Warren Said Dershowitz Argument Was 'Nonsensical,' He Takes Her Back to Law 101
Alan Dershowitz, a key player on President Donald Trump’s legal team in his impeachment trial, slammed Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts after the Democratic presidential candidate both criticized the celebrated attorney’s defense and admitted she had a hard time understanding it.
Warren hammered Dershowitz after his presentation to the Senate on Monday, claiming the Trump lawyer’s argument was “contrary to both law & fact.”
Alan Dershowitz’s argument is contrary to both law & fact.
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) January 28, 2020
Of course, the Harvard Law professor emeritus wouldn’t let such ignorance of the law slide, so he went on Twitter the next day to give Warren a lesson.
“Warren doesn’t understand the law. My former colleague, Senator Warren, claims she could not follow my carefully laid out presentation that everybody else seemed to understand,” Dershowitz wrote. “This says more about Warren than it does about me.”
Warren doesn’t understand the law.
My former colleague, Senator Warren, claims she could not follow my carefully laid out presentation that everybody else seemed to understand. This says more about Warren than it does about me. (1 of 2)— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 28, 2020
He then addressed Warren’s “willfully” misleading statement, challenging her to back up things she claimed Dershowitz said.
She also willfully mischaracterized what I said, claiming that I spoke about “intent.” I challenge her to find that word anywhere in my presentation. I talked about the difficulty of discerning mixed motives. (2 of 3
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 28, 2020
Dershowitz also implied that Warren — a former Harvard Law professor — couldn’t even tell the difference between motive and intent, two words that should be in the vocabulary of even first-year law students.
“It’s the responsibility of presidential candidates to have a better understanding of the law,” he added.
(3 OF 3)
If Warren knew anything about criminal law she would understand the distinction between motives – which are not elements of crime—and intent, which is. It’s the responsibility of presidential candidates to have a better understanding of the law.— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) January 28, 2020
Warren commented Monday that Dershowitz was wrong, despite admitting she had a hard time understanding his arguments.
“He is a criminal law professor who stood in the well of the Senate and talked about how law never inquires into intent and that we should not be using the president’s intent as part of understanding impeachment,” she said, according to the Hill.
“Criminal law is all about intent. Mens rea is the heart of criminal law. That’s the very basis of it. So it makes his whole presentation just nonsensical. I truly could not follow it.” (Emphasis added.)
Warren’s mischaracterization of Trump’s legal defense should not come as any surprise, as the senator has a patchy history with telling the truth.
The presidential hopeful has previously twisted her family’s stories into a false racial identity, lied on legal documents and even misrepresented her dad’s career to make it appear more blue-collar.
Now, it appears that even Warren’s understanding of the law needs to be called into question before she gets any closer to the White House.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
