Alan Dershowitz: This Was One The 'Worst' Decisions The Supreme Court Has Made In Modern History 

Charlie The land was taken but the project was never built !

@@josephpadula2283 I know, right! As if taking private property wasn't criminal enough, the reason they took it never happened. Disgusting

awful

You are correct. I also consider that one of the worst. The Court changed the words "for public use" into "for a public purpose", and that now means anyone can have their property taken just because the city wants someone else to have it and increase the property taxes paid on it.

That was a horrible decision also.

I hope Trump makes Ken Paxton his AG. He has the motivation needed to bring the traitors to justice

Hard to believe... Our government is corrupt beyond repair...

Hard to believe an American President tried to change the outcome of an election just because he lost and than tried to force a rebellion to stay in power when he scam of manufacturing fake electors didn't work and he was not convicted for Treason?

@@karlfowler3742Yes, why not have everyone in the Executive branch be criminals. Wonderful idea.

I’m not a democrat but neither am I a traitor to America. I might or might not agree with a president, or a parties policies or point of view, but never would I ever agree to, partake in or support any person or party that would PHYSICALLY attack the United States government on the orders of a President trying to cling onto power. They ordered an attack on the backbone of what makes America stand out in the world at americas homes of homes the United States Capitol Building by trying to destroy Americas democracy & its constitution. And if you don’t think that trying to overturn an election by force isn’t treason then I don’t know what is. This was carried out for one persons idea of what he thinks America should be & by a party that continues to lie to the American people on a continuous basis, when the evidence is there to prove them wrong. Everyone’s on edge at the moment & blaming the Biden administration for what’s happening to Trump, but you see it’s not the Biden administration that’s causing all of trump’s problems, it’s American democracy & the constitution fighting back because it was attacked by Trump & the Republican Party while they were trying to cling onto power anyway they could. its just coming back to bite them that’s all. You attack America you pay a price end of story. You see this is why American democracy & the constitution is there, it’s to protect anyone that tries to attack America or her people. It doesn’t make any difference wether you are a Republican or a democrat, the American constitution & its democracy, was, & still is, being attacked on a daily basis & America needs everyone’s help both republican & democrats to unite to stop the carnage. It can’t be allowed to continue, because America as you know it now, for better or for worse, will be disintegrate by foreign bodies that don’t agree with the American constitution as it stands. They only want to install their own party rules & laws by getting rid of what’s there already & which has protected all American people this far. Sure, fight like cats and dogs in the streets over the border & the likes, that’s politics & political bullshit because they want to get one over on their opposition, but no political party should ever be allowed to PHYSICALLY attack the United States Capitol Building, American democracy & the constitution on anyone’s orders. That’s not politics anymore by a party, that’s someone starting an internal war in America. That’s an attack on every American, man woman & child world wide. This attack on January 6th needs to be destroyed so deep into the core of American politics, that no person or party will ever ever consider the idea again. People have to be held accountable for Americas sake. If you don’t put out all the flames of a fire properly first time round, those embers just might gain momentum when you’re being distracted by something else, destroying everything in its path. Right now as it presently stands, American democracy & the constitution are the foundation of the American people’s laws, which in place binds all Americans together all over the world. If you decide to let that go, you are really letting American go, as you are turning your back on everything that has been achieved since the foundation of the United States of America. At this present moment in time the evidence shows that a majority of Republican Party members & supporters were the people who, planned, supported, partook & executed the attack on January 6th under there leader Mr Trump. To this very day they are still attacking Americas democracy including the constitution by words & actions on a daily basis. Yet to date, not one republican senator or member that took an oath of office to protect the same, has been arrested, removed from office or held accountable for their involvement in the January 6th attempted overthrow of the American government. Not one.. Next time it could be democrats, or maybe republicans again, god knows, but whoever it is, the American people cannot allow its democracy & constitution to be attacked or destroyed by any one person or party. It’s not about republicans fighting democrats or democrats fighting republicans, it’s about all of the American people fighting against anyone who attacks America, and especially its democracy & the constitution. Fight & vote for the right reason and not a party or person. In other words fight for America. For those who understand, No explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, No explanation possible .

The Constitution doesn’t require a conviction, genius.

He has been convicted for sexual assault , but you're ok with that ?

Nor does it apparently define what an insurrection is. It's a shame people hid behind that in the case of this witch hunt propagated by the left in an effort to devide us even further​@@michaelgibbons2556

@@michaelgibbons2556 ok einstien, how many rioters were charged with insurrection ???? would you got to a REAL overthrow with a bullhorn and a flag ????

@@michaelgibbons2556 it requires an actual crime. Trump was never charged with one while president.

Burning down buildings by itself is not an insurrection, but it is a crime. Having a cardboard sign and your cell phone at the Capitol building is not an insurrection. Using that cardboard sign to attack people at the Capitol is a crime. People are claiming they were allowed into the building forgetting all the violence and tearing down barriers on the way to the doors; of fact that they attacked police who were trying to keep them out; of the windows that were broken to gain entrance; of the offices that were broken into; of the vandalism that the insurrectionists perpetrated; and most importantly of the official proceedings that were interrupted as Congress and the VP fled for their lives. This was an attack on our country!

Y. Yes🤪

All those undercover agents that were there could have stopped it all, So could the National Guard that Trump offered could have stopped it too. It was planned to happen. By many underhanded people.@@froglady7491

​@@froglady7491 LMFAO suuuure it was.The Buffalo guy almost took over! Baaahahahahah! glad we dodged that one.

@@froglady7491 We saw plenty of footage of police waving the crowd into building. The barriers were ripped down by the implanted feds of which there were many.

The Judicial Branch including SCOTUS does not enforce the law. That is the job of the Executive Branch. The Legislative Branch makes the laws. The Judicial Branch interprets the laws when there are questions or controversies. So what new law do you think SCOTUS made?

SORRY, THE CONSTITUTION SAYS TRUMP IS NOT ELEGIBLE, BECAUSE HE CAUSED THE INSURECTION

He tried a coup.

Repubicans: "What about law and order?" Also Republicans:

@@compulsiveviewingmaterialswhich he has yet to be convicted of in a criminal procedure

@@ostrich67 Watching the US fall apart from the outside it's pretty clear it's not republicans that are the most whacky ones... That feels VERY weird to say about people who, generally, believe in an invisible, all-knowing being in the sky morally judging you...

Yet he has no desire to try and clear his name. his goal is delay and try and pardon himself. The amount of evidence against him, he is toast.@@RockSmithStudio

When he said that, my first thought was "Wot fresh douchbaggery be this?"

@@ostlandr I see you have never been in the system .

hopefully he will go through that court system he so firmly believes in, for others of course

This is one of Epstein's buddies.

But we have that pillar of justice and righteousness sitting on the Supreme Court bench. You know, the Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas.

if it's his client

Alan "Epstein Island" Dershowitz

LOL, trump is not pursued because of name nor party. If he had been exactly the same person, but ran as a democrat, NONE of these republicans would be defending him, and he would already be in prison.

We have never had a justice system. It is The criminals justice system. Justice for criminals.

@@michaelwimberley6695 Is that the same as Trump's Derangement Syndrome ?

Let us be very clear here. Trump is not been convicted on name alone. Trump is going to go to prison after he's convicted for the crimes he committed Just because you won't admit he's guilty of crimes doesn't mean the real Americans don't know he's guilty, have not seen the crimes he committed, and don't want him held accountable.

It’s called corruption. How do you think unconstitutional drug prohibition laws have been on the books for over half a century when we already have the Supreme Court decision on the repeal of alcohol prohibition. It clearly states that they repealed prohibition because the federal government lacks the authority granted by the constitution to ban things because they get you intoxicated.

“You have no right not to be vaccinated… And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”-Alan Dershowitz

Alan believes the DMC is still the same as his dad's.

Definitely a MAGA believe he defended him in both impeachments

But the weird part is that he says over & over again is that he would never vote for Trump. Something just doesn't add up with him. @@Aki-OB1

New democratic socialist party .?you are talking about the current democratic party right?if you are and beieve the socialist democratic part of your comment you are obviously delusional

The secretary of state of Maine has decided that Trump is disqualified from the primary ballot because a the Supreme Court of Colorado decided he has committed " insurrection" but without a jury conviction. So Trump has been denied a jury trial but that doesn't matter to these insane Democrats BTW there is a beautiful picture of the Secretary of State of Maine standing very to Biden ( just the two of them ) Biden has one of his hands on her shoulder and he has her hand clasped tightly to hers in a palm to palm grip Still this woman didn't think this should a reason to recuse herself from this decision, which was hers alone

They are discussing the Trump ballot Maine case, but he is saying the bush gore case was the worst ever… Dershowitz is on the Epstein list

@@TheFrogfeeder and Trump flew repeatedly on Epstein's Jet.

The background is too embarrassing, and that's why is being ignored. They know it is stupid to say that if engaged in insurrection, only Congressman and Senators will be disqualified to run for office. But the president and vice president can engage in insurrection, and still can for office...LOL

Good question. My anger is a little high, so please bear with me on this. MY UNDERSTANDING (so it's kinda weak) is that, because this judge in Maine believes MSNPC when they say, "Orange Man Led Insurrection to Overthrow US Government," he's not entitled to run for President of the United States based on the Insurrection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Problem is he's not been convicted and we are supposed to live in a country where someone is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his/her peers. The Bush v. Gore case was with regard to the 2000 election, where in four districts in Florida (of eleven, if memory serves), Pro-Gore vote counters went through the punch cards to ascertain what they THOUGHT the person was saying with their vote. This meant that in four districts, a subjective analysis of the official vote card was used while in the other seven (again, my memory; this was nearly a quarter of a century ago) a different standard of analysis was used. The Bush legal team won before SCOTUS based on the two different standards of analysis was a violation of the fifteenth amendment (or maybe fourteenth amendment) granting a completely *equal* (emphasis important) vote to every man (at the time; amended later to rightly include women).

It appears many MAGA don't actually know that.

The CACA legislation was CACA from the beginning, passed by people with CACA for brains, before anyone could read all the CACA. {CACA=Can't Afford Care Act}.

Do you have a health care that is better than obama care? If you have then that’s not a problem.

Obamacare, Romney care, is working well.

@@nicasio1979 Your question does not make any sense. He literally cannot have any other than obamacare.

what do you have against Obamacare.Dont just hate something just because you are miserable. Obamacare is saving millions of your fellow Americans. Nobody asks you to get one if you don't want it

The same is also true with scientists and medical doctors, as we particularly learned during the COVID tyranny. We must always be free to examine evidence and make decisions for ourselves.

​@@leczornEXACTLY!

Exactly. Everything supreme ends up getting away with everything because they can act with impunity having no higher court to challenge them and they are not going to challenge themselves....well even if they did....it is like the police investigating the police...anything may come out of that. Besides candidates are not selected for their personal values....

Incompetence is incompetence.

​@@jacuzzihotYou were fine with that until they began leaning republican.

Exactly what potus 45 is fighting for.

So you want every question to be decided by the entire voting population of the United States? Are you willing to in hear all the evidence for and against Trump or have you already made up your mind?

Fucking exactly

He already has been indicted and will go on trial in March 2024.

@@GNFLYER He has not been indicted on charges of insurrection.

I'm pretty sure "fight like helll" did not help Trump's case

Yes, peacefully protest the completely legal election that I just lost. Do you not see that total corruption and illegality in that? He lost the election and knew it. He is a liar.

No those words are not, but those words are not the issue. He was excited about the violence he incited and he knew that his words were welcoming those wanting to kill Mike Pence, and he did nothing to stop it. Only 3 hours later did he say anything to defuse, but now he lies and pretends that he tried to defuse hours earlier.

@@cfb1923 He said "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard" That is not an insurrection.

@yamamoto2221 Who carried a gun into the Capital? That is another phony claim.

It means nothing really. Epstein had lots of money and he covered his tracks with powerful people. He wasn't sharing his little girls with anyone.

The facts don’t support that conclusion. You know the adage that say if you tell the same lies often enough then people will start to believe it.

@omniproductions8471 - If you are referring to Trump, first time 2016 he lost the popular vote, but won the office based on Electoral college. The 2nd time (2020) he lost both the popular vote (by almost 10 million), as well as the electoral college. So no we aren't going to agree that Trump won both times because the objective facts don't support your personal beliefs. I hope that's clear now.

It is perfectly fine to stalk a judge as long as Chuck Schumer says so.

Yes, and the threats, and stalking are crimes incited by trump which is yet another crime committed by trump.

Schumer sucks😅

Yeah of course. But without integrity and INDEPENDENT oversight of judges and police, justice is hi-jacked by the rich.

So it is ok to pack the court with federalists who will follow Trump’s orders. But I agree that SCOTUS should decide based on law and the constitution.

Dersh lost all credibility when he represented trump in one of his impeachments.. yeah, I know, for the money.

....and his a lawyer ??????? lol

He hasn't had a trial, but the Colorado AG has convicted him and is desperately trying to remove him from the ballot. Maine is also swirling down the same toilet. That's not justice.

False ones at that 😂

indictments are nothing. But please hold your breath waiting for a conviction. If any.

I wouldn't go that far. There is a breed of older Democrats who use the word liberal to mean that they support the Constitutional freedoms - freedom of speech, religion, assembly, etc. RFK Jr. is another one. Our job is to open the eyes of those Democrats and help them see how illiberal and corrupt their party has become. Wouldn't having the Democrat Party reformed from within be preferable to having to run against the corrupt party they are now for the indefinite future?

but made a living off guilty right wing republicans in court. and he lost more than he won.

What is Dershowitz responsible for? Be specific!

It never changes when you recount the same corrupt votes. Duh

Let's also remember, The League of Women Voters was caught, on camera, stuffing ballot boxes with ballot's that had no other election vote than Al Gore for President. This was the "hanging chad". Those ballot's were punched with a paper punch. They were still counted, which led to that whole farce in the first place.

But at the same time, there were so many irregularities in the voting process. We heard daily of something new. SCOTUS actually stopped the last recount.

LIES

@@rjgib1016 Whose?

Democrats like recounts until they win.

you know nothing about the Florida recount

Not quite. Close but not quite. The Sec of State for FL called the election in accordance with FL election law when time ran out. Despite numerous recounts Gore never had more votes counted than Bush. Gore appealed FL calling the election because he wanted more recounts. SCOTUS ruled for FL because Article 2 of the Constitution allows states to make election laws and the FL Sec of State was following the law in FL. By the way that election law in FL was put on the books by the DEMs.

@@maizie9454 The Sec of State for FL called the election in accordance with FL election law when time ran out. Despite numerous recounts Gore never had more votes counted than Bush. Gore appealed FL calling the election because he wanted more recounts. SCOTUS ruled for FL because Article 2 of the Constitution allows states to make election laws and the FL Sec of State was following the law in FL. By the way that election law in FL was put on the books by the DEMs.

Yes

And half the country thinks he is as innocent as a new born babe.

Exactly. Dershowitz is wrong this time. No one is perfect.

@CulpeperMortgage I agree 100%.

why would they count votes after it was over? that makes no sense.

The butterfly ballot was the problem where Gore votes went to Pat Buchanan, but there was no way to correct for that so they just had to stand.

I believe that Dershowitz is referring to the 500,000 more votes for Gore over the idiot prince nationwide.

The constitution in no way makes him ineligible to run. Just saying and making these things up and then hiring marketing firms to promote those ideas doesn't make them legitmate. The demonstrable coup in November 2020 is what the security state is trying to hide.

It is not your right to vote for whomever you want. It is your right to for any eligible candidate that you want.

@@Aireck174 What are you talking about? The Democrats’ primary has multiple people on the ballot

@@froglady7491 There could be 500 people on the ballot and it doesn't matter when democrats cancel the primary. Democrats already canceled the one in Florida.

@@froglady7491 No. I can still vote for whomever I want to _as a right_ . If they're eligible to assume that office is another matter entirely. And let's not forget that political parties are private organizations. They're perfectly free to forego the primary process altogether, and choose their candidate any way they choose to. A caucus just being one example. Either way, trying to derail a political party's _choice_ of candidate certainly has to go down as a low point in our Republic, and it certainly sets out to interfere with an election.

@@ravenslaves Oh you can vote for Santa Claus if you want to, but your vote won’t be counted. If the candidate you vote for is not eligible, your vote won’t be counted. And if the Party’s candidate is ineligible, do you really want to trick people to vote for him by putting him on the ballot, knowing that he can’t be elected? Don’t you want to get this question answered before voting starts so that the Republicans have a valid choice. Or do you want it decided after the primary vote is already decided?

Obama openly admitted his hatred for the Constitution and since we did nothing about it, democrats have felt free to ignore it at every turn.

Sec 5 of the 14th amendment states only congress has the authority to act within the provisions set forth in the amendment. Congress has not taken any action therefore the 14th amendment does not apply. Go read the whole amendment.

@@retirednavy8720 Tried to respond but it went to the wrong thread above. I have read the entire Amendment from Section 1, Due process; to Section 3, Insurrection; to Section 5, Exclusive Congressional power to enforce.

He's not talking about LITERALLY putting Trump's guilt or innocence up for a public vote. As much as I wish it could be true that Americans wouldn't vote a known criminal into office, sadly, the voters of DC elected Berry back into the mayor's office after he served time for smoking crack (as mayor). I still can't believe that DC voters thought he was their best option. But just look at the effort the DA's are putting into creating the President Trump circus. How can that not get a lot of Democrat voters' attention that something is off?

​@@rosc2022because anybody that votes is an npc.

@@rosc2022 - Well, Barry was prosecuted right?. What is your problem with Trump been prosecuted?. Both committed crimes. You seem to be against that. Is a world of contradictions if a person is a felon he cannot vote, some say that once you become a criminal regardless of paying back you should not be able to vote, but an indicted or even convicted Trump should be able to not just vote but run for the presidency. Can you see how stupid we look to the world?. 14.3 doesn't say anything about past crimes except for been an insurrectionist that was/is a public official and swore an oath. Because Trump attempted to stop the legal transfer of power ordered by the Constitution he is an insurrectionist. On Jan. 20, 2017 he became a public official and swore an oath. So 14.3 applies. And just to be clear 14.3 doesn't requires a conviction it only needs participation or supporting. And for the moving of the goal post been made by stating that a conviction is required, well, it is not. Ex-Rep. George Santos was just removed from Congress without a conviction. He was removed because there is evidence that he violated his oath and or the ethics/conduct of his office. He has trials scheduled this year just like Trump and George Santos was an elected sitting Representative and he was expelled again without a criminal trial or conviction but just on the available evidence. With Trump there is already plenty of evidence.

Innocent till proven guilty in a court of law

However, with money buying judges and not even an ethics base line present and no other agency recognized with oversight, that would be a very toxic and unsanitary attitude. We have the proof that morality alone cannot keep this judges's hands out of the cookie jar. ANY judge should refrain very far from widely recognized acts of bribery or blackmail. The Supreme Court should never be in any situation even remotely suggesting possible corruption. WITH EXTRAORDINARY POWERS COMES EXTRAORDINARY RESPONSIBILITIES Likewise policemen should be held to a much higher standard. Police immunity is no longer justified, seen the overwhelming cases of police abuse and the continued police brutality that so typically starts with a traffic violation and ends up with a handcuffed person dead, after being assaulted by several cops, eager and trained and equipped to kill. A case like Tyre Nichols could only happen if there is a general attitude that cops can get away with murder, rather than will be held to a higher standard of accountability. It is absurd to see criminals roam free and innocent people targeted for murder by police. This is what happens when there is lack of oversight and lack of enforcement of "code". If the public does not trust the police, we have a problem. Besides Superior Judges are not selected for their integrity, but for their non-integrity, willing to bend towards a political agenda. So unless we do stand with impunity and not with impartiality or integrity of judges.....well if that is the case, then let's put a sign in front of the Superior Court, that this is what it is, without pretense. The sign could read: "Impunity, neither Integrity nor Impartiality", preferable in Latin. If the public does not trust the judges, we have a problem. In either case of police or judges, we are talking about public servants, paid by tax payers money. So if these entities become self-serving, we have a serious problem. Inaction is not justified. Suggestion that the public should not protest is inherently undemocratic. We need these entities to be widely respected to have a practical balance of powers. If not, an insurrection would be a much desired solution.

They are talking about the SC decision made in Florida, back when Bush ran against Gore. Dersh believes Gore won Florida and should have been elected president.

He advocated staying in power despite the vote of the people!

@@totostamopo Who??

It says you need to look up "insurrection" in a dictionary.

It says NOTHING!

But it's weird as you are going against the veto system. If people voted for Biden then a group of people decides that it is not valid and threatens through an insurrection it is scary as then it means you don't care about the votes.

Donnie only needed 11780 votes to win like a traitor. Fake electors for everyone!

@@johnwattdotca Insurrection is defined in the constitution. That is the only definition that applies here.

I guess you missed the part about how all the violence occurred during the electoral count certification. It was interrupted and delayed which was the first lack of complete peaceful transfer of power in history. All based on lies. Trump lost in over 60 courts some with Trump-appointed judges. Why? There has never been one iota of evidence to suggest that there was fraud that swung the election to Biden. That was just Trump grooming the masses.

When he or she tries to prevent a president elect from taking office after he or she won a fair and free presidential election! Quit whining! Trump LOST!

@@cfb1923 Strange how the normal checks and safeguards against mail ballot fraud were suspended (because of COVID) at the same time many States sent out millions of mail ballots, even though mail ballots are the easiest way to cheat. And no one was even allowed to check for fraud, because that would be "voter suppression".

What's your point?

@@Milkmans_Son Alan's a hypocrite

Supreme Court is corrupt partisan and have no care about America. They are concerned about themselves

They were more moral then. Now almost all the top leaders in the Democrat party and every institution are Satanists.

Was the composition of the Supreme Court justices in 2000 the same as it is today? Did the SCOTUS in 2000 include, for instance, a justice who is so out-of-touch that he/she doesn't even know what a woman is?

There is no appeal as he has never been charged with insurrection

which is a criminal charge. the 14th is about being qualify. like being 35. is he charged with not being 35?

@@diegojines-us9pc If there was an accusation that he was under 35 and they would not accept his birth certificate, then yes, it would go to court if they wanted to prove he was ineligible.

​@@malenurse1999there is an appeal filed because of Colorado removing him from the ballot by the ACLJ.

The accusation of insurrection against Trump is absolutely ridiculous and 100% unwarranted. This is simply another attempt by the corrupt Democrats to interfere with the upcoming 2024 election which they know they cannot win against Trump. Those who brought these charges should be arrested, charged and imprisoned. SCOTUS should dismiss this charge and order all states to leave Trump on the ballot. THIS IS WHAT WE THE PEOPLE WANT AND THEY ARE IN PLACE TO SERVE US...NOT THE CORRUPT DEMOCRAT PARTY.

Fortunately, the United States is *not* and never has been a democracy. The United States is a Constitution based representative Republic.

Yep the people- not a president that doesn't like that the people voted for his opponent and so whines that the vote was rigged and begins corruptly trying to get states to change their votes!

We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

America is NOT a Democracy.

You are misinformed. Trump has been indicted for 91 criminal charges in four different jurisdictions.!!! In addition, he has already been convicted of sexual assault and has to pay at least $10,000,000, with the possibility of much bigger punitive damages in the next trial.

Coming soon

he better be, he has to defend why he was on Epstein's plane.

@@bonnenaturel6688 he was Epstein lawyer

How rich!

Alan is not an honest man swings with the Wind a hypocrite if ever I've seen one. He knows it is for the courts to decide.

@@larryroberts4984 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣A perfect example of massaging the facts...

Dershowitz says just let the voters decide..!!! So, according to Dershowitz, all the criminals he defended can run for president, regardless of Date of Birth, Place of Birth, and Criminal Record. And this guy supposedly has read the constitution. ..LOL

We see your speech, sooo, what are you talking about?

@@realtruenorth My comment was 🚫 erased , I'm not wasting time repeating it, , I'm being systematically shadow boxed everything is In 2 's.

@@DavidLouisLouis-qh9ni probably somebody flagged it, not youtube, just another person.

Not as long as we have a Constitution!

@@Sarah-im3lp As long as the constitution is upheld.

Because he will win and everyone knows it . Up hold the constitution ya ok until it comes to their right to bear arms then the constitution goes out the window then free speech that to goes out the window . Democrats only want the constitution when it benefits fits them , didn’t they say it’s a two hundred year old piece of paper it needs to be re written ? Yes thy did

El Chapo for president.

The people DID vote for whom they wanted in 2020. But Trump refused to accept it and what a mess for the country. What makes you think if Trump loses in 2024 he will concede then?

Actually you're wrong. There was nothing wrong with Roe V Wade as it helped to recognize what women already know and new and that's it they have the right to an abortion and people like you have no say in the matter The Supreme Court overturning of that was a travesty and it was a clear attempt to steal the human rights of women an attempt that is now blowing up in their faces, and Republicans are going to continue to pay for that CRYING in every election that is to come

sad he is training kids to go to jail for trump.

@@diegojines-us9pc You know he is very anti-Trump, he just thinks it's incredibly dangerous and wrong for states to determine who eligible for a Federal election

I remember during OJ hearing, he literally made stuff up to confuse juries, as though the murders were possibly gang related.

That's not even remotely true.

@@garyjackson3531 Translation: "I got nuthin' except mindless butt-hurt over the truth."

Dems wanted certain areas recounted and not the whole state which is by law

Bush v. Gore was a good decision. Dershowitz is biased. Here's the problem with Gore's position. He wanted to count hanging and dimpled chads as votes and he wanted to throw out butterfly ballots as confusing. BUT, he only wanted to count chads and toss out ballots in deeply Democratic districts. SCOTUS correctly said that you have to count the whole state or no district. Quite right!

ALL preplanned .... leading to this, Tyranny

Not according to Trump supporters.

WRONG TRUMP SUPPORTERS LOVE CONSTITUTION REPUBLIC NOT LEFTIST TROLLS. LEFTIST THINK AMERICA IS A DEMOCRACY WRONG AND THEY ARE LIARS. WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY.

@@ericgranberg8893 Name the law Trump broke. Can you do that?

@@retirednavy8720 Insurrection.

No, he just made empty-headed conservatives feel ignorant, selfish, and narcissistic.

you made that one up

Now THAT'S an inconvenient truth.

​@@jeffreyforeman5031You never heard of Y 2 K ?

What happened?

They can only go so far to protect a traitor

Best news I have heard in a week.

Donald Trump is Donald Trump we know it , they know it , but they are scared to death (not literally) of him being President , it`s true . Vote in 2024 Presidential Elections , in November . Remember now .

A criminal who abides by a free and fair election is not the same as a criminal who refuses to do so.

@@totostamopo Why was it fair, when the usual safeguards and checks against fraud were suspended just for the 2020 election? If there was ever a election where fraud could have made the difference in the outcome, it would be 2020. Millions of ballots mailed out with no security checks first, even though we have been told that mail ballots are the easiest way to cheat, yet instead we are told this was the most secure election in history?

Unfortunately it would be found in the nonfiction section.

Ye. trumpettes - multiple different attempt to destroy a US Election. just. in last 2 weeks - White House lawyer R.G.. GUILTY of lying in an attempt to increase threats on Election Workers. trump did the EXACT same , down to naming the victims. Several 'Alternate electors' GUILTY . trump, another tape of him pressuring Election officials to change an Election . 3 different attempts to destroy a US Election, last couple weeks. TRAITORS

It would span 40 volumes.

“Donald Trump, His allies and supporters, are a clear and present danger to American Democracy!” America’s most well respected CONSERVATIVE Constitutional Scholar, Judge Michael Luttig. Most of my republican colleagues don’t even believe in the Constitution!” Sen. Mitt Romney Democrats LOVE and RESPECT our Constitution! It’s the republicans who hate what America is all about!

It could focus on how Biden got us to 3.7% unemployment an a record stock market, and record oil production to boot.

and the election was rigged. we heard it form fox. and still dont believe them. parrot.

@@diegojines-us9pc Millions and millions of mail ballots sent out with no security checks before hand as is required by law, but we are all supposed to believe everything was honest?

Money pays for speech to be communicated. Imagine shutting down people because with their money, you have "too much' speech. From a purely First Amendment matter, you can see the conflict when faced with the Constitution. "Congress shall pass no law..." Think about the impact it could have had if it went the other way. Let's say you go after newspapers that endorse political candidates. Imagine saying something like this: "You have 3 million subscribers in circulation, but only newspapers that have a circulation of less than 1 million are allowed to make endorsements. You're too big, so you don't get to have a voice." That would be an affront to free speech - and who gets to decide how much is too much, and how many is too many? It may be unpalatable, but it was the correct decision. That's why you can always find an organization - or create an organization with like-minded individuals - and come together to communicate your brand of speech.

@@RonJDuncan no it was not the right decision… Once again an organization, like the newspaper you're talking about is not a person, and it doesn't have a voice. It's employees have a voice and they are free to endorse whoever they want to individually. Their subscribers, have a voice, and they can endorse and vote for whoever they want as well But the newspaper itself, is just a business and it has no individual rights nor is it entitled to any rights because it is not a living person it is a thing

@@keithziegler8881 A newspaper falls under freedom of the press, and it's no less important than freedom of speech. Further, SCOTUS precedent has held speech/press etc as sacrosanct. In fact, the New York Times endorsed Abraham Lincoln in 1860, going back generations. But I'll take it a step further. If you want to go the opposite direction, then perhaps things that are "not living persons" shouldn't be taxed - because if they can't "speak" and aren't "living" and have no "voice" then how could they be taxed?

@@RonJDuncan if a corporation wants to put out memo that they endorse a particular candidate that's great… But that doesn't mean that corporation can donate money to a particular candidate. Not the same thing

@keithziegler8881 So stop taxing corporations. Then it can be ruled that they aren't "people" and don't get free speech. After all, the basis comes down to "No taxation without representation" as it were.

Well there was no election uncertainty with the 2020 election. Trump tried to stir election uncertainty amongst his sycophantic followers but the facts did not support a claim of uncertainty therefore the claim is dismissed

That doesn't make sense. If Roe was a terrible decision (and even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg admitted it was), it should have been overturned.

@heatherhall7899 oh I agree it should have been overturned. Dershowitz was saying overturning roe was the worst decision, which I disagreed with

Every Woman should have the right to control their own uterus. It's their decision, not Your decision or any legislative branch of government to make!

@@seveglider8406 Oh yeah that's written in the constitution. I forgot.

​@seveglider8406 most women who want abortions already did have control of there uterus when they opened there legs.