Dershowitz read the indictment

Dershowitz I've read the indictment and here is my analysis on Rumble. 31 minutes.

He spends about 20 minutes on this, some salient points and then some riffing and commentary and related matters. After that he reviews the indictments against Trump and then does some viewer letters and things like that.

Notes:
- One of the strangest documents he's ever read.
- Document is so strange that under its own rubric or logic, Jack Smith could be indicted. It goes after Trump for an alleged lie - but Jack Smith lied as well. He outlines Trump's Jan6 speech. He deliberately leaves out key words, about protesting peacefully, that keeps Trump's actions within the first amendment. Thus Jack Smith lied, left them out of the indictment, and under his own theory of the case that lies can be criminalized, Jack Smith can now be indicted.
- Trump's words are protected by the Constitution and Jack Smith's actions can rightfully be construed as an attack upon Trump's rights and punishing him for exercising his rights. That's a crime.
- These points illustrate how open ended and dangerous this indictment is. It turns "political lies" into crimes.
- If politicians lie, you should tell the truth, Adley Stevenson (sp?) said, "If you agree to stop lying about me I agree to stop telling the truth about you."
- Indictment is effectively shrinking the first amendment.
- In this case they will likely have to prove that Trump knew or believed that he had lost the election when he made the statements he made.
- Thomas Jefferson said we have nothing to fear from the wrong reason of some if others have the ability to correct them.
- Today the country is deeply divided and this indictment doesn't help. It should have never been brought in the DC district. Can't get a fair trial there. Most one-sided district in the US. Judge has demonstrated anti-Trump bias. Whole background is pro-Democrat. Some of the longest sentences for Jan6 people came from this judge.
- If you're going to indict the opponent to the President, if you're the AG, you have to make sure this is the strongest possible case imaginable.

He's not a fan of the indictment, obviously, or what it does to the nation. His attack on the logic of the indictment and it's logical consequences is important for those that still believe in civil liberties, IMO.