The internet may be “forever,” but I don’t expect my words will become the next Rosetta Stone where future archaeologists decipher the zeitgeist of our era by filtering my articles against Urban Dictionary and reruns of the Wizards of Waverly Place. Still, I’m kind of proud of “Dumb-namic duo,” the term I busted out yesterday to describe onetime respected scholars Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz.
These two overgrown pull-toys are out here squandering their academic credentials faster than Montgomery Brewster as if they’ve been promised a lifetime of cable TV green rooms if they can pack in the most stupid sound bytes over the span of a month.
Yay Dersh… You made it!
Yes, the guy at the party incapable of getting any hint is back to explain a fake constitutional privilege that didn’t even exist in the law WHEN DERSH WAS BORN as if it’s some sort of blessed truth.
Anyway, with Turley in the news for demanding the DOJ make every FBI wired informant wear a sign that says “I’m with Merrick” to every meeting, Dershowitz just had to come back to assert his dominance to the lowest common denominator crowd. It’s like East Coast rappers vs West Coast rappers except they’re all incredibly dumb white people!
Alan Dershowitz, the famed Harvard law professor emeritus and lifelong Democrat,
Can I be a lifelong 3rd grader? I think we’d all benefit from judging ourselves against stuff decades in the past.
…reviewed some of the correspondence at Just the News’ request.
Just the News is the brain droppings of John Solomon, the former The Hill editor so nutty that even they worried his antics “could destroy” them. There’s no way Dershowitz carrying their water is a permanent disgrace for Harvard Law… nope, not at all.
He said the Biden White House’s eagerness to waive Trump’s claims of privilege could have future implications for generations of presidents to come.
To be clear, executive privilege was made up during the Nixon years and belongs to the federal government, not an individual. The whole point is to protect the sausage-making process for the Executive branch. It does not extend to a former president shielding personally embarrassing messages from the world.
And it definitely doesn’t extend to opting out of criminal investigations.
Dershowitz said after reading the text of Wall’s letter. “The current president should not be able to waive the executive privilege of a predecessor, without the consent of the former president. Otherwise, [privilege] means nothing. What president will ever discuss anything in private if he knows the man who beat him can and will disclose it.
Seriously, does Dershowitz think a former CEO binds corporations forever? There’s an “up dog” joke here about Upjohn but I’m at a legal technology conference and don’t have the time to construct it. Use your imaginations.
While some courts have upheld the notion of a successor president waiving privilege for a predecessor, Dershowitz said the matter remains to be decided definitively by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Laws only count if the Supreme Court has dealt with the precise issue apparently.
“The best thinking is that an incumbent president cannot waive the right of the previous president,” he said in a phone interview with Just the News. “It would make a mockery of the whole notion of privilege.”
Speaking of making a mockery of something… maybe don’t answer every request for comment, buddy.
Earlier: Jonathan Turley Very Upset That Merrick Garland Isn’t Cartoonishly Bad At His Job
Alan Dershowitz Is So SILENCED That He’s Got A New Book, A New Yorker Interview, Constant Cable News Appearances…
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.