Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz has accused the Democrats of scheming to get President Donald Trump “disqualified from running” for re-election in 2024.
The legal scholar spoke with journalist John Solomon on “Just the News Not Noise” where he discussed the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home by Democrat President Joe Biden’s FBI.
“Look, I’m a liberal Democrat, I voted for Joe Biden,” Dershowitz said.
“I’m not gonna vote for Trump if he runs for reelection.
“I want to have the right to vote against him, I don’t want to see bureaucrats deny me that right to vote against him, that’s what democracy is.”
Dershowitz said Trump’s opponents are making a doomed “attempt to try to get him disqualified from running.
“I don’t think it’s gonna work,” he stated.
“I think it actually, probably has strengthened his base of support.”
“There are three kinds of people out there,” he continued.
“There are the anti-Trump haters, for whom anything that happens to Trump – professor Laurence Tribe – it doesn’t matter, he’ll trash the Constitution to get Trump.
“Then there are the Trump lovers.
“Doesn’t matter how much evidence they might have, it’s not possible that Trump did anything wrong.
“Then, there is the vast majority of neutral Americans who want to see justice done, who want to see fair justice.
“They don’t want a different rule for Hillary Clinton and Sandy Berger on the one hand, and President Trump on the other hand.
“They want to see equal justice under the law,” he said.
As Slay News reported earlier this week, Dershowitz previously commented on the raid on Trump’s Florida residence in an op-ed for The Hill, describing the move as a “double standard of justice.”
“The decision by the Justice Department to conduct a full-scale morning raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home does not seem justified, based on what we know as of now.
“If it is true that the basis of the raid was the former president’s alleged removal of classified material from the White House, that would constitute a double standard of justice.
“There were no raids, for example, on the homes of Hillary Clinton or former Clinton administration national security adviser Sandy Berger for comparable allegations of mishandling official records in the recent past.
“Previous violations of the Presidential Records Act typically have been punished by administrative fines, not criminal prosecution.
“Perhaps there are legitimate reasons for applying a different standard to Trump’s conduct, but those are not readily obvious at this stage.
“The more appropriate action would have been for a grand jury to issue a subpoena for any boxes of material that were seized and for Trump’s private safe that was opened.
“That would have given Trump’s lawyers the opportunity to challenge the subpoena on various grounds — that some of the material was not classified; that previous classified material was declassified by Trump; that other documents may be covered by various privileges, such as executive or lawyer-client.
“Instead, the FBI apparently seized everything in view and will sort the documents and other material without a court deciding which ones are appropriately subject to Justice Department seizure,” he said.
