Archive for the ‘Alan Dershowitz’ Category

Dershowitz: SCOTUS Will Uphold Trump’s Latest Travel Ban

The Supreme Court will likely uphold the Trump administration’s travel ban because it is aimed not at Muslims, but countries that do not have “adequate vetting processes,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax TV on Wednesday.

In an interview with “Newsmax Now” host Bill Tucker, the Newsmax contributor and author of “Trumped Up” conceded the ban is not “the most perfect and artfully drawn ban,” but noted “that’s not the criteria’s constitutionality.”

“It is not a Muslim ban,”he declared. “It is a ban on people coming from countries that don’t have adequate vetting processes for assuring that terrorists don’t come into the country.”

Important: Newsmax TV is available on DirecTV Ch. 349, U-Verse 1220, and FiOS 615. If your cable operator does not have Newsmax TV just call and ask them to put us on Call toll-free 1-844-500-6397 and we will connect you right away to your cable operator!

For more places to Find Newsmax TV Click Here Now

He said the lower court decisions to block the travel ban suggest “politicization rather than [judicial] activism.”

“I think we’re seeing judges impose their own personal views,” he said. “I think they’re honorable people, they’re honest judges. That’s the way they view the Constitution. . . . And they honestly, but in my view, mistakenlycome to the conclusion that this discriminates against Muslims.”

Weighing in on the NFL controversy over players who refuse to stand during the national anthem, Dershowitz said you cannot make the protest a crime.

“But if the employer on his own, without any threat from the government of tax consequences, were to say that every player must stand, that would be perfectly OK and the players couldn’t sue,” he said.

“I always put out the shoe on the other foot test and under our Constitution what’s good for the kneeling players is good for the Klan,”he said. “There’s no constitutional difference between a Klansman and a football player kneeling. So be careful what you wish for because what you wish for for the football players will also be applicable to the Ku Klux Klan, and the neo-Nazis, Antifa, and every other terrible group.”

2017 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Here is the original post:

Dershowitz: SCOTUS Will Uphold Trump’s Latest Travel Ban

Fair Usage Law

October 19, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Liberals in Statue Debate Doing What Stalin …

During an interview with Fox & Friends, Alan Dershowitz slammed the hard left by describing their efforts to tear down Confederate monuments as Stalinist.

Brian Kilmeade began by asking Dershowitz for his thoughts about the news that the countrys oldest monument to Christopher Columbus was recently defaced amidst the pushback against statues. Dershowitz was concerned people might try to tear down statues of Americas slave-owning founding fathers, and he said that erasing national history is not the right way to inform the public about the countrys evolution.

We have to take some of the statues that were put up more recently, for example, during the Civil Rights Movement and perhaps move them to museums where they can be used to teach young students about how statues are intended sometimes for bad purposes, to glorify negatives and to hold back positive developments. But the idea of willy-nilly going through and doing what Stalin did erasing history and re-writing it to serve current purposes does pose a danger, and it poses a danger of educational malpractice, of missing opportunities to educate people, and of going too far.

Dershowitz also went after Antifa for using their opposition to fascism to justify violence and the stifling of free speech. He went on to say that moderate liberals have a responsibility to hold left-wing radicals accountable, but President Trump and centrist conservatives are obligated to condemn hard-right extremism too.

Watch above, via Fox.

[Image via screengrab]

>> Follow Ken Meyer (@KenMeyer91) on Twitter

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

See the original post here:

Alan Dershowitz: Liberals in Statue Debate Doing What Stalin …

Fair Usage Law

October 17, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Poster with my face on it was defaced …

Famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz said Thursday a poster promoting an event of his at the University of California, Berkeley was defaced with a swastika.

“This was posted at the Law School at @UCBerkeley where I spoke yesterday. A swastika is drawn over my face,” Dershowitz, who is Jewish, tweeted. “The poster itself is filled with out of context misquotes. I oppose torture in all forms.”

The lead-up to Dershowitz’s Oct. 11 appearance at UC Berkeley on the topic of “The Liberal Case for Israel” was marred with controversy.

Earlier in October, Dershowitz threatened legal action against the school’s provost after the institution prevented him from speaking about Israel at the request of a student organization because, as a “high-profile” speaker, they didn’t give the administration eight weeks notice.

That requirement is usually waived for guests invited by the school’s departments, Dershowitz told LawNewz.com last month.

“All the departments are all hard left departments,” Dershowitz said. “They are much more likely to invite hard left speakers. That results in content-based discrimination.”

Dan Mogulof, UC Berkeley’s assistant vice chancellor, told the Washington Examiner the school’s policy is “content and perspective neutral, with the criteria that trigger the eight-week advance notice requirement based solely on objective measures, such as audience size.”

The disagreement was eventually settled when the dean of UC Berkeley’s Law School extended Dershowitz an invitation.

See the rest here:

Alan Dershowitz: Poster with my face on it was defaced …

Fair Usage Law

October 17, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Antifa is "trying to tear down America …

I dont know how, I dont know when, but Dershowitz is going to end up on Trumps staff eventually, probably in the stable of lawyers doing Russiagate defense work. Trump cant have failed to notice that hes on Fox and CNN regularly defending the president (however well-caveated) and criticizing his enemies. His broadside at Antifa near the end here is both righteous and true, although he cleverly folds it into a sharp critique of Trump himself. I feel obliged to speak out against Antifa, says Dershowitz, because Im a man of the left and they claim falsely to speak in my name. The president had the same obligation with respect to the alt-right after Charlottesville (a point Ive made myself) and he whiffed.

Come to think of it, maybe Dersh wont be working for Trump after all.

His analogy between tearing down Confederate statues and Stalins habit of expunging disfavored politicos from Soviet history sits uneasily with me, although I think hes referring to extreme tactics like rampaging mobs tearing down monuments physically and breaking them up. Stalin wanted to whitewash the collective memory of Russians by excising his political enemies from it. Most critics of Confederate statuary have the opposite impulse they see the monuments themselves as a whitewash of history. Uprooting public testaments to the slave regimes gallantry is a step towards a crisper understanding of the past. But the line is tricky: One could (and some do) make the same argument about statues of Washington and Jefferson, that a reckoning with their slaveholding cant begin until history is cleansed of idolatry towards the Founders. I think the fear of SJWs running roughshod over Lee and stampeding towards Mount Vernon and Monticello is overstated, but American higher education being what it is, its not groundless. The left tends not to worry overly much about discernment when its in idol-smashing mode.

Mike Pence had an interesting suggestion for monument mania:

EARHARDT: Youre in favor of keeping those monuments?

PENCE: I think that obviously, I think that should always be a local decision and, with regard to the U.S. Capitol, should be state decisions. But Im someone who believes in more monuments, not less monuments. What we ought to do is we ought to remember our history. But we also ought to celebrate the progress that weve made since that history.

You know, when I walked back in 2010 across the Edmund Pettus Bridge with John Lewis, arm and arm, and we remembered Bloody Sunday and the extraordinary progress of the civil rights movement, I cant help but think that, rather than pulling down monuments, as some are wont to do, rather than tearing down monuments that have graced our cities all across this country for years, we ought to have been building more monuments. We ought to be celebrating the men and women whove helped our nation move toward a more perfect union and tell the whole story of America.

Not every monument to Washington or Jefferson requires a prominent reminder that they held slaves, but ones that purport to recount their entire life story like Mount Vernon and Monticello obviously do. I dont think that same principle works with CSA statuary since slavery isnt just part of the story; its the casus belli in a war the Confederacy was created to wage. Its like trying to solve the problem with a statue to U.S. General Benedict Arnold by adding a plaque that begins, Oh, by the way Arnolds treason isnt part of the story, its the main detail in the story. Whether the similar problem with Confederate monuments could be solved by erecting statues to Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, or to American slaves generally nearby, I dont know. Something for the local community to ruminate on.

Read more:

Alan Dershowitz: Antifa is "trying to tear down America …

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

How Alan Dershowitz Went From Hillary Donor to Trump’s Attack Dog on Russia – Daily Beast

Alan Dershowitza liberal Harvard law professor and ardent backer of Hillary Clintonhas emerged as one of the Russia probes most vocal critics.

Hes likened the investigation to a KGB hunt, and special counsel Bob Mueller to a notoriously obsessed sailor. Its made him a Fox News fixture, and that has left some of his counterparts in the legal world baffled and skeptical. But those close to Dershowitz say his vociferous criticism of Muellers investigation is the opposite of surprisingand that Mueller and Dershowitz have a history.

Thats according to Harvey Silverglate, a criminal defense attorney who has worked with Dershowitz over the years. The two men once represented Jeffrey MacDonald, who was convicted decades ago of murdering his wife and two daughters and who still maintains his innocence. Silverglate and Dershowitz tried to get MacDonald a new trial. As part of that effort, said Silverglate, they met with Mueller at the Justice Department headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C.

This meeting came in the early 90sSilverglate didnt recall the exact yearwhen Mueller headed the Justice Departments Criminal Division. They wanted him to ask the judge who convicted MacDonald to vacate that conviction because of problems with evidence. A report from the time said Dershowitz argued government agents had conspired to frame MacDonald.

Mueller opens up the meeting with the following line, which was so seared into my memory that I will never forget it, Silverglate told The Daily Beast. He looks at usAlan Dershowitz and meand says, OK, gentlemen, I just want to say: Criticism of the bureau is a non-starter.

But criticizing the FBI was exactly what Dershowitz and Silverglate had come to do.

Alan and I both walked away in a little bit of shellshock, Silverglate continued, understanding that there were things to Mueller that were more important than facts, more important than truth, more important than the erroneous conviction of an innocent American, and that is, the reputation of the FBI and his relationship with the FBI.

Dershowitz told The Daily Beast he recalls working on the MacDonald case with Silverglate but doesnt specifically recall that conversation. He didnt question Silverglates account.

As Muellers probe of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election has gained momentum, Dershowitz has become a staple of conservative media. On Aug. 20, he told New York Republican billionaire radio host John Catsimatidis that Muellers probe threatens American democracy.

The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with [Trump] politically, and target him, really endangers democracy, he said, according to The Hill. [It] reminds me of what the head of the KGB said to Stalin: Show me the man, and I will find you the crime.

And last month on Fox & Friends, Dershowitz compared Mueller and his team to Captain Ahab from Moby Dick.

Theyre determined to get that white whale, he said.

Get The Beast In Your Inbox!

Start and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.

A speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don’t).

Subscribe

Thank You!

You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason.

Dershowitz has also criticized Mueller for hiring lawyers who have contributed to Democratic politicians. And he recently released a new book, Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy. Critics say hes a Trump shill. He says thats laughable.

Please put on the record that I am not defending him, that I am only focusing on the issues, he said. And the issues this time happen to come out largely on his sidebut, by the way, not always.

Some suspect Dershowitzs advocacy goes beyond his television appearances. A person familiar with the presidents legal affairs said there are concerns Dershowitz has talked about legal affairs with Trump.

Dershowitz told The Daily Beast this isnt true. He said he and the president have spoken, but never privately. He said the two men spoke at Mar-a-Lago once when Dershowitz dined there with Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, a mutual friend of the two. Trump came over to their table and chatted with them about the travel ban, according to Dershowitz. Trump said he wanted to try to enforce the first version of the travel ban, which federal courts had struck down. Dershowitz said he told the president that would be a bad idea.

Then he took me aside and said, I want to talk to you about the peace prospects in the Middle East because you know Netanyahu, Dershowitz said. I said, Look, Mr. President, I didnt vote for you, but on Israel and the Middle East, I am passionately concerned with that and Im happy to help, 24/7.

Dershowitz said he later met with Jason Greenblatt, Trumps envoy for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, and that he also met with Mahmoud Abbas shortly before the Palestinian Authority president met with Trump at the White House. And he said he criticized Trump for not making Elliott Abramsa foreign policy adviser to George W. Bushthe next deputy secretary of state.

Besides Ruddy, Dershowitz and the president share a number of friends and acquaintances, including Patriots owner Bob Kraft. The two men met years ago in Krafts suite at a Patriots game, he said.

I liked him, Dershowitz said. He was very nice, he was very affable. We talked football.

Dershowitz and Trump also both know Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted pedophile who has long been friendly with Bill Clinton, too. Trump once praised Epsteins social life, noting he likes women on the younger side. Epstein was one of Dershowitzs clients. And he isnt the most controversial person Dershowitz has defended; the attorney also represented O.J. Simpson.

Publicly, Dershowitz is never one for understatement. Take his recent comments about Antifa, the far left group:

Antifa is a radical anti-American, anti-free market, communist, socialist, hard, hard-left censorial organization that tries to stop speakers on campuses, he told the hosts of Fox & Friendsreportedly Trumps favorite TV showon Tuesday morning.

He taped that hit from Marthas Vineyard, where he spends the summers.

Im not getting very many invitations to dinner at Marthas Vineyard, Dershowitz said wryly. My life can always be judged by the dinner invitations. They went down to zero when I defended O.J. Simpson, and theyre down considerably now.

But his cable-news invitations are through the roof.

Theres a big difference between inviting you to dinner and inviting you to speak, because I do draw crowds, he said. Whether or not people like me or dont like me, nobody has ever accused me of being boring.

They do accuse him of being opportunistic and intellectually dishonest. Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor who practices law in Chicago, told The Daily Beast he believes Dershowitzs defense of the president is so terrible it must be in bad faith.

All of the arguments that are made by Dershowitz appear to me to be highly misleading, and I think that he has enough experience and knowledge as a lawyer to know better, he said. For that reason, Ive concluded that Alan Dershowitz is not giving neutral legal analysis but is instead trying to score political points. I think hes being disingenuous.

Deshowitz vigorously disputes that.

Many serious scholars have told me they agree with these arguments, he said. They are certainly serious and are likely to be given serious consideration by any court. Any defense attorney who failed to raise them would be guilty of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Norm Eisen, the chair of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, sometimes spars with Dershowitz on cable news and on Twitter. And like many of the most prominent legal figures in Washington, he was once one of Dershowitzs students at Harvard Law.

Agree or disagree, hes absolutely consistent in advocating for the narrowest possible reasonable application of criminal law and of the importance of not politicizing it, Eisen said.

Silverglate added that Dershowitz doesnt mind the kind of spats that have drawn scorching criticism from fellow Democrats.

We dont have friends on the right, we dont have friends on the left, he said. And we manage.

View post:

How Alan Dershowitz Went From Hillary Donor to Trump’s Attack Dog on Russia – Daily Beast

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Trump has a special obligation to condemn the racist Right – Washington Examiner

All decent Americans have an obligation to condemn the violent bigotry of the Nazi and KKK demonstrators in Charlottesville, Va., or wherever else they spew their poisonous and threatening rhetoric. But President Trump has a special obligation to single out for condemnation, and distance himself from, individuals and groups that claim (even if falsely) to speak in his name, as the racist provocateurs in Charlottesville did.

David Duke, the notorious bigot, told reporters that white nationalists were working to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” Richard Spencer, the founder of the Daily Stormer (a not-so-coded homage to the Nazi publication Der Sturmer), attributed the growth of the ultra-nationalist alt-right to the Trump presidency: “Obviously the alt-right has come very far in the past two years in terms of public exposure is Donald Trump one of the major causes of that? Of course.”

Trump initially responded as follows: “We must ALL be united and condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America.” But then, following the car ramming that killed a peaceful protestor, Trump made the following statement: “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides on many sides.”

Trump’s inclusion of the words “violence on many sides,” which seemed improvised, suggested to some a moral equivalence between the Nazis and the KKK and those protesting and resisting them. Trump denied that he was suggesting any such equivalence and made the following statement: “Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.”

But then a day later he seemed to double down on his attempt to be even handed in his comments about the “many sides” of this conflict. He pointed to “very fine people on both sides,” implying that Nazis and Klansmen could be “fine,” because their protests were “very legal.” Then he denounced “alt-left” groups that were “very, very violent.” Once again he blamed “both sides,” and asked rhetorically, “what about the alt-left’, that as you say, came charging at the alt-right? Don’t they have any semblance of guilt?”

David Duke immediately praised Trump’s condemnation of the “alt- left,” thanking him “for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa.”

Finally (though nothing this president ever tweets is final), Trump praised the anti-racist “protestors in Boston who are speaking out against bigotry and hate.”

It is against this background that the president’s back-and-forth statements must be evaluated.

Even if it were true and the evidence is to the contrary that Black Lives Matter and Antifa were as blameworthy for Charlottesville as the Nazis and KKK, it would still be incumbent on Trump to focus his condemnation especially on the violent racist right that claims to speak on his behalf. The hard left which does, in part, include some violent and bigoted elements does not purport to speak on the president’s behalf and does not claim to be trying to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” To the contrary, they oppose everything he stands for.

This situation poses a delicate dilemma for Trump. He has denounced the ideology of the violent racists on the alt-right who claim to be acting in his name, though not quickly or forcefully enough. And he has declared his opposition to “racism” and specifically to “those who cause violence in its name,” who he has called “criminals” and “thugs.” He specifically included within these categories the “KKK, neo-Nazis [and] white supremacists,” the very groups that purport to speak in his name.

Why is that not enough? Why should he not at the same time condemn the alt-left for its violence? These are reasonable questions that require nuanced answers. Let me try to provide some.

I have long believed that it is the special responsibility of decent conservatives to expose, condemn, and marginalize hard-right extremists and bigots. William Buckley showed the way when he refused to defend Patrick Buchanan against charges that what he had said amounted to anti-Semitism. Other decent conservatives followed Buckley’s lead and marginalized anti-Semites and racists who expressed bigotry in the false name of conservatism.

I also believe that it is the special responsibility of decent liberals to do the same with regard to hard-left bigoted extremists. I must acknowledge, as a liberal, that we have not done as good a job as decent conservatives have done. Perhaps this is because hard-left extremists often march under banners of benevolence, whereas hard-right extremists tend not to hide their malevolence.

Consider, for example, Antifa, the radical hard-left group, some of whose members violently confronted the Nazis and Klansmen in Charlottesville. As reported by the New York Times, the organization is comprised of a “diverse collection of anarchists, communists and socialists” with its “antecedents in Germany and Italy.” According to the Times, “Its adherents express disdain for mainstream liberal politics” and support “direct action” by which they mean “using force and violence” rather than free speech and civil disobedience. Their leaders claim that violence is necessary because “it’s full on war.”

Nor is this merely rhetoric. On university campuses, particularly at Berkeley, “black-clad protestors, some of whom identified themselves as Antifa, smashed windows, threw gasoline bombs and broke into campus buildings, causing $100,000 in damage.” They model themselves on the “Weathermen” of the 1970s, who were responsible for numerous acts of violence.

They claim to be using counterviolence in defense against the violence of neo-Nazi and Klansmen, but that is not true. They also use violence to shut down speakers with whose worldviews they disagree: they include not only right-wing extremists, but also mainstream conservatives, moderate Zionists, and even some liberals. They reject dialogue in favor of intimidation and force.

As a liberal, I will not give these hard-left violent bigots a pass. It is true that the Nazis and KKK are currently more dangerous in terms of physical violence than hard-left groups. (It is also true that the most violent groups by far are radical Islamic terrorist, who are not the targets of Antifa protests.) But the violence of the racist right (and radical jihadists) must not lead us to ignore the reality that Antifa and its radical allies pose real danger to the future of our nation, because of their increasing influence on university campuses where our future leaders are being educated. The recent events in Charlottesville and elsewhere have made them heroes among some mainstream liberals, who are willing to excuse their anti-liberal bigotry because they are on the barricades against fascism.

It’s far too easy to self-righteously condemn your political enemies when they step (or leap) over the line to bigotry and violence. It’s far more difficult to condemn those who share your wing, whether Left or Right, but who go too far. But that is what morality and decency require, as Buckley taught us.

So President Trump must stop being even-handed in his condemnations. He should focus his condemnation on extreme right-wing bigots who speak and act in his name and leave it to those of us on the left to focus our condemnation on left-wing extremists and bigots.

Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of several books, including most recently Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy.

If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.

Continue reading here:

Alan Dershowitz: Trump has a special obligation to condemn the racist Right – Washington Examiner

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

MSNBC host snarks at Alan Dershowitz over Russian probe, and he … – TheBlaze.com

MSNBCs Joy Reid thought it was a good idea to mock famedlawyer andprofessor emeritus at Harvard Law School Alan Dershowitz, but he shut her down with just one tweet.

Her criticism was aimed at his opinion that the investigation into Russian interference and collusion endangers democracy. Rather than engage with him on the merits of the case, she mocked that he was posing opinions out of opportunistic self-interest.

If by democracy you mean Alan Dershhowitz [sic] getting a Supreme Court seat or at least solicitor general for his obsequious loyalty to Trump, she tweeted, with a link to a story at The Hill reporting Dershowitzs comments about the investigation.

The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with [President Trump] politically, and target him, really endangers democracy. [It] reminds me of what the head of the KGB said to Stalin: Show me the man, and I will find you the crime,’ Dershowitzsaid on a radio talk show.

[This is] where things happen in darkness and secrecy. The American public doesnt learn about it, he said.

Dershowitz took to Twitter Monday to respond to Reids criticism.

Ad hominems dont respond to serious arguments, he posted simply.

He referred to the logical fallacy which has to do with an interlocutor assailing her rhetorical opponent with insults rather than attacking the argument.

Dershowitz also responded to former White House Ethics Counsel Richard Painter, a frequent Trump critic, over the same comments.

As a civil libertarian I cant remain silent in the face of violations of civil liberties regardless of the political implications, he tweeted. Thats the difference between me and partisans who place politics over principles.

Special Counsel Mueller has reportedly opened a grand jury investigation into the matter, while many have speculated that Trump is looking to fire him in order to end the politically damaging investigation.

Continued here:

MSNBC host snarks at Alan Dershowitz over Russian probe, and he … – TheBlaze.com

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

WATCH: Alan Dershowitz On Why The Left Should Decry Bigotry On Its Side – Yeshiva World News

The American party, i.e. the Democratic Party, has so assimilated the idea of political correctness that they cant exist without out. The sometimes violent radical left is actually part of their mainstream. People such as Al Sharpton have been mainstream Democrats for a generation. The Republicans are in a much better position since the alt right is far removed from the mainstream of the Republican, and in fact that mainstream is dominated by members of minorities that the Nazis/KKK types deplore (including Jews, Catholics, Asians and Hispanics, immigrants). Thus the Democrats are stuck with the alt-left, while the Republicans are free to denounce their alt-right supporters.

Follow this link:

WATCH: Alan Dershowitz On Why The Left Should Decry Bigotry On Its Side – Yeshiva World News

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: ‘Violent’ Antifa movement is ‘trying to tear down … – Washington Times

Prominent Harvard law professor and liberal author Alan Dershowitz rebuked the hard-left militant movement Antifa on Tuesday, saying liberals need to avoid turning violent leftist factions into heroes.

Appearing on Fox & Friends Tuesday morning, Mr. Dershowitz said the movement sweeping the country to take down Confederate-era statues that some find offensive is setting a dangerous precedent.

Do not glorify the violent people who are now tearing down the statues, he said. Many of these people, not all of them, many of these people are trying to tear down America.

Antifa is a radical anti-American, anti-free market, communist, socialist, hard, hard left censorial organization that tries to stop speakers on campuses from speaking, Mr. Dershowitz said. They use violence. And just because theyre opposed to fascism and to some of these monuments shouldnt make them heroes of the liberals.

Im a liberal, and I think its the obligation of liberals to speak out against the hard left radicals just like its the obligation of conservatives to speak out against the extremism of the hard right, he added.

Mr. Dershowitz acknowledged that while some historical monuments are better suited in museums, liberals should avoid becoming Stalinist in trying to erase or revise history.

We have to use this as an educational moment, he said. We have to take some of the statues that were put up more recently, for example, during the Civil Rights Movement and perhaps move them to museums where they can be used to teach young students about how statues are intended sometimes for bad purposes, to glorify negatives and to hold back positive developments.

But the idea of willy-nilly going through and doing what Stalin did just erasing history and re-writing it to serve current purposes does pose a danger, and it poses a danger of educational malpractice, of missing opportunities to educate people, and of going too far, he said.

Mr. Dershowitz argued that the movement against Confederate-era statues ignores other discriminated groups in America, like Jews, women, and the Japanese.

Once you start rewriting history of African Americans in this country, you have to start rewriting history of discrimination against many, many other groups, he said. Look, were both a nation of immigrants and a nation of discrimination against immigrants. Thats an important history for us to remember.

Continued here:

Alan Dershowitz: ‘Violent’ Antifa movement is ‘trying to tear down … – Washington Times

Fair Usage Law

August 22, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Dershowitz: SCOTUS Will Uphold Trump’s Latest Travel Ban

The Supreme Court will likely uphold the Trump administration’s travel ban because it is aimed not at Muslims, but countries that do not have “adequate vetting processes,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax TV on Wednesday. In an interview with “Newsmax Now” host Bill Tucker, the Newsmax contributor and author of “Trumped Up” conceded the ban is not “the most perfect and artfully drawn ban,” but noted “that’s not the criteria’s constitutionality.” “It is not a Muslim ban,”he declared. “It is a ban on people coming from countries that don’t have adequate vetting processes for assuring that terrorists don’t come into the country.” Important: Newsmax TV is available on DirecTV Ch. 349, U-Verse 1220, and FiOS 615. If your cable operator does not have Newsmax TV just call and ask them to put us on Call toll-free 1-844-500-6397 and we will connect you right away to your cable operator! For more places to Find Newsmax TV Click Here Now He said the lower court decisions to block the travel ban suggest “politicization rather than [judicial] activism.” “I think we’re seeing judges impose their own personal views,” he said. “I think they’re honorable people, they’re honest judges. That’s the way they view the Constitution. . . . And they honestly, but in my view, mistakenlycome to the conclusion that this discriminates against Muslims.” Weighing in on the NFL controversy over players who refuse to stand during the national anthem, Dershowitz said you cannot make the protest a crime. “But if the employer on his own, without any threat from the government of tax consequences, were to say that every player must stand, that would be perfectly OK and the players couldn’t sue,” he said. “I always put out the shoe on the other foot test and under our Constitution what’s good for the kneeling players is good for the Klan,”he said. “There’s no constitutional difference between a Klansman and a football player kneeling. So be careful what you wish for because what you wish for for the football players will also be applicable to the Ku Klux Klan, and the neo-Nazis, Antifa, and every other terrible group.” 2017 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Fair Usage Law

October 19, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Liberals in Statue Debate Doing What Stalin …

During an interview with Fox & Friends, Alan Dershowitz slammed the hard left by describing their efforts to tear down Confederate monuments as Stalinist. Brian Kilmeade began by asking Dershowitz for his thoughts about the news that the countrys oldest monument to Christopher Columbus was recently defaced amidst the pushback against statues. Dershowitz was concerned people might try to tear down statues of Americas slave-owning founding fathers, and he said that erasing national history is not the right way to inform the public about the countrys evolution. We have to take some of the statues that were put up more recently, for example, during the Civil Rights Movement and perhaps move them to museums where they can be used to teach young students about how statues are intended sometimes for bad purposes, to glorify negatives and to hold back positive developments. But the idea of willy-nilly going through and doing what Stalin did erasing history and re-writing it to serve current purposes does pose a danger, and it poses a danger of educational malpractice, of missing opportunities to educate people, and of going too far. Dershowitz also went after Antifa for using their opposition to fascism to justify violence and the stifling of free speech. He went on to say that moderate liberals have a responsibility to hold left-wing radicals accountable, but President Trump and centrist conservatives are obligated to condemn hard-right extremism too. Watch above, via Fox. [Image via screengrab] > > Follow Ken Meyer (@KenMeyer91) on Twitter Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

Fair Usage Law

October 17, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Poster with my face on it was defaced …

Famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz said Thursday a poster promoting an event of his at the University of California, Berkeley was defaced with a swastika. “This was posted at the Law School at @UCBerkeley where I spoke yesterday. A swastika is drawn over my face,” Dershowitz, who is Jewish, tweeted. “The poster itself is filled with out of context misquotes. I oppose torture in all forms.” The lead-up to Dershowitz’s Oct. 11 appearance at UC Berkeley on the topic of “The Liberal Case for Israel” was marred with controversy. Earlier in October, Dershowitz threatened legal action against the school’s provost after the institution prevented him from speaking about Israel at the request of a student organization because, as a “high-profile” speaker, they didn’t give the administration eight weeks notice. That requirement is usually waived for guests invited by the school’s departments, Dershowitz told LawNewz.com last month. “All the departments are all hard left departments,” Dershowitz said. “They are much more likely to invite hard left speakers. That results in content-based discrimination.” Dan Mogulof, UC Berkeley’s assistant vice chancellor, told the Washington Examiner the school’s policy is “content and perspective neutral, with the criteria that trigger the eight-week advance notice requirement based solely on objective measures, such as audience size.” The disagreement was eventually settled when the dean of UC Berkeley’s Law School extended Dershowitz an invitation.

Fair Usage Law

October 17, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Antifa is "trying to tear down America …

I dont know how, I dont know when, but Dershowitz is going to end up on Trumps staff eventually, probably in the stable of lawyers doing Russiagate defense work. Trump cant have failed to notice that hes on Fox and CNN regularly defending the president (however well-caveated) and criticizing his enemies. His broadside at Antifa near the end here is both righteous and true, although he cleverly folds it into a sharp critique of Trump himself. I feel obliged to speak out against Antifa, says Dershowitz, because Im a man of the left and they claim falsely to speak in my name. The president had the same obligation with respect to the alt-right after Charlottesville (a point Ive made myself) and he whiffed. Come to think of it, maybe Dersh wont be working for Trump after all. His analogy between tearing down Confederate statues and Stalins habit of expunging disfavored politicos from Soviet history sits uneasily with me, although I think hes referring to extreme tactics like rampaging mobs tearing down monuments physically and breaking them up. Stalin wanted to whitewash the collective memory of Russians by excising his political enemies from it. Most critics of Confederate statuary have the opposite impulse they see the monuments themselves as a whitewash of history. Uprooting public testaments to the slave regimes gallantry is a step towards a crisper understanding of the past. But the line is tricky: One could (and some do) make the same argument about statues of Washington and Jefferson, that a reckoning with their slaveholding cant begin until history is cleansed of idolatry towards the Founders. I think the fear of SJWs running roughshod over Lee and stampeding towards Mount Vernon and Monticello is overstated, but American higher education being what it is, its not groundless. The left tends not to worry overly much about discernment when its in idol-smashing mode. Mike Pence had an interesting suggestion for monument mania: EARHARDT: Youre in favor of keeping those monuments? PENCE: I think that obviously, I think that should always be a local decision and, with regard to the U.S. Capitol, should be state decisions. But Im someone who believes in more monuments, not less monuments. What we ought to do is we ought to remember our history. But we also ought to celebrate the progress that weve made since that history. You know, when I walked back in 2010 across the Edmund Pettus Bridge with John Lewis, arm and arm, and we remembered Bloody Sunday and the extraordinary progress of the civil rights movement, I cant help but think that, rather than pulling down monuments, as some are wont to do, rather than tearing down monuments that have graced our cities all across this country for years, we ought to have been building more monuments. We ought to be celebrating the men and women whove helped our nation move toward a more perfect union and tell the whole story of America. Not every monument to Washington or Jefferson requires a prominent reminder that they held slaves, but ones that purport to recount their entire life story like Mount Vernon and Monticello obviously do. I dont think that same principle works with CSA statuary since slavery isnt just part of the story; its the casus belli in a war the Confederacy was created to wage. Its like trying to solve the problem with a statue to U.S. General Benedict Arnold by adding a plaque that begins, Oh, by the way Arnolds treason isnt part of the story, its the main detail in the story. Whether the similar problem with Confederate monuments could be solved by erecting statues to Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, or to American slaves generally nearby, I dont know. Something for the local community to ruminate on.

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

How Alan Dershowitz Went From Hillary Donor to Trump’s Attack Dog on Russia – Daily Beast

Alan Dershowitza liberal Harvard law professor and ardent backer of Hillary Clintonhas emerged as one of the Russia probes most vocal critics. Hes likened the investigation to a KGB hunt, and special counsel Bob Mueller to a notoriously obsessed sailor. Its made him a Fox News fixture, and that has left some of his counterparts in the legal world baffled and skeptical. But those close to Dershowitz say his vociferous criticism of Muellers investigation is the opposite of surprisingand that Mueller and Dershowitz have a history. Thats according to Harvey Silverglate, a criminal defense attorney who has worked with Dershowitz over the years. The two men once represented Jeffrey MacDonald, who was convicted decades ago of murdering his wife and two daughters and who still maintains his innocence. Silverglate and Dershowitz tried to get MacDonald a new trial. As part of that effort, said Silverglate, they met with Mueller at the Justice Department headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. This meeting came in the early 90sSilverglate didnt recall the exact yearwhen Mueller headed the Justice Departments Criminal Division. They wanted him to ask the judge who convicted MacDonald to vacate that conviction because of problems with evidence. A report from the time said Dershowitz argued government agents had conspired to frame MacDonald. Mueller opens up the meeting with the following line, which was so seared into my memory that I will never forget it, Silverglate told The Daily Beast. He looks at usAlan Dershowitz and meand says, OK, gentlemen, I just want to say: Criticism of the bureau is a non-starter. But criticizing the FBI was exactly what Dershowitz and Silverglate had come to do. Alan and I both walked away in a little bit of shellshock, Silverglate continued, understanding that there were things to Mueller that were more important than facts, more important than truth, more important than the erroneous conviction of an innocent American, and that is, the reputation of the FBI and his relationship with the FBI. Dershowitz told The Daily Beast he recalls working on the MacDonald case with Silverglate but doesnt specifically recall that conversation. He didnt question Silverglates account. As Muellers probe of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election has gained momentum, Dershowitz has become a staple of conservative media. On Aug. 20, he told New York Republican billionaire radio host John Catsimatidis that Muellers probe threatens American democracy. The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with [Trump] politically, and target him, really endangers democracy, he said, according to The Hill. [It] reminds me of what the head of the KGB said to Stalin: Show me the man, and I will find you the crime. And last month on Fox & Friends, Dershowitz compared Mueller and his team to Captain Ahab from Moby Dick. Theyre determined to get that white whale, he said. Get The Beast In Your Inbox! Start and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast. A speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don’t). Subscribe Thank You! You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason. Dershowitz has also criticized Mueller for hiring lawyers who have contributed to Democratic politicians. And he recently released a new book, Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy. Critics say hes a Trump shill. He says thats laughable. Please put on the record that I am not defending him, that I am only focusing on the issues, he said. And the issues this time happen to come out largely on his sidebut, by the way, not always. Some suspect Dershowitzs advocacy goes beyond his television appearances. A person familiar with the presidents legal affairs said there are concerns Dershowitz has talked about legal affairs with Trump. Dershowitz told The Daily Beast this isnt true. He said he and the president have spoken, but never privately. He said the two men spoke at Mar-a-Lago once when Dershowitz dined there with Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, a mutual friend of the two. Trump came over to their table and chatted with them about the travel ban, according to Dershowitz. Trump said he wanted to try to enforce the first version of the travel ban, which federal courts had struck down. Dershowitz said he told the president that would be a bad idea. Then he took me aside and said, I want to talk to you about the peace prospects in the Middle East because you know Netanyahu, Dershowitz said. I said, Look, Mr. President, I didnt vote for you, but on Israel and the Middle East, I am passionately concerned with that and Im happy to help, 24/7. Dershowitz said he later met with Jason Greenblatt, Trumps envoy for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, and that he also met with Mahmoud Abbas shortly before the Palestinian Authority president met with Trump at the White House. And he said he criticized Trump for not making Elliott Abramsa foreign policy adviser to George W. Bushthe next deputy secretary of state. Besides Ruddy, Dershowitz and the president share a number of friends and acquaintances, including Patriots owner Bob Kraft. The two men met years ago in Krafts suite at a Patriots game, he said. I liked him, Dershowitz said. He was very nice, he was very affable. We talked football. Dershowitz and Trump also both know Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted pedophile who has long been friendly with Bill Clinton, too. Trump once praised Epsteins social life, noting he likes women on the younger side. Epstein was one of Dershowitzs clients. And he isnt the most controversial person Dershowitz has defended; the attorney also represented O.J. Simpson. Publicly, Dershowitz is never one for understatement. Take his recent comments about Antifa, the far left group: Antifa is a radical anti-American, anti-free market, communist, socialist, hard, hard-left censorial organization that tries to stop speakers on campuses, he told the hosts of Fox & Friendsreportedly Trumps favorite TV showon Tuesday morning. He taped that hit from Marthas Vineyard, where he spends the summers. Im not getting very many invitations to dinner at Marthas Vineyard, Dershowitz said wryly. My life can always be judged by the dinner invitations. They went down to zero when I defended O.J. Simpson, and theyre down considerably now. But his cable-news invitations are through the roof. Theres a big difference between inviting you to dinner and inviting you to speak, because I do draw crowds, he said. Whether or not people like me or dont like me, nobody has ever accused me of being boring. They do accuse him of being opportunistic and intellectually dishonest. Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor who practices law in Chicago, told The Daily Beast he believes Dershowitzs defense of the president is so terrible it must be in bad faith. All of the arguments that are made by Dershowitz appear to me to be highly misleading, and I think that he has enough experience and knowledge as a lawyer to know better, he said. For that reason, Ive concluded that Alan Dershowitz is not giving neutral legal analysis but is instead trying to score political points. I think hes being disingenuous. Deshowitz vigorously disputes that. Many serious scholars have told me they agree with these arguments, he said. They are certainly serious and are likely to be given serious consideration by any court. Any defense attorney who failed to raise them would be guilty of ineffective assistance of counsel. Norm Eisen, the chair of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, sometimes spars with Dershowitz on cable news and on Twitter. And like many of the most prominent legal figures in Washington, he was once one of Dershowitzs students at Harvard Law. Agree or disagree, hes absolutely consistent in advocating for the narrowest possible reasonable application of criminal law and of the importance of not politicizing it, Eisen said. Silverglate added that Dershowitz doesnt mind the kind of spats that have drawn scorching criticism from fellow Democrats. We dont have friends on the right, we dont have friends on the left, he said. And we manage.

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: Trump has a special obligation to condemn the racist Right – Washington Examiner

All decent Americans have an obligation to condemn the violent bigotry of the Nazi and KKK demonstrators in Charlottesville, Va., or wherever else they spew their poisonous and threatening rhetoric. But President Trump has a special obligation to single out for condemnation, and distance himself from, individuals and groups that claim (even if falsely) to speak in his name, as the racist provocateurs in Charlottesville did. David Duke, the notorious bigot, told reporters that white nationalists were working to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” Richard Spencer, the founder of the Daily Stormer (a not-so-coded homage to the Nazi publication Der Sturmer), attributed the growth of the ultra-nationalist alt-right to the Trump presidency: “Obviously the alt-right has come very far in the past two years in terms of public exposure is Donald Trump one of the major causes of that? Of course.” Trump initially responded as follows: “We must ALL be united and condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America.” But then, following the car ramming that killed a peaceful protestor, Trump made the following statement: “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides on many sides.” Trump’s inclusion of the words “violence on many sides,” which seemed improvised, suggested to some a moral equivalence between the Nazis and the KKK and those protesting and resisting them. Trump denied that he was suggesting any such equivalence and made the following statement: “Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.” But then a day later he seemed to double down on his attempt to be even handed in his comments about the “many sides” of this conflict. He pointed to “very fine people on both sides,” implying that Nazis and Klansmen could be “fine,” because their protests were “very legal.” Then he denounced “alt-left” groups that were “very, very violent.” Once again he blamed “both sides,” and asked rhetorically, “what about the alt-left’, that as you say, came charging at the alt-right? Don’t they have any semblance of guilt?” David Duke immediately praised Trump’s condemnation of the “alt- left,” thanking him “for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa.” Finally (though nothing this president ever tweets is final), Trump praised the anti-racist “protestors in Boston who are speaking out against bigotry and hate.” It is against this background that the president’s back-and-forth statements must be evaluated. Even if it were true and the evidence is to the contrary that Black Lives Matter and Antifa were as blameworthy for Charlottesville as the Nazis and KKK, it would still be incumbent on Trump to focus his condemnation especially on the violent racist right that claims to speak on his behalf. The hard left which does, in part, include some violent and bigoted elements does not purport to speak on the president’s behalf and does not claim to be trying to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” To the contrary, they oppose everything he stands for. This situation poses a delicate dilemma for Trump. He has denounced the ideology of the violent racists on the alt-right who claim to be acting in his name, though not quickly or forcefully enough. And he has declared his opposition to “racism” and specifically to “those who cause violence in its name,” who he has called “criminals” and “thugs.” He specifically included within these categories the “KKK, neo-Nazis [and] white supremacists,” the very groups that purport to speak in his name. Why is that not enough? Why should he not at the same time condemn the alt-left for its violence? These are reasonable questions that require nuanced answers. Let me try to provide some. I have long believed that it is the special responsibility of decent conservatives to expose, condemn, and marginalize hard-right extremists and bigots. William Buckley showed the way when he refused to defend Patrick Buchanan against charges that what he had said amounted to anti-Semitism. Other decent conservatives followed Buckley’s lead and marginalized anti-Semites and racists who expressed bigotry in the false name of conservatism. I also believe that it is the special responsibility of decent liberals to do the same with regard to hard-left bigoted extremists. I must acknowledge, as a liberal, that we have not done as good a job as decent conservatives have done. Perhaps this is because hard-left extremists often march under banners of benevolence, whereas hard-right extremists tend not to hide their malevolence. Consider, for example, Antifa, the radical hard-left group, some of whose members violently confronted the Nazis and Klansmen in Charlottesville. As reported by the New York Times, the organization is comprised of a “diverse collection of anarchists, communists and socialists” with its “antecedents in Germany and Italy.” According to the Times, “Its adherents express disdain for mainstream liberal politics” and support “direct action” by which they mean “using force and violence” rather than free speech and civil disobedience. Their leaders claim that violence is necessary because “it’s full on war.” Nor is this merely rhetoric. On university campuses, particularly at Berkeley, “black-clad protestors, some of whom identified themselves as Antifa, smashed windows, threw gasoline bombs and broke into campus buildings, causing $100,000 in damage.” They model themselves on the “Weathermen” of the 1970s, who were responsible for numerous acts of violence. They claim to be using counterviolence in defense against the violence of neo-Nazi and Klansmen, but that is not true. They also use violence to shut down speakers with whose worldviews they disagree: they include not only right-wing extremists, but also mainstream conservatives, moderate Zionists, and even some liberals. They reject dialogue in favor of intimidation and force. As a liberal, I will not give these hard-left violent bigots a pass. It is true that the Nazis and KKK are currently more dangerous in terms of physical violence than hard-left groups. (It is also true that the most violent groups by far are radical Islamic terrorist, who are not the targets of Antifa protests.) But the violence of the racist right (and radical jihadists) must not lead us to ignore the reality that Antifa and its radical allies pose real danger to the future of our nation, because of their increasing influence on university campuses where our future leaders are being educated. The recent events in Charlottesville and elsewhere have made them heroes among some mainstream liberals, who are willing to excuse their anti-liberal bigotry because they are on the barricades against fascism. It’s far too easy to self-righteously condemn your political enemies when they step (or leap) over the line to bigotry and violence. It’s far more difficult to condemn those who share your wing, whether Left or Right, but who go too far. But that is what morality and decency require, as Buckley taught us. So President Trump must stop being even-handed in his condemnations. He should focus his condemnation on extreme right-wing bigots who speak and act in his name and leave it to those of us on the left to focus our condemnation on left-wing extremists and bigots. Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of several books, including most recently Trumped Up: How Criminalization of Political Differences Endangers Democracy. If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

MSNBC host snarks at Alan Dershowitz over Russian probe, and he … – TheBlaze.com

MSNBCs Joy Reid thought it was a good idea to mock famedlawyer andprofessor emeritus at Harvard Law School Alan Dershowitz, but he shut her down with just one tweet. Her criticism was aimed at his opinion that the investigation into Russian interference and collusion endangers democracy. Rather than engage with him on the merits of the case, she mocked that he was posing opinions out of opportunistic self-interest. If by democracy you mean Alan Dershhowitz [sic] getting a Supreme Court seat or at least solicitor general for his obsequious loyalty to Trump, she tweeted, with a link to a story at The Hill reporting Dershowitzs comments about the investigation. The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with [President Trump] politically, and target him, really endangers democracy. [It] reminds me of what the head of the KGB said to Stalin: Show me the man, and I will find you the crime,’ Dershowitzsaid on a radio talk show. [This is] where things happen in darkness and secrecy. The American public doesnt learn about it, he said. Dershowitz took to Twitter Monday to respond to Reids criticism. Ad hominems dont respond to serious arguments, he posted simply. He referred to the logical fallacy which has to do with an interlocutor assailing her rhetorical opponent with insults rather than attacking the argument. Dershowitz also responded to former White House Ethics Counsel Richard Painter, a frequent Trump critic, over the same comments. As a civil libertarian I cant remain silent in the face of violations of civil liberties regardless of the political implications, he tweeted. Thats the difference between me and partisans who place politics over principles. Special Counsel Mueller has reportedly opened a grand jury investigation into the matter, while many have speculated that Trump is looking to fire him in order to end the politically damaging investigation.

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

WATCH: Alan Dershowitz On Why The Left Should Decry Bigotry On Its Side – Yeshiva World News

The American party, i.e. the Democratic Party, has so assimilated the idea of political correctness that they cant exist without out. The sometimes violent radical left is actually part of their mainstream. People such as Al Sharpton have been mainstream Democrats for a generation. The Republicans are in a much better position since the alt right is far removed from the mainstream of the Republican, and in fact that mainstream is dominated by members of minorities that the Nazis/KKK types deplore (including Jews, Catholics, Asians and Hispanics, immigrants). Thus the Democrats are stuck with the alt-left, while the Republicans are free to denounce their alt-right supporters.

Fair Usage Law

August 23, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed

Alan Dershowitz: ‘Violent’ Antifa movement is ‘trying to tear down … – Washington Times

Prominent Harvard law professor and liberal author Alan Dershowitz rebuked the hard-left militant movement Antifa on Tuesday, saying liberals need to avoid turning violent leftist factions into heroes. Appearing on Fox & Friends Tuesday morning, Mr. Dershowitz said the movement sweeping the country to take down Confederate-era statues that some find offensive is setting a dangerous precedent. Do not glorify the violent people who are now tearing down the statues, he said. Many of these people, not all of them, many of these people are trying to tear down America. Antifa is a radical anti-American, anti-free market, communist, socialist, hard, hard left censorial organization that tries to stop speakers on campuses from speaking, Mr. Dershowitz said. They use violence. And just because theyre opposed to fascism and to some of these monuments shouldnt make them heroes of the liberals. Im a liberal, and I think its the obligation of liberals to speak out against the hard left radicals just like its the obligation of conservatives to speak out against the extremism of the hard right, he added. Mr. Dershowitz acknowledged that while some historical monuments are better suited in museums, liberals should avoid becoming Stalinist in trying to erase or revise history. We have to use this as an educational moment, he said. We have to take some of the statues that were put up more recently, for example, during the Civil Rights Movement and perhaps move them to museums where they can be used to teach young students about how statues are intended sometimes for bad purposes, to glorify negatives and to hold back positive developments. But the idea of willy-nilly going through and doing what Stalin did just erasing history and re-writing it to serve current purposes does pose a danger, and it poses a danger of educational malpractice, of missing opportunities to educate people, and of going too far, he said. Mr. Dershowitz argued that the movement against Confederate-era statues ignores other discriminated groups in America, like Jews, women, and the Japanese. Once you start rewriting history of African Americans in this country, you have to start rewriting history of discrimination against many, many other groups, he said. Look, were both a nation of immigrants and a nation of discrimination against immigrants. Thats an important history for us to remember.

Fair Usage Law

August 22, 2017   Posted in: Alan Dershowitz  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."