"If the president does something which he believes will help him get elected, in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment". Alan Dershowitz, Jan 29 2020.
So, hypothetically, if a president requested a foreign power to 'detain indefinitely' a political rival, in return for say government aid and believed that his (re) election was in the national interest that would be an acceptable quid pro quo?
But Dershowitz doesn't qualify this as limited to a foreign power. He might ask the his Attorney General to open an investigation into a rival candidate in return for a promise of another job, perhaps at State, or as a director of one of his companies; that too would be an OK quid pro quo?
Or perhaps, he could offer local returning officers a position in his cabinet if they stuffed the ballot boxes in the elections they are charged with overseeing?
Because, let's face it, no candidate running for office is ever going to think that their getting elected is NOT in the public interest; if they did -- and had any integrity-- they wouldn't be running.
Dershowitz appears not to see much further than the glare of the spotlight he appears to so enjoy. Is this really the kind of "intellect" the Harvard Law School wants to associate itself with?
No comments:
Post a Comment