ReportWire

Tag: Alan Dershowitz

  • As Epstein’s cushy jail sentence raised concerns, his lawyers went on charm offensive

    [ad_1]

    An undated photo of Jeffrey Epstein and his defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, released by House Oversight Committee Democrats on Dec. 12, 2025

    An undated photo of Jeffrey Epstein and his defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, released by House Oversight Committee Democrats on Dec. 12, 2025

    House Oversight Committee Democrats

    Jeffrey Epstein’s team of high-powered lawyers famously negotiated a lenient 2007 deal on his behalf with federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida that allowed the financier to avoid a lengthy prison sentence and plead guilty to only two state charges to settle allegations that he had abused dozens of teenage girls.

    Never-before-seen documents released this week by the Department of Justice as part of the so-called Epstein Files show how his attorneys continued to try to influence federal prosecutors even after his deal was finalized, and mixed personal and business relationships with the attorneys who had agreed to settle Epstein’s case.

    While federal prosecutors pushed back against Epstein’s lawyers, at the end of day, Epstein got what he wanted.

    In mid-November of 2008, nearly five months after Epstein began his sentence at the Palm Beach County Jail, his attorney Jay Lefkowitz wrote to one of the Florida prosecutors on the case asking if the prosecutor could meet the week of Thanksgiving.

    “Do we need to discuss anything related to Mr. Epstein or is this purely a social visit?,” asked the prosecutor, whose name is redacted.

    Lefkowitz replied that he would be seeing Epstein and would provide the prosecutor updates on his client.

    “But primarily,” Lefkowitz wrote, “I thought we could have a social visit. For once.”

    Lefkowitz didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

    His correspondence with the unnamed prosecutor came roughly one week before the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida wrote to another of Epstein’s prominent attorneys, Roy Black, to raise a significant issue.

    Miami criminal defense attorney Roy Black
    Miami criminal defense attorney Roy Black Handout

    They learned that Epstein had applied for and been admitted to a work release program through the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office, which operated the county jail.

    Under the terms of this program, Epstein was ultimately able to spend up to 12 hours a day, six days a week working at a nearby office he rented in West Palm Beach while he was serving his sentence. Epstein allegedly continued to abuse girls at this West Palm Beach Office while still technically serving his incarceration.

    In the Nov. 24, 2008 letter, the U.S. Attorney’s Office wrote that Epstein’s participation in the program is a “material breach” of his deal with the government. Part of his agreement required that he spend his incarceration in jail, not on work release.

    “Accordingly, the United States demands that Mr. Epstein withdraw his application to participate in the program and complete his eighteen-month term of imprisonment,” the letter states.

    Neither of those things would happen.

    Epstein continued to participate in the program, and he was released from custody after only 13 months.

    Black died earlier this year.

    ‘A relaxed drink and conversation’

    It wasn’t the first time federal prosecutors discussed the conditions of Epstein’s incarceration with his attorneys; the letter indicates that they raised concerns about it in June 2008 as his plea deal with the state was being finalized. It wouldn’t be the last time, either.

    Another of Epstein’s attorneys, Alan Dershowitz, met for a drink in March 2009 with an attorney from the U.S. Attorney’s Office who Dershowitz identified as Jeffrey Sloman, the then-deputy U.S. attorney in Miami.

    Sloman at the time was overseeing the Epstein case and succeeded Alexander Acosta as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida two months later.

    Dershowitz wrote to Sloman after their meeting.

    “It was so nice having a relaxed drink and conversation on the porch of our neighborhood bistro,” Dershowitz wrote. “I appreciate your kind words of advice, encouragement and friendship.”

    But the visit clearly wasn’t all social.

    “I especially appreciate your assurance that the feds will not interfere with how the Palm Beach sheriff administers jefferey’s sentence as long as he is treated like any similarly situated inmate,” Dershowitz added, misspelling Epstein’s name. “My understanding is that if the sheriff were to decide, in the normal course of events, that the circumstances warranted Jeffrey completing the custodial portion of his sentence under alternative custody/in-home detention, your office would not intrude.”

    Sloman responded saying that he looked “forward to maintaining and growing our friendship.”

    He went on to say that the U.S. Attorney’s Office “will not interfere with how the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office administers the sentence imposed by the Court.”

    But he added that “this does not mean that [The U.S. Attorney’s Office] condones or encourages [The Palm Beach Sheriffs Office] to mitigate the terms and conditions of his sentence.”

    If the office was contacted to offer their position on Epstein being allowed to serve out the remainder of his sentence in “alternative custody or in-home detention,” Sloman wrote, “we will object.”

    Dershowitz wrote back the following day with a compliment.

    “You are a real mensch,” he said.

    A few months later Epstein was released from the Palm Beach County jail, five months before the scheduled end of his 18-month sentence.

    Dershowitz told the Miami Herald that he did for Epstein what he would do for any client.

    “I try to get the best possible situation,” he said.

    He added that there was “nothing unusual” about the negotiations between Epstein’s legal team and the U.S. Attorney’s Office throughout the entire process.

    Sloman didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

    ‘The possibility of working together’

    The prospect of future work complicated the relationship between federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida and Epstein’s legal team.

    Acosta, who formally signed off on Epstein’s non-prosecution deal with the feds, recused himself from the case in December 2008 because he was in discussions about going to work for the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, according to the Justice Department’s internal investigation into the Epstein deal released in 2020. Kirkland & Ellis employed both Lefkowitz and another of Epstein’s high-powered attorneys, former Solicitor General Ken Starr.

    The report also showed that Acosta had met with Lefkowitz for breakfast in October 2007 at a West Palm Beach Marriott.

    In a letter to Acosta, Lefkowitz wrote that Acosta had assured him that the U.S. Attorney’s Office would “not intervene with the State Attorney’s Office regarding this matter” and not intervene in Epstein’s state sentence. Acosta disputed that characterization in a letter sent to Lefkowitz in response, the report said. Agreeing to those terms would equate to “the imposition of a gag order,” the response to Lefkowitz said.

    Epstein himself was in direct contact with one of the prosecutors who oversaw his case after he was released from custody.

    The Herald previously reported that Epstein met with former prosecutor Matthew Menchel several times in 2011, 2013 and 2017, according to Epstein’s calendars released by the House Oversight Committee from material it received through a subpoena to Epstein’s estate.

    The new Epstein files include another new piece of information, an October 2010 e-mail between Menchel and Epstein, less than a year and a half after Epstein’s sentence ended.

    “I very much enjoyed our talk the other night,” Menchel wrote. “I look forward to the possibility of working together, but regardless let’s keep in touch.” A spokesperson for Menchel provided the Herald with a statement indicating that Menchel never met with Epstein during the time he was involved with the Epstein investigation at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and that the law firm where Menchel went to work after leaving the government, Kobre & Kim, was one of several firms Epstein considered hiring to address various legal issues.

    “There was nothing inappropriate about any of Mr. Menchel’s communications or conduct,” the statement said. “Ultimately, neither Mr. Menchel nor anyone else at his firm ever represented Epstein or otherwise did business with him.”

    Julie K. Brown

    Miami Herald

    Julie K. Brown is a member of the Miami Herald’s Investigative Team. Her 2017 probe into Palm Beach sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein won multiple journalism awards, including a George Polk Award. She was also a member of the Herald’s 2022 Pulitzer-Prize-winning team recognized for its coverage of the Surfside condo collapse.
    Support my work with a digital subscription

    [ad_2]

    Ben Wieder,Julie K Brown

    Source link

  • Why Epstein Victims Can’t Just Reveal THE LIST – And How We Could Get It Anyway! – Perez Hilton

    [ad_1]

    This week we got one of the most hopeful bits of news yet about this Jeffrey Epstein scandal… but there’s a pretty big hurdle to clear still.

    The Donald Trump administration may be content to bury the Epstein files forever, with the President personally calling the whole thing “a Democrat hoax”… But the victims won’t go away!

    Several women who were abused and trafficked by Epstein in the ’90s and 2000s came to Capitol Hill on Wednesday and spoke out. And in one of the bravest, most badass moves we’ve seen, they announced they were putting together their own Epstein list! Accuser Lisa Phillips declared:

    “And let me announce now: Several of us Epstein survivors have been discussing creating our own list of names. We know the names. Many of us were abused by them. Now together as survivors we will confidentially compile the names we all know were regularly in the Epstein world. And it will be done by survivors and for survivors. No one else is involved.”

    Hell yeah!

    Many asked why they aren’t just saying the names right there. We mean, they did mention Trump and Bill Clinton by name as being part of Epstein’s circle… but they didn’t make accusations against anyone other than Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Why??

    Related: Trump Nightmare! Ghislaine Maxwell Said Some Of Epstein’s Pals ‘Are In Your Cabinet’!

    Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie, the Republican Congressman who is leading the charge with his Democratic counterpart Ro Khanna from California, explained just that to folks on the internet. Taking to his X (Twitter) account, he wrote:

    “Survivors at our press conference announced they are privately compiling their own Epstein list. They would be sued into homelessness for naming names…”

    Yeah, we’ve already seen some of them threatened with lawsuits before. Even if they filed lawsuits, they’d still face legal action in retaliation. Alan Dershowitz actually did countersue Virginia Roberts Giuffre. All the accused probably have really powerful, expensive legal teams. It’s a huge obstacle.

    However, Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene give no effs when it comes to something this morally clear — and they have a certain protection that could allow them to announce the list publicly! He continued…

    “…but @RepMTG and I are willing to name names in the House of Representatives under Constitutional ‘speech or debate’ immunity.”

    That’s amazing! We could actually get this thing out this way! It wouldn’t give us the files with all the evidence and accusations that are already on record… But it would be something. And hey, if just SIX Republicans join all the Democrats in the House, they could force the DOJ to reveal all of it!

    Someone asked why accusing the men of crimes opened them up to lawsuits at all — wondering why they couldn’t just press charges against the men for what they did. Massie pointed out the sad reality:

    “Individuals can’t file criminal charges. That would be up to the government, who already has these names, and has already failed to file charges.”

    Damn. Not only have they failed to file charges, Trump’s DOJ and FBI made clear they had no intention of ever doing so. That’s what got this renewed fervor going in the first place!

    But hey, at least someone in Congress has a backbone!

    [Image via Johnny Louis/MEGA/WENN/Florida Department of Law Enforcement.]

    [ad_2]

    Perez Hilton

    Source link

  • Epstein Victims Come Forward, Saying They’ll Make Their Own List: ‘We Know The Names’ – Perez Hilton

    [ad_1]

    It’s about damn time!

    The country has been waiting for years now for the release of the Epstein Files — all the info the government collected on underage sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein both before and after his death. Many of Donald Trump‘s supporters believed he would be their champion and make all of it public… but it’s become clear even to most of MAGA that’s a long wait on a train that ain’t comin’.

    No, Trump — a longtime pal of Epstein, and not the only one in the government — has made clear where he stands. He doesn’t want any of it out, he wants everyone to shut up and stop asking about it, he even went so far as to say the entire thing was just a fake Witch Hunt — repeating as recently as Wednesday that it’s “a Democrat hoax.”

    But of course, we know that’s not true. Epstein’s right-hand woman and sometime girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted on sex trafficking charges, essentially proving in court that Epstein was guilty, too. We mean, he died rather inconveniently in prison before he was able to face justice, but his accomplice’s guilty verdict was pretty definitive legal proof. After all, the victims said it was both of them who recruited, sexually abused, and trafficked them to powerful men.

    Related: Trump Nightmare! Ghislaine Maxwell Said Some Of Epstein’s Pals ‘Are In Your Cabinet’!

    So there’s just that one loose end. Why the hell aren’t any of these powerful men facing justice? The ones who participated in the underage sex trafficking? That’s who everyone has been hoping would be exposed when the Epstein Files finally went public. But that… never happened.

    Well, thankfully a few Republicans are standing up to Trump and siding with Democrats to demand everything be released. Congressmen Ro Khanna (D-California) and Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) are asking their fellow reps to sign a discharge to force Trump’s DOJ to release all the files. They already have 134 of the 218 signatures they need, including Republicans Lauren BoebertNancy Mace, and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Wow. We may not agree with them on anything else, but at least we can all agree that UNDERAGE SEX TRAFFICKING IS WRONG! Jeez, why does this have to be difficult at all??

    In a press conference on Wednesday morning, Rep. Massie hit back directly at Trump’s “hoax” defense, saying:

    “I think it’s shameful that this has been called a hoax. Hopefully, today, we can clear that up. This is not a hoax. This is real. There are real survivors. There are real victims to this criminal enterprise, and the perpetrators are being protected because they’re rich, powerful, and political donors to the establishment here in Washington, DC.”

    In their most powerful push for votes yet, Khanna and Massie invited some of those real survivors of Epstein to speak out about what was done to them — and why it’s so important these files be released. Trump’s FBI and DOJ used the victims as an excuse why the files should be kept private, to protect them — but these women are standing up and calling BS. And we are so in awe of their bravery.

    Annie Farmer was just 16 years old when Epstein and Maxwell assaulted and took sensitive photos of her and her sister Maria Farmer. They even reported it to authorities at the time, and… nothing. That was in 1996, btw. Now she’s had three decades to witness the inaction when powerful men are involved. She told the crowd gathered on Capitol Hill on Wednesday:

    “I am now 46 years old; 30 years later, we still do not know why that report wasn’t properly investigated, or why Epstein and his associates were allowed to harm hundreds, if not thousands, of other girls and young women.”

    She added, pointing at the men still being protected:

    “Not only did many others participate in the abuse, it is clear that many were aware of his interest in girls and very young women and chose to look the other way because it benefited them to do so. They wanted access to his circle and his money. Their choice to align with his power left those of us who had been harmed by this man and his associates feeling very isolated.”

    Sky Roberts, brother of the late Virginia Roberts Giuffre — who died by suicide earlier this year, echoed these sentiments:

    “The justice system was not designed to serve the powerful, it was meant to protect the people — and it’s time it started doing just that.”

    He has every reason to be furious. The President of the United States admitted to knowing that Epstein “stole” his 16-year-old sister from Mar-a-Lago, and has faced no consequences whatsoever…

    But the victims weren’t just there to inspire Congress to try to find them justice — they revealed they’re ready to fight with the one weapon they have: information.

    As Haley Robson, who says she was trafficked by Epstein to other men starting when she was 16 years old, said:

    “We are the keys. We know the games. We know the players.”

    She also blasted the DOJ for using the victims as their shield for not releasing the files, saying:

    “Shame on you for using our trauma to weaponize this moment.”

    Well, you know who isn’t going to exploit the survivors and their trauma? The survivors themselves. Accuser Lisa Phillips declared to thunderous applause:

    “And let me announce now: Several of us Epstein survivors have been discussing creating our own list of names. We know the names. Many of us were abused by them. Now together as survivors we will confidentially compile the names we all know were regularly in the Epstein world. And it will be done by survivors and for survivors. No one else is involved.”

    Whoa. Whoa whoa whoa! Hell yeah! This is a total game changer!

    We have to assume they’ve stayed quiet for so long because they were afraid of what would happen to them. After all, accusers have faced threats both of the legal AND violent kind. Well… not anymore! Now that it’s become clear the government has to be dragged kicking and screaming to truth and transparency, it’s well past time for these women to take charge.

    It sounds like one way or another, an “Epstein list” is going to get released. After all, they know who some of the men who abused them are. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to shout it from the rooftops? Who’s going to stop them from outing sexual predators and rapists of minors??

    Oh, right.

    A White House official blasted the efforts to release the Epstein files, even though they clearly have the backing of the victims. They said:

    “Helping Thomas Massie and Liberal Democrats with their attention-seeking, while the DOJ is fully supporting a more comprehensive file release effort from the Oversight Committee, would be viewed as a very hostile act to the administration.”

    A “very hostile act” to the Trump administration?! Why would the push for a release of information be hostile to Trump? Hmm, let’s think about that one…

    Some of the victims hinted at the men involved. Chauntae Davies pointed out how Epstein and Maxwell were consistently “boastful about their famous or powerful friends.” And Epstein loved bragging most about how close he was with Trump:

    “And his biggest brag forever was that he was very good friends with Donald Trump. He had an 8 by 10 framed picture of him on his desk with the two of them, like they were very close.”

    Several men have been associated with Epstein over the years. Bill Clinton rode on his plane and apparently had him over to the White House. Attorney Alan Dershowitz had some kind of relationship, though he’s quite litigious about what kind. Prince Andrew has been straight up accused of having sex with 17-year-old Virginia Roberts.

    The infamous photo of Prince Andrew with Virginia Roberts, who says she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein to have sex with the Royal when she was just 17. / (c) BBC/WENN

    But we don’t know of any other name as closely associated with Jeffrey Epstein as our 47th President.

    Trump was good friends with Epstein for years, they were party pals, having been described by mutual friends and acquaintances as “best friends” and “wingmen.” There’s a ton of photo and video evidence of them partying together. There are stories about them hanging out with young women. Hell, Trump even said in a profile in 2003:

    “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy, He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

    If that weren’t suspicious enough, Trump actually has been accused of wrongdoing with Epstein. A woman going by the pseudonym Katie Johnson told a horrifying story years ago, accusing Trump of tying her to a bed at Epstein’s apartment and raping her. She said she was only 13 years old when this happened. The same age as his daughter Ivanka Trump that year.

    Johnson withdrew her lawsuit against Trump, citing fears for her safety, and has since disappeared. You can read her entire story HERE, if you have the stomach for it.

    The point is, there may be a huge reason Trump is so keen to sweep all this under the rug — and always has been. But he can no longer silence the survivors.

    We don’t know what will come first, the victims’ unofficial Epstein list or the actual release of actionable material by the US government… but if we had to bet, the smart money is on the women to come through.

    And damn, we cannot wait.

    See the full press conference for yourself (below):

    [Image via MEGA/WENN/PBS/NBC/YouTube.]

    [ad_2]

    Perez Hilton

    Source link

  • Donald Trump may be stuck in a Manhattan courtroom, but he knows his fave legal analysts

    Donald Trump may be stuck in a Manhattan courtroom, but he knows his fave legal analysts

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK – If there are bragging rights associated with Donald Trump praising your legal acumen when he speaks after a day’s testimony at his criminal trial, Fox News analyst Andy McCarthy has already been cited at least a dozen times.

    The former president and current presidential candidate has routinely stepped to a metal barricade outside the courtroom in lower Manhattan to face cameras and get the last word on the day’s proceedings. As the trial has wound down, his speeches — he rarely acknowledges shouted questions — more frequently consist of reading the words of friendly commentators from a sheaf of papers.

    Besides McCarthy, a former Manhattan prosecutor and writer for National Review, Fox commentators Jonathan Turley, Gregg Jarrett and Mark Levin get frequent shoutouts.

    “Every legal scholar says, `They don’t have a case,’” Trump has said more than once while reading back supportive quotes.

    McCarthy, quoted by the former president three separate times on May 13, is a “great analyst,” Trump said. Some favorites get personal praise: Byron York is “a great person, great reporter.” Alan Dershowitz is similarly “a great person,” Trump said. Occasionally, someone from CNN slips in. MSNBC gets the silent treatment.

    For television, New York’s ban on cameras in the courtroom means plenty of airtime for legal analysts. It evokes the high point of the form three decades ago, when the O.J. Simpson murder trial made household names of the likes of Jeffrey Toobin, Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren. Fox’s Jarrett, who worked at Court TV in the 1990s, straddles the eras.

    OPINIONS FROM EXPERTS RUN THE GAMUT

    Naturally, it’s not hard to find those who contradict Trump. On the television news networks covering the trial extensively, prevailing opinions tend to reflect the audiences they seek: little sympathy for the prosecution’s case on Fox, equally difficult to find praise for the defense on MSNBC. On CNN, it’s more mixed.

    The more experienced legal minds, like Chuck Rosenberg speaking on MSNBC on Wednesday, note that it would be foolish to predict an outcome. The only opinions that really matter are the jurors’.

    More nuanced coverage can usually be found offscreen. Sunday’s edition of The New York Times, for example, had a news story quoting experts that concluded: “Several experts say the case remains the prosecution’s to lose.” In the same day’s opinion section, columnist Ross Douthat concluded that the case has been a political winner for Trump so far.

    “Just as even paranoid people can have enemies, even sinful demagogues can face a politically motivated prosecution — and stand to gain from the appearance of legal persecution,” Douthat wrote. “And that appearance, so far, has been the trial’s political gift to Donald Trump.”

    MSNBC was devoting a large part of its day to Trump’s legal issues well before the current trial. Former prosecutor Andrew Weissmann is a huge presence there; he also contributes a podcast, “Prosecuting Donald Trump,” with fellow analyst Mary McCord.

    Even MSNBC’s biggest stars, including Rachel Maddow, have spent time in the courtroom. After listening to Trump’s defense earlier this week, she reported that it was “discursive, sprawling and uninteresting.”

    TRUMP CHOOSES HIS FOCUS

    Fox’s commentators on this case have drawn much of Trump’s attention. Turley made 47 appearances to talk about the trial on Fox’s weekday programs from the start of the trial through May 15, with McCarthy logging 35, according to the liberal watchdog Media Matters.

    McCarthy once prosecuted terrorism cases in the U.S. attorney’s office in New York’s Southern District and represented Rudolph Giuliani. Turley is a professor at George Washington University’s law school and founded the Project for Older Prisoners, which helps seek release of geriatric prison inmates.

    Writing about the trial in the National Review, McCarthy said that “Trump ought to be acquitted for the simplest of reasons: Prosecutors can’t prove their case.” He criticized prosecution witness and former Trump attorney Michael Cohen on the air, saying Cohen’s dishonesty and bias against Trump will be problems he has to overcome with the jury.

    Turley, speaking to Fox’s Jesse Watters last week, called Cohen “the most compromised, unbelievable witness in the history of the federal legal system.” On another Fox appearance, Turley said the judge, Juan Merchan, shouldn’t even give the case to the jury.

    “I think this case is gone,” Turley said. “They didn’t state the basis for a crime.”

    On Fox this week, anchor Martha MacCallum said that “if you watch the legal experts on the other channels, this case is airtight.”

    The network on Monday, as it usually does, ran Trump’s daily wrap in its 5 p.m. ET hour — the time slot of “The Five,” the most popular program on cable news. MSNBC didn’t carry Trump. CNN showed the former president and immediately followed him with a fact-check.

    As happened that day, and occasionally others, Trump singled out some CNN commentators for praise. He quoted CNN’s Laura Coates, Elie Honig and Tim Parlatore, the latter a former Trump lawyer hired as an analyst.

    CNN’s fact-checker, Tom Foreman, said that Trump was doing “a lot of cherry-picking” in his citations.

    “It is certainly true that we have some panelists who say this is not a good case,” CNN’s Jake Tapper said. “There are also people who feel the other way. And that’s what we try to do here — bring a diversity of viewpoints.”

    ___

    David Bauder writes about media for The Associated Press. Follow him at http://twitter.com/dbauder

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    David Bauder, Associated Press

    Source link

  • Alan Dershowitz Says He Has Warned Trump Jews Won’t Vote For Him

    Alan Dershowitz Says He Has Warned Trump Jews Won’t Vote For Him

    [ad_1]

    Prominent attorney and Donald Trump ally Alan Dershowitz said he has told the former president several times that most Jews won’t vote for him — or any Republicans — because of their stands on human rights.

    Dershowitz recalled that Trump over the years has asked him a number of times: “Why don’t more Jews vote for me? I’ve been so good for Israel. I’ve been so good to the Jewish people.”

    Dershowitz said his answer has always essentially the same, “Jews like me admire what you did for Israel. We appreciate it. … But we can’t vote Republican, because Israel is not the only issue that we deeply care about. We’re Americans.”

    He pointed out to Trump that he supports same-sex marriage, a woman’s right to an abortion, work to combat climate change, gun control, and separation of church and state. These are the “issues that Republicans are not good on. They’re terrible,” Dershowitz said.

    Dershowitz, once considered a staunch liberal, has drifted into Trump’s camp over the years. He served on Trump’s defense team during his first impeachment trial and blasted the FBI in editorials for agents’ confiscation of documents at Mar-a-Lago in August that Trump took from the White House.

    [ad_2]

    Source link