They are both in show business, and both comedians. In fact, the Yiddish meaning of Der-show-itz is ‘the show (or the ‘talking’) is coming fast’ (or it’s about to begin). But I digress ...
We are all familiar with the cynical, witty humor and directorial genius of Woody Allen, but the constitutional comedy stylings of celebrity attorney Alan Dershowitz were on full display and prominently featured at President Goldfinger’s impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate chamber. Dershowitz literally rewrote the U.S. Constitution in real time right before the discerning eyes and ears of senators and house representatives, and the American public, with the same dexterity of a shell game con and with the same suggestive oratory he used in defending O.J. Simpson, Claus von Bulow, and Jeffrey Epstein. Good company for Trump.
To make his performance even more convincing, Dershowitz could have entered the senate chamber atop a horse and wearing a three-cornered hat with quilled pen in hand and a Revolutionary War musket strapped to his back, shouting, “The British are coming!”
Dershowitz’s interpretation of the Constitution literally gave Trump total immunity from having any legal responsibility for his actions. He argued that “a president can’t be impeached for exercising executive powers to win an election if he believes his victory is in the national public interest.” This defense drew laughter from both the senators and representatives in the chamber.
“And if a president does something which he believes will help him get elected, in the public interest ...” Dershowitz added, “...that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.” The House Representatives were holding their sides laughing. You’d think they just heard Woody Allen deliver his hilarious 'Living Life Backward'’ monologue. Here it is ...
“In my next life I want to live my life backwards. You start out dead and get that out of the way. Then you wake up in an old people’s home feeling better every day. You get kicked out for being too healthy, go collect your pension, and then you start work, you get a gold watch and a party on your first day. You work for 40 years until you’re young enough to enjoy your retirement. You party, drink alcohol, and are generally promiscuous, then you are ready for high school. You then go to primary school, you become a kid, you play. You have no responsibilities, you become a baby until you are born. And then you spend your last 9 months floating in luxurious spa-like conditions with central heating and room service on tap, larger quarters every day, and then Voila! you finish off as an orgasm!”
But I digress again...
Dershowitz’s defense kept revolving around the concepts of illegal vs. unconventional, motive vs. intent, criminal vs. impeachable. He tried to make the case that if Trump’s motive for asking Ukraine for help was a mix of both national interest and political gain, it was not impeachable because it is not a “purely” corrupt intention. More laughter. It was reminiscent of Nixon’s infamous, “If the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.”
Gray area? Such a broad, partisan interpretation of the law or of the Constitution is an insult to justice. Dershowitz artfully moved the battlefield into the gray area and turned justice into a sport leaving a questionable, but not reasonable, presumption of innocence in the minds of the weak of mind.
It’s almost a Catch-22, or more like ‘you can’t have your cake and eat it too’. Meaning, if you eat your cake, then you don’t have it anymore. Right? It’s a shell game. Where’s the pea? Where’s the Crime? Where’s Waldo? Where is Trump? Now you see him, now you don’t.
Dershowitz’s stand-up comedy act shell game leaves you with the idea that justice means being able to knowingly lie in a court of law, under oath, and because you believe your lie is good for the country because you believe you should be president and you are good for the country, or that your cause is just, then it’s okay to lie and cheat to achieve your goal.
Such a broad interpretation of the law is an insult to justice. There should be no betting line or “odds” in a courtroom. But, unfortunately, that’s how the law rolls over justice in far too many cases. Sometimes a lawyer takes the “long shot” and beats the odds ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFTRwD85AQ4 ...more comedians.
Representative Adam Schiff, not a comedian, a democratic impeachment manager, called Dershowitz’s argument odd, saying, “All quid pro quos are not the same. Some are legitimate and some are corrupt. You don’t need to be a mind reader to figure out which is which.”
Basically, Dershowitz, through his interpretation of the Constitution, gave Trump a blank check to do with as he pleases. Both O.J. Simpson and Claus von Bulow walked too. So did Jeffrey Epstein, in a way. Epstein, a friend of Donald Trump, was found dead in his jail cell awaiting trial for sex trafficking.
In politics there is the Electoral College vote and the popular vote. They often differ widely. But in real life there is the inescapable truth vote ...and it's always dead-on.
So, what does that tell you about Alan Dershowitz? He may have been a great lawyer, teacher and mentor. Certainly a scholar of the law and of the Constitution. But maybe it’s time to hang up the ego and the robes, and back away from the television cameras.
And what does that tell you about Donald ‘Goldfinger’ Trump? With comedians like Alan Dershowitz and Rudy Giuliani trying to save him it makes you want to laugh out loud. LOL. Or COL ...cry out loud.
When justice and “the law” conflict, as it does so obviously in this case, it becomes a sport. A spectator sport ...and the combatants become media stars.
But, seriously, the law may be a sport to some, but it’s not a joke.
John Kushma is a communication consultant and lives in Logan, Utah
https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-george-kushma-379a5762
Some past articles and op-eds
https://muckrack.com/john-kushma/articles
...
