingly and deliberately misled the public about the election results. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of the rule of law and the constitutional protections that safeguard freedom of speech, even when the speech in question challenges the status quo.
Login