Alan Dershowitz 是川普的(前)律師之一好麽？
他是三天兩頭上 Fox 為川普辯護的退休人士，而且早就不是哈佛教授，十年都不止了。
矽穀工匠 發表評論於
拜總2020年封口費是facebook直接下撥的，比較值啊。
漁富 發表評論於
故國思維，法氓法盲！
xyz66 發表評論於
敢情你是“缺啥叫囂啥”啊！
xyz66 發表評論於
樓下的“TexusIns02”：
你這滿嘴臭哄哄的，從哪個號子裏冒出來的？
xyz66 發表評論於
連自由派的哈佛法學院著名教授Liberal legal legend Alan Dershowitz 都看不下去了， Here is a summary of what he wrote for DailyMail.com about the guilty verdict against former President Donald Trump:
Long before Donald Trump’s hush-money trial concluded, I predicted that his conviction wss a forgone conclusion – despite the obvious weakness of the case against him.
Had the prosecution been brought in another part of the country, or even in another part of New York State, which was more fairly balanced with anti and pro-Trump voters, I am in little doubt that the outcome would have been different.
But instead, on Thursday, Trump became the first former president to be found guilty of a crime – convicted on all 34 flimsy counts of ‘falsifying business records.
Why? Because this case was tried in Manhattan, where practically every man on the street wants to keep one Donald Trump out of the White House.
Perhaps the most important function of an independent jury in criminal trials is to keep a check on the biases of prosecutors and judges.
But for this constitutional protection to work, jurors must not be biased themselves against a defendant.
It’s quite apparent that this essential protection was absent.
Nor did this case seem to be based on the evidence or the law. In fact, I saw no credible evidence of a crime.
The case brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg – elected to ‘Get Trump’ – was so woefully weak on the facts and the law that it makes Trump’s conviction even more dangerous.
It now means that future prosecutors can concoct extremely weak cases against political opponents and be assured of a conviction – albeit if they just pick the right venue and select the right jurors.
This trial was without precedent.
Never in American history has anyone ever been prosecuted for – as Trump’s defense argued was the case – erroneous bookkeeping made by a company underling who failed to disclose the payment of ‘hush money’.
What there is plenty of precedent for is… the payment of hush money.
Stormy女早在2011年就威脅老川要曝光the alleged one-time encounter in a hotel room in 2006， 她自己也說是自願的（典型的she-said-he-said scenario). 這種要挾對社會名人還少嗎？ 還記得選前關於比爾 克林頓的各種womanizing problems 曝光嗎?
