Trump immunity case EXPLAINED: Alan Dershowitz's biggest takeaways

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Yesterday, in a landmark decision, the Supreme Court determined in a 6-3 ruling that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution for actions related to the core powers of their office.

This will send Trump’s case back to the lower courts where it will be determined whether or not his January 6 actions were official or unofficial.

How should we interpret this ruling, and what does it mean going forward? Glenn Beck, Stu Burguiere, and Alan Dershowitz discuss the case.

Trump Immunity Case EXPLAINED: Alan Dershowitz's Biggest

“I think it’s a win for the republic,” says Glenn.

Dershowitz agrees and adds that it’s likely a win for Donald Trump too, as “it probably means there won't be a trial before the election.”

However, “I think [the ruling] is going to be hard to implement in practice because everything the president does, he does as president. That's very hard to separate out private acts from public acts,” he explains.

Further, “There is no actual official process to figure out whether these are official acts or not, so this is a maze of legal rulings and challenges,” adds Stu.

And there’s another potential problem.

“It's going to be implemented by the lower courts, and the lower court of the District of Columbia [is] completely biased against Trump,” says Dershowitz, adding that “it may come back to the Supreme Court."

But Glenn has a prediction.

If “President Trump loses this election ... these cases will just disappear,” but “if [Trump] wins this election, they'll fight it tooth and nail, and they'll drag him all the way through.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Harvard openly SUPPORTS Hamas invasion, and Alan Dershowitz is FURIOUS — 'We are a country in moral crisis.'

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has some choice words for Obama and his former Ivy League employer.

As an Orthodox Jew, Hamas’ invasion of Israel hits close to home for Dershowitz.

“It was just ten days ago or so that I had a three-hour dinner with Benjamin Netanyahu,” he tells Glenn Beck, “and we talked about all the threats Israel was facing, but nobody could have imagined this — raping Jewish women, killing Jewish babies, and Harvard law students are supporting it.”

“About 30 Jewish Harvard organizations have supported Hamas and said this is all the blame of Israel,” he continues, which is disturbing because “these are our future leaders, these are the people today who are being educated to become the heads of our legislative, executive, and judicial branch[es].”

“We are a country in moral crisis when you get our future leaders defending rapists and murderers and putting the blame on innocent people,” says an enraged Dershowitz.

Further, Barack Obama, despite being a former Harvard Law student, “hasn’t said an effing word about this” and neither has “the president of Harvard,” he tells Glenn.

“We keep forgetting that Harvard [and] places like Harvard were a center of Nazi support during the 1930s,” he recounts. “Harvard University welcomed Nazis, gave them honorary degrees.”

And while it’s extremely upsetting to see support for such depravity, Dershowitz thinks it’s important to remember who “the real villain” is.

“Iran put them up to it; we now know from Wall Street Journal reporting that there were meetings in Lebanon in which Iran gave them the green light [and] told them to go forward,” Dershowitz explains.

“This will never end unless there’s regime change in Iran, and the first step that should be taken is for the United States and Israel together with the fleet that is now approaching the Eastern Mediterranean to destroy Iran's nuclear reactor … Iran must come out of this thing losing its most valuable weapon — the nuclear arsenal,” he says.

“Hamas and Hezbollah are puppets — mere surrogates — that just do the bidding of this horrible, horrible Nazi regime in Iran that will never be satisfied with the two states solution” because “they want Israel wiped off the map and every single Israeli Jew murdered.”

“Hamas [and] Hezbollah, Iran — those regimes have got to go … or you're never going to have any kind of peace,” agrees Glenn.

To hear their full conversation, watch the clip below.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Could Trump’s 3rd indictment mean the END of free speech? Alan Dershowitz weighs in

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

American lawyer and former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz joins Glenn Beck to discuss the implications of Trump’s third indictment.

“What exactly is Donald Trump being charged with in this latest indictment?” asks Glenn.

“The basic charge is that ... he believed that he had actually lost the election fair and square,” despite his insistence that it was stolen, “and he engaged in all these actions with a corrupt motive,” answers Dershowitz, referencing the January 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol.

However, he doesn't “think the government’s going to be able to prove that.”

He also doesn’t think the election was stolen from Trump, but if Trump wants to believe that himself, “that doesn’t make a crime,” he tells Glenn.

Further, if they’re going to indict “the man running against the incumbent president who is now tied 44-44 in the New York Times poll, that indictment better be the strongest indictment in American history,” says Dershowitz.

“There should be a smoking gun, fingerprints, a videotaping, a confession,” he continues, “but this document is so flawed; it’s so filled with speculation.”

To make matters worse, the trial is being held in the District of Columbia, where the jury is openly hostile toward anyone and anything connected to Donald Trump.

To avoid bias, “this case should be tried in a purple state,” says Dershowitz, not “in the most Democratic district in the United States of America — the most anti-Trump district in the entire United States.”

And yet it gets even worse.

The judge set to hold the trial “has a very questionable background” and is well-known as “the January 6 hanging judge” for the disproportionately harsh punishments she’s issued to anyone involved in the January 6 attacks.

Regardless of where the trial is held, however, at its core, this case is an attack on freedom of speech.

Quoting Jonathan Turley, Glenn says, “this is the first criminal indictment of alleged misinformation.”’

“I think [Turley’s] right,” says Dershowitz, adding, “the first amendment protects so much speech that we despise,” and, “this indictment takes us down the road toward criminalizing free speech.”

The fact of the matter is, “under our First Amendment, we have extraordinarily broad rights to do the wrong thing, and now President Trump is being indicted for doing what this administration thinks was the wrong thing,” he says.

To listen to their full conversation, watch the clip below.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'We don't have a Republic anymore': Republicans react to Trump indictment; suggest it is an attempt to 'preemptively steal the 2024 election'

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,62,0,45 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Former President Donald Trump revealed Thursday he had been indicted on seven counts in connection with his handling of allegedly classified documents.

Trump's attorney, Jim Trusty, called the charges — which reportedly include false statements, conspiracy to obstruct and a charge under the Espionage Act — "ludicrous."

Trusty confirmed to CNN that the Department of Justice sent a summons letter to the Republican presidential candidate's legal team via email listing the counts and scheduling a Miami federal court appearance for Tuesday afternoon.

Republicans, legal experts, and other keen observers reckon this development is an attempt by the Biden administration and those subject to its influence to sap the Democratic president's top political challenger ahead of the 2024 election.

After all, Biden, no stranger to accusations of mishandling classified documents, could use the help.

Recent Harvard-Harris and Marquette polls indicate Trump has a 5-7 point advantage over the 80-year-old Democrat, who appears to have trouble keeping his footing both in approval polls and on stage.

Republicans respond on a 'dark day'

Republicans circled the wagons Thursday night, certain justice was not the aim with this latest Trump indictment.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) suggested the indictment was the "culmination of what Merrick Garland has been pushing for since he became Attorney General. The weaponization of our Department of Justice against enemies of the Biden admin. will do enormous damage to the rule of law & have a lasting impact."
Cruz told Fox Business on Thursday that Attorney General Merrick Garland "has corrupted the machinery of government. He's the most partisan Attorney General in our nation's history."

While in competition with Trump for the Republican nomination, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis condemned the indictment, writing, "The weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society. We have for years witnessed an uneven application of the law depending upon political affiliation. Why so zealous in pursuing Trump yet so passive about Hillary or Hunter?"

Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) tweeted, "The former president will be indicted for 'mishandling' his own government’s classified info. Yet everyone agrees the president has the authority to declassify anything. This is a moral and constitutional joke. Merrick Garland has disgraced this country."

"Biden is attacking his most likely 2024 opponent," continued Vance. "He’s using the justice system to preemptively steal the 2024 election. This is what’s happening, plain and simple."

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) concurred, stressing that if the Biden DOJ was indeed trying to clear the political field for President Joe Biden with this indictment, the country was in serious trouble.

"If the president in power can just jail his political opponents, which is what Joe Biden is trying to do tonight, we don't have a republic anymore. We don't have the rule of law. We don't have the Constitution," Hawley told Fox News. "No one should be in doubt of what's happening tonight. Joe Biden and his cronies are trying to take out their chief political opponent."

Hawley added, "this has never happened before in American history. ... We are in dangerous, dangerous waters and it is because of Joe Biden."

\u201cHawley: If the president in power can jail his political opponents, which is what Joe Biden is trying to do tonight, we don't have a republic anymore. We don't have the rule of law or constitution.\u201d
— Acyn (@Acyn) 1686277619

Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) said Trump's indictment marked a "dark day for the United States of America."

"It is unconscionable for a President to indict the leading candidate opposing him. Joe Biden kept classified documents for decades. I, and every American who believes in the rule of law, stand with President Trump against this grave injustice," wrote McCarthy. "House Republicans will hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable."

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) noted the curious timing of the indictment: "On the day members of Congress learn from an FBI document linking then VP Joe Biden to receiving $5 MILLION from Burisma in a pay-for-play scheme, Biden’s DOJ announces another phony indictment of the leading candidate for the GOP Presidential nomination, Biden’s likely opponent, and the former POTUS."

Donalds added, "This mob-like justice system is turning Lady Justice on its head and is the most significant threat to our democracy."

TheBlaze previously reported that Trump indicated in a video message that the indictment amounts to "election interference."

"They're doing it to affect the election," said Trump. "They [are] cheating on the election just like the did the last time."

— Trump War Room (@Trump War Room) 1686269728

Eliminating the competition

Republican lawmakers are not the only ones scratching their heads over the indictment.

Legal expert Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax, "Unless this indictment is the strongest case since [former President] Richard Nixon's obstruction of justice back in the 1970s, this is a disgrace."

"When you have the current administration going after the man who was potentially capable of unseating them, it better be the strongest case imaginable," said Dershowitz. "It better be the case that would get bipartisan support."

Dershowitz stressed that unless Jack Smith, a war crimes prosecutor appointed by Garland to lead the documents probe, has an ironclad case replete with damning evidence, "this is an indictment that never, ever should have been brought," adding that if "President Trump believed that he had declassified the material and that he was entitled to possess them, then it can't be a crime to refuse to turn them over."

Former Trump advisor and "War Room" host Steve Bannon responded to the news, saying, "This whole fantasy about DOJ [being] separate from the administration, the FBI's independent — they're not independent agencies. This is some fantasy that the left has cooked up. ... Merrick Garland is hardwired into the White House. The FBI is hardwired into Merrick Garland. They're rolling against Trump 'cause they can't beat Trump at the ballot box. The most important thing they have to do from their own perspective is demoralize you."

Investigative journalist Matt Taibbi, admittedly no fan of Trump, told NewsNation, "If you're going to take the very extreme step of indicting somebody who is the likely nominee of the opposition party, the charge has to meet two tests: It has to be extremely serious and it has to be an airtight case. And I think both of these cases fail on both of those points."

Stephen Miller, contributing editor at the Spectator, tweeted, "Comey found stripped classified material on a laptop of the husband of Hillary Clinton's closest aide, who didn't have a security clearance & was sexting 15 year olds, and he went like 'Yeah we're not pressing charges here' Everything about the Trump indictment is political."

Byron York, chief political correspondent at the Washington Examiner, underscored that this indictment is not only the first federal charge against a former president, "but it would also be the first time a sitting president's administration has indicted a leading opposition party candidate in the run-up to a presidential election."

Trump's attorney Jim Trusty told NBC's "Today" that the former president's legal team does not anticipate another indictment from the D.C. grand jury empaneled in the classified documents case.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Alan Dershowitz: George Soros DEVOTED to hurting America

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,0 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Alan Dershowitz and Glenn Beck might not agree on everything, but they absolutely do agree on one thing. And that one thing is that George Soros is not a good man.

Dershowitz has recently written a scathing article about Soros, and Beck invited him on the show to discuss it.

According to Beck, in retaliation for the decades he’s been warning Americans about Soros’ true intentions, Soros has “rallied people” to say that Beck is an anti-Semite, despite winning the Defender of Israel award.

“How dare anybody call you an anti-Semite,” Dershowitz says. “The only anti-Semite that we’ve discussed on this show so far is George Soros.”

Dershowitz believes that Soros is “self-hating” and thus “not even a Jew.”

Dershowitz adds that Soros made his first money “by collecting the property of Jews who were being sent to the concentration camps.”

“He’s devoted his life to hurting Jews, to hurting Israel, to hurting America — and nobody’s attacking him because he’s a Jew,” Dershowitz says.

He goes on to say that “George Soros is anything but good for America, good for the Jewish people, good for Israel,” and that he will continue to criticize him as he’s been doing for the last 20 years alongside Glenn.

“Let people call me an anti-Semite,” Dershowitz, who is Jewish, says.

“I tell you, this is not going to make you more popular,” Glenn laughs.

Glenn believes it's important that they continue to speak out about George Soros because he “funds so many things” and has such a tight grip on the mainstream media.

“No one in the media will say anything about George Soros, and he is dismantling our country,” Glenn says.

According to Dershowitz, even the Jerusalem Post is a staunch defender of Soros.

“The Jerusalem Post had an article saying, ‘Every Jew must support George Soros.’ And I wrote back to say, ‘Not this Jew.’”

“I’m not going to do it,” Dershowitz continues. “I see evil where I see evil. I see good where I see good.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Alan Dershowitz defends massage at Epstein’s house

[rebelmouse-proxy-image,0,0,80 crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//" expand=1]

Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyer friend, Alan Dershowitz, who most recently penned the classic "The Case for Vaccine Mandates," is setting the record straight on his reported massage at Epstein’s house.

In a heated interview on Alex Stein’s "Prime Time," the disgraced lawyer claims he has “only had sex with one woman" since he married his wife, and not only that, but his massage at Epstein’s house was scheduled for him by his wife.

He claims the masseuse was a 40-year-old woman named Olga and that he has never been involved in any of Epstein’s dirty underage business.

However, as Stein points out, just the fact that he’s been on the receiving end of a massage at Epstein’s house is enough to cause controversy. Because, you know, just a casual massage at a known sex trafficker and pedophile’s home. No big deal.

It seems that Dershowitz has also forgotten he’s been a huge proponent of ending age of consent laws and played a large part in getting Jeffrey Epstein a measly 13-month county jail sentence for the sexual abuse of underage girls.

So, while Dershowitz is adamant that he has never received a massage from one of Epstein’s underage girls, the fact that he willingly received a massage at all is head-scratching to say the least.

It seems the takeaway here is that if you don’t want to be accused of potential heinous acts, don’t hang out with the people who are constantly committing them.

Want more from Alex Stein?

To enjoy more of Alex's culture jamming, comedic monologues, skits, and street segments, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Alan Dershowitz: Rittenhouse 'should be acquitted,' then sue liberal media outlets for their 'deliberate and willful lies'

Former Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz blasted liberal media outlets such as CNN and the New Yorker over the weekend for their biased and erroneous reporting on the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.

What did he say?

The scholar said the Illinois teenager charged with killing two men and wounding another during Black Lives Matter riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last summer "should be acquitted" and then should go on the offensive against the media outlets that have branded him a white supremacist vigilante before the conclusion of his trial.

"If I were a juror, I would vote that there was reasonable doubt [and] that he did act in self-defense," Dershowitz told Newsmax on Saturday.

"Then he'll bring lawsuits, and that's the way to answer ... vigilante justice is what CNN is doing, not what a 17-year-old kid under pressure may have done right or wrong. It's CNN who is involved in vigilante justice. It's the New Yorker that's guilty of vigilante justice," he added.

Dershowitz compared Rittenhouse's case to former Kentucky high school student Nicholas Sandmann, who became the target of left-wing media attacks following an encounter with a Native American activist in Washington, D.C.

Sandmann later sued CNN and the Washington Post. Both the network and the paper ended up settling.

"The idea is to make the media accountable for deliberate and willful lies," Dershowitz explained.

What else?

He added in a Sunday conversation with Breitbart's Joel Pollak that "CNN and some of the other TV stations" are the "ones who want to put not the thumb, but the elbow on the scale of justice."

"They want to influence the outcome of this case," he argued. "And there are others who are threatening violence if there is anything but convictions in this case, as they threatened violence in previous cases and will in subsequent cases unless something is done about it. It's the New Yorker and CNN that are the vigilantes. They're the ones who are trying to influence justice without regard to evidence or the law."

Rittenhouse is currently facing multiple felony murder charges — including first-degree intentional homicide and first-degree reckless homicide — for fatally shooting Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and wounding Gage Grosskreutz, 28.

Rittenhouse's defense team has maintained that their client was in Kenosha on Aug. 25, 2020, to protect local businesses and provide medical aid during the uprising and that he was only acting in self-defense when he fired the shots.

Videos of the incidents seen by the public appear to show Rittenhouse being chased and physically threatened before firing his gun. The prosecution, however, argued that the defendant provoked the attacks by bringing an AR-15 to the protests.

As of Tuesday afternoon, the jury was still deliberating over the verdict.