Trump Vindicated? Alan Dershowitz Goes on Live TV & Wrecks Liberal Narrative That Trump is in Legal Trouble

It’s always refreshing to see a liberal who will admit when their Party is wrong. Left-leaning Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz did just that this week when he appeared on Fox News to speak with Tucker Carlson this week. Dershowitz appeared on Carlson’s show just mere hours after former lawyer to President Donald Trump, Michael Cohen, surrendered himself to the prosecution, pleading guilty.

Dershowitz explained that while the Democrats are hoping this means that Trump will somehow be implicated, it doesn’t meant that. He explained that at the worst, all this will be viewed as is a “minor campaign contribution violation.” Just about all presidential candidates have done this. It’s punishable with a fine. Impeachment is not an appropriate punishment.

Take a look at what Dershowitz had to say:

From Mediaite:

Dershowitz, who was speaking to Fox News host Tucker Carlson when he made the remarks, did admit that today’s court proceedings are “the beginning of a story that will unravel over time” and that the president “perhaps” violated “election laws,” but he spent the rest of the interview defending Trump amid the scandal.

“Volation of election laws are regarded as kind of jaywalking in the realm of things about elections,” Dershowitz said. “Every administration violates the election laws, every candidate violates the election laws when they run for president.”

The Daily Caller reports, “Liberal Harvard professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz on Wednesday took the wind out of the sails of those who hope Michael Cohen’s Tuesday plea deal with prosecutors will lead to President Trump’s impeachment or criminal implication.”

While appearing on Wednesday’s episode of Fox News’ “Special Report With Bret Baier,” the liberal Law Professor stated, “He is more correct than his critics are. It’s complicated. The law is clear that the president may contribute to his own campaign, so if the president had paid $280,000 to these two women, even if he had done so in order to help his campaign, that would be no problem, it would be legal. If Cohen himself made the contribution that would be unlawful because he has a limit of $5200.”

He then stated that the prosecution is stuck in a “catch-22.”

Dershowitz went on, “If he believes Cohen that the president directed him to do it, then that’s not a crime at all. If he doesn’t believe Cohen, then Cohen has committed a crime and not the president — and the legal pundits have been saying if Cohen admits to a crime, that makes Trump an unindicted coconspirator — just wrong as a matter of basic criminal law. You don’t become an unindicted coconspirator if your action is lawful even though the action of the other person is unlawful.”

Dershowitz was questioned why he believes Cohen entered a guilty plea. He stated that the prosecution had him “dead to rights” when it came down to the tax crimes. They just attached the other charges as an “add on” in order to get him to give them information on Trump.

“It’s not even a close question, that is so over-the-top,” Dershowitz explained after Baier showed a video clip of the President being accused of “high crime and misdemeanor.” “It is not a crime to contribute to your own campaign. If he had written a letter to these two women saying you’re going to hurt me in my campaign, I’m going to pay you $150,000 to help me get elected president and you have to keep it quiet, it’s hush money. No crime.”

Dershowitz then stated, “I challenge any of those who say it’s a crime to find me anything in the criminal law that would make it a crime for a president personally or candidate personally to pay in order to save his own election. It’s just not against the law. It may be a political sin, even if it determined the outcome of the election but the rule of law requires that when you say something is a crime, show me the statute. Show me the statute. There is no statute that would make that a crime. It might be a misdemeanor for the campaign to fail to report that payment but it would be on the campaign not on the candidate. That’s not even a close question. To talk about this as a high crime and misdemeanor, it’s absurd. That’s not the kind of thing the framers had in mind.”