When you're ready to ride Metro, we want you to know we're ready for you. Here are just a few of the people at Metro to tell you how we're doing our part to keep writers safe. We're cleaning before you have found half sound of sound of statist, no mask, no Metro need one. We have a few extras at Metro. We're doing our part to keep the DC area moving. Find out more at well nota dot com slash doing our part, Speaking of truth telling, it's a great pleasure
to welcome back to the Armstrong and Getty Show. Allen Dershwitz, lawyer, Harvard law professor, author, commentator, etcetera. Mr Dershwitz, how are you, sir? I'm doing great. How are you? Thank you? It's good to talk. So, before we get into the case against impeaching Trump, how much does it bother you that you are an anomaly in that you are willing to just apply what you see is the truth of the law,
regardless of party. In other words, you don't put a partisan slant on things that that really I try very hard to do that every single day. Obviously you do too. But I think we're you know, we're we're like unicorns. It's very hard to do that. But you know, I don't think we'll unicorns my book, The Case against the Teaching Trump has become a man a time settella, which means people are reading. People I think want to hear
all sides of the issue. I think a lot of academics and university professors so they want they know the truth, and they want to shut down debate. They want to save spaces and triggle mind. But I think the average American wants the rual side of issue, and they're able to do it. And you know that's why I just recommend beat the book. It's a hundred fifty pages. If you disagree with it, fine, but you know, maybe I'll
persuade you, maybe you'll persuade me. But here on Month's Vineyard, people are saying, no, no no, no, we don't We don't even want to hear what you have to say because it might benefit Trump, and anything that's benefits Trump is something we don't want to hear. We don't even want to allow it to be heard. At the attitude here on Month's Vineyard among some people, well, given the vagueness of the Constitution in terms of what is an impeachable offense.
Give us the longest short of your theory. Well, I don't think it's that vague. It says, you know, we rejected the notion of maladministration as grounds for impeachment and instead required that they'd be convictioned by the Senate two thirds of a crime, either treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Those are all crimes. And so I think you have to prove that a president actively engaged
in a crime before you can impeach. And we can impeach them because you disagree with what he said at a press conference in Helsinki, which I disagree with. You can't do it because you don't like his policies on the border or separating families. It has to find a crime, and that's where I disagree with many of my colleagues, and I think I lay at the argument very carefully, and the crime has to be a high crime, not a low crime. So I think Clinton was not properly
impeached of Bill Clinton because his crime was a low crime. Uh. It's interesting to Hamilton's in his own life. Hamilton was one of the drafters and he wrote The Federalist paper about impeachment. He himself committed a low crime. He paid extortion to prevent an adulteress affair from being made public, but he didn't use public funds. He issued a statement to that effect, admitting it. But the reason is because if he had used public funds as a Treasury secretary,
it would have been a high crime. But using his own funds to cover up adultery, he was a low crime, not impeachable. And that's why he was prepared to make that distinction. And it's a distinction that I think is made in the Constitution. And it certainly seems like we should be worried about a precedent that it would set if Democrats take control of Congress and do impeach President Trump, whether he's convicted or not, that we've just, you know,
lowered the bar for what we consider impeachable. I think that's right, and I always try to impose on myself and others the shoelan, the other Pook test, if the shore run the other foot, Hillary Clinton, what position it would he be taking. I know what position I'd be taking,
and I think everybody has to meet that challenge. I wrote a book cuotes the fame Injustice and Zomigo in the Supreme Court wrote versus Bush versus Gore, and which I said, if it had been Gore versus Bush, if the show had been on the other foot, I think the case probably would have done out differently. And that's not the way the Supreme Court or the Congress should behave. There should be a single test, no matter who the
president is. Alan Dershowitz on the line, you said in the last day or so that the Justice Department really ill served the president by coming out with the indictment of the Russian UH spooks right before the meeting in Healthinki. What do you mean by that? Well, I think well, I think that Justice Corman should say at a politics instead of foreign policy, it was absolutely no reason to have the indictment come down just before the President went
to have a meeting with Prudent. It would have been far far better and nobody would have lost anything if the indictment came down today or next week. And the indictment is a show indictment, nobody's everything to be brought to trial. Uh. These folks, that twelve of them, are not going to come to Disneyland and allow themselves to be served and arrested, and they're not going to be extraduised, so we'll never know what the proof is, what the evid this will never know whether they would want or
lost the case. And indictment is just a charge. And remember, as a judge of New York one said, a prosecutor can get grandeur do indict a ham sandwich. So let's not place too much weight on an indictment that will never come to trial. The book is The Case Against Impeaching Trump by Alan Dershowitz, And you're making that argument. But I read an interview the other day in which you laundry listed the Trump policies you don't agree with, and it seemed it was practically every Trump policy that
exists you don't agree with. Yet you wrote a book like this. What is that causing you any stress in your personal life? The people are saying, dude, what are you doing? Yeah, it does, and people are attacking me and saying, you know, if you're uh Clinton person against Trump, you shouldn't be writing this book. Well, you know, I have to write this book. All my life. I defended people I disagreed with. I defended the rights of Nazister and Marks, there's skip Illinois. I defended communist when I
was a college student. You know, I hated and still hate communism. Um. So it's been my life to defend principles and not to ask myself whether I like or support the person about whom the principle will to whom the principle is being applied. So I think, I think that I think that is more important to me anyway into the national discussion than anything you write, the fact that you're going with principles as opposed to your partisan leanings. Amen.
I tried very hard to apply to myself. I hope everybody applies that to themselves, because our Constitution was written not for Democrats or Republicans, not for black or white, not for you or than as a Southern, as recurring for everybody, and we have to apply it equally to everybody. And that's the shoe on the other foot test that I always apply to myself and to others well, just too. In the very few seconds we have left to return to Jack's question of a moment ago, does anybody actually
refer to you as dude at this point in your life? Ellen, Yeah, oh Man. Alan Dershowitz, lawyer, and Harvard law professor. We know you're pressed for time, but we appreciate the conversation very much. Hope we can do it again. The book, The Case against Impeaching Trump, It's say it's a good solid helping of truth without uh in principle, without worrying about partisanship. Great to talk, Thank you, Thank you so much. The shoe is on the other foot. Test that is
what you have to do. Absolutely, God, dang it. I think he I think. I think the reason it's the best selling book though, is a bunch of people who really like Donald Trump and wouldn't apply this same principle to Hillary right are buying the book. Politics is a stilly business and ugly. Marshall's News is next on the Armstrong and Getty Show. When you're ready to ride Metro,
we want you to know we're ready for you. Here are just a few of the people at Metro to tell you how we're doing our part to keep writers safe. We're cleaning before you've found halfs out of suns of statist no mask, no metro need on. We have a few extras at Metro. We're doing our part to keep the d C area moving. Find out more at will Not a dot com slash doing our part