Al Sharpton Alan Dershowitz Derek chauvin Derek chauvin trial Intelwars Maxine Waters Peter cahill Supreme Court

Dershowitz predicts Derek Chauvin’s conviction will be overturned, citing Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton

Legal scholar Alan Dershowitz predicted Monday that Derek Chauvin’s conviction would be overturned on appeal because of the unusual number of “outside influences” that potentially tainted the jury, which was unsequestered for the majority of the trial.

Chauvin was convicted Tuesday of murdering George Floyd last May. The jury reached a verdict more quickly than expected, declaring Chauvin guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter.

What did Dershowitz say?

Speaking on Newmax TV, Dershowitz declared that Chauvin’s actions were “inexcusable morally,” but called the verdict “very questionable,” citing outside influences.

In fact, Dershowitz said the verdict “should be” overturned on appeal.

“The verdict is very questionable because of the outside influences from people like Al Sharpton and Maxine Waters. Their threats and intimidation and hanging the ‘Sword of Damocles’ over the jury — basically saying that if you don’t convict on the murder charge, or all the charges, the cities will burn, the country will be destroyed — seeped into the jury room because the judge made a terrible mistake by not sequestering a jury,” Dershowitz explained.

“I think it should be reversed on appeal,” he predicted.

Despite the amount of attention Chauvin’s trial received, the jury was only fully sequestered on Monday when closing arguments took place.

Because the jurors were not sequestered for the duration of the trial and were open to outside voices threatening protest violence, Dershowitz said it would be inconceivable to think the jurors were not consciously or subconsciously weighing the impact their decision would have on society.

“That should never, ever be allowed to seep into a jury room,” Dershowitz said, adding that he has no confidence the verdict was “produced by due process and the rule of law.”

What about an appeal?

Dershowitz predicted Chauvin’s case will ultimately be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, which he said would be Chauvin’s best hope for a conviction reversal.

Citing Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Al Sharpton, Dershowitz said, “These folks took what they did right out of the playbook of the Deep South in the 1920s when prominent public officials would whoop up the crowds in front of the courthouse, demanding conviction of black people and acquittal of white people.”

“The Supreme Court and other courts reversed convictions based on that because jurors should not be intimidated or influenced by what goes on outside the courtroom,” he added.

Specifically, Dershowitz cited the infamous Sam Sheppard murder trial in the 1950s. Sheppard was convicted of murdering his wife, but was exonerated a decade later. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately determined Sheppard was deprived of a fair trial because the jury was tainted by media attention that engulfed the case.

Dershowitz also said Judge Peter Cahill, the judge who presided over Chauvin’s trial, supports his hypothesis.

On Monday, Cahill castigated Waters for urging protesters to “get more confrontational” if Chauvin was not found guilty. “You got to make sure that they know we mean business,” Waters said.

Cahill said Waters’ comments could be used by the defense in an appeal to argue for a mistrial.

“I will give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,” Cahill said after denying the defense’s motion for a mistrial over Waters’ remarks.

“This goes back to what I’ve been saying from the beginning. I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law, and to the judicial branch and our function,” the judge added. “I think if they want to give their opinions they should do so in a respectful and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the Constitution to respect a coequal branch of government.”

“Their failure to do so is abhorrent!” he said.

Alan Dershowitz Derek chauvin trial Intelwars Interviews ku klux klan Maxine Waters Maxine waters comments Stinchfield Videos

Alan Dershowitz compares Maxine Waters rhetoric to that of the Ku Klux Klan’s toward juries in the ’50s and ’60s

Alan Dershowitz, legal scholar and famed criminal defense attorney, said Tuesday that California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters’ words encouraging demonstrators to rise up over the Derek Chauvin trial is no different than the Ku Klux Klan trying to intimidate juries in the mid-20th century.

Over the weekend, Waters said that if a jury does not find Chauvin guilty, protesters and demonstrators have to “stay in the street” and “fight for justice.”

“We’ve got to get more active,” she added. “You’ve got to get more confrontational. You’ve got to make sure that they know we mean business.”

What are the details?

In a Tuesday morning appearance on Newsmax, Dershowitz said that Waters’ tactics were no different than that of the Ku Klux Klan toward juries in the 1950s and 1960s.

“Her message was clearly intended to get to the jury. If you acquit, or if you find a charge less than murder, we will burn down your buildings. We will burn down your businesses. We will attack you,” he said. “This was an attempt to intimidate the jury. It’s borrowed precisely from the Ku Klux Klan of the 1930s and 1920s when the Klan would march outside of courthouses and threaten all kinds of reprisals if the jury ever dare convict a white person or acquit a black person. And so efforts to intimidate a jury should result in a mistrial.”

Dershowitz later insisted that the judge would never grant a mistrial in this case, because then he would be responsible for any ensuing riots, “even though it was Waters who was responsible.”

“That’s not the way the system of justice should operate,” the Harvard professor added, according to Mediaite. “We’re not under the rule of law in Minneapolis, we’re under the rule of the crowd.”

“The irony of what Congresswoman Waters did, she borrowed the playbook of the Ku Klux Klan from the 1920s, the 1930s,” he added. “They would stand outside of courtrooms and they would threatened violence if any juror would ever acquit, a black person or convict a white person.”

“Now we’re seeing exactly the opposite was seeing mobs outside the courthouse and was seeing members of congress just like the Klan had governors and senators and very prominent public officials demanding verdicts in particular cases is and now we have a member of Congress demanding a verdict in the case,” he insisted.

Waters’ tactics similar to KKK | Alan Dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz Biden unity Glen Beck IMPEACHMENT Impeachment unconstitutional Intelwars Political poll Rand Paul Trump Impeachment unity

Majority of voters say Trump impeachment will further divide Americans

President Joe Biden has been preaching “unity” among Americans of all political parties for months. On Inauguration Day, he called for togetherness, “Today, on this January day, my whole soul is in this: bringing America together, uniting our people, uniting our nation. And I ask every American to join me in this cause.” But it appears that Democratic members of Congress didn’t get the memo about unity, because they are impeaching former President Donald Trump, a measure that most Americans deem divisive.

A new Rasmussen Reports poll found that 57% of likely voters said the impeachment of Trump would further divide Americans. The survey discovered that 19% believe the impeachment trial will unify Americans, and 20% said it wouldn’t have any effect on the country’s cohesion.

The poll also found that 50% of likely voters said the Senate should not convict the former President Trump of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and 45% said he should be convicted.

On Jan. 13, the House of Representatives voted 232-197 to impeach Trump on the charge of “incitement of insurrection” for his actions surrounding the storming of the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6. The impeachment article was delivered to the Senate on Monday.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said the upcoming Senate impeachment trial of Trump is already “dead on arrival.” He claimed that 45 Republican senators have determined that the proceedings are unconstitutional.

“We had 45 people, 45 Republican senators say that the whole charade is unconstitutional,” Paul told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo earlier this week. “So, what does that mean? It means … the trial is dead on arrival.”

“There will be a show,” Paul said. “There will be a parade of partisanship, but the Democrats really will not be able to win. They will be able to play a partisan game that they wish to play. But it’s all over.”

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told Glenn Beck that the impeachment against Trump is “unconstitutional.”

“The Constitution says the purpose of impeachment is to remove somebody,” Dershowitz said on BlazeTV’s “Glenn Beck Program.” “He [Trump] is out of office. There’s nothing left to do. It doesn’t say you can impeach him to disqualify him for the future. It says, if you remove him you can then add disqualification, but you can’t just impeach somebody to disqualify them.”

No impeachment has ever been brought against a president who is out of office.

Democrats need at least 17 GOP senators to vote with them to reach the two-thirds threshold to convict Trump in his second impeachment trial. If the former president is convicted, it will allow the Senate to permanently disqualify Trump from holding “any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”

The Senate impeachment trial is set to kick off the week of Feb. 8.

Alan Dershowitz Can trump be impeached after leaving office? Intelwars Trump Impeachment Trump impeachment second time Trump impeachment trial

Alan Dershowitz: ‘It’s clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL’ to impeach Trump after leaving office

As the Senate prepares for former President Trump’s second impeachment trial, many are asking whether it’s constitutional to try a president after leaving office. Alan Dershowitz, lawyer and host of the of “The Dershow,” joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to talk about the legal battles Trump still faces.

Dershowitz said he believes the Senate doesn’t have the authority to convict Trump, now that he’s a private citizen again, and thus can’t use impeachment to bar him from running for office again.

“The Constitution says the purpose of impeachment is to remove somebody. He [Trump] is out of office. There’s nothing left to do.
It doesn’t say you can impeach him to disqualify him for the future. It says, if you remove him you can then add disqualification, but you can’t just impeach somebody to disqualify them,” Dershowitz said.

“The Senate can’t try ordinary citizens. So once you’re an ordinary citizen, you get tried only in the courts, not in the Senate. So it’s clearly unconstitutional,” he added.

Dershowitz, who served on Trump’s legal team during the first impeachment trial, also discussed whether he thinks Trump is legally (or even just ethically) responsible for the Capitol riot earlier this month, and whether those engaging in violence could be considered “domestic terrorists.”

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

2020 presidential election Alan Dershowitz Constitutional victory Fox News Intelwars maria bartiromo President Donald Trump

Alan Dershowitz says ‘legal, constitutional paths’ to 2020 presidential election exist for Trump

Alan Dershowitz, legal scholar and famed criminal defense attorney, believes President Donald Trump has at least two or three potential constitutional paths to securing the 2020 presidential election.

Several states across the country are still in the process of officially certifying the vote, and the Electoral College convenes mid-December.

Inauguration Day is Jan. 20, 2021.

What are the details?

According to the Washington Examiner, Dershowitz said during an interview with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo that Trump and his legal team have several strategies in order to clinch a re-election against former Vice President Joe Biden.

“In Pennsylvania, [the Trump team has] two very strong legal arguments,” he explained. “One, that the courts changed what the legislature did about counting ballots after the end of election day. That’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. I don’t necessarily support it, but it’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. … They also have a winning issue in the Supreme Court on equal protection, that some counties allowed flawed ballots to be cured while others didn’t. Bush v. Gore suggests that an equal protection argument can prevail.”

Dershowitz also said that Biden’s vote lead, however, could prevent Trump and his legal team from contesting what the Examiner refers to as a “sufficient number of ballots.”

“The other legal theory they have, which is a potentially strong one, is that the computers, either fraudulently or by glitches, changed hundreds of thousands of votes. There, there are enough votes to make a difference, but I haven’t seen the evidence to support that,” he explained to Bartiromo. “So, in one case, they don’t have the numbers. In another case, they don’t seem yet to have the evidence; maybe they do. I haven’t seen it. But the legal theory is there to support them if they have the numbers and they have the evidence.”

Dershowitz pointed out that Trump and his team is under the gun to prove a case based on voter fraud.

“You need to have witnesses, experts subject to cross-examination, and findings by a court,” he explained.

“Notwithstanding the fact that there are legal paths to potential victory,” the professor continued, “I don’t think that the election is going to be reversed based on the numbers that I see at the moment and based on the fact that I haven’t seen the evidence. Their strongest case, if they have the evidence, is that computers may have turned hundreds of thousands of votes.”

Alan Dershowitz BILL OF RIGHTS Criminal defense attorney alan dershowitz Dershowitz on 2a Intelwars Second Amendment

‘I don’t want to change one word of it’: Alan Dershowitz on why the Second Amendment MUST be preserved

Legal scholar and famed criminal defense attorney Alan Dershowitz has a message for partisans dividing America: “A plague on both your houses.” He voted for Hillary Clinton. He endorsed Joe Biden. He’s a man who is basically the Forrest Gump of American judicial history.

Look up a big court case over the past few decades, and you’ll probably see him standing in the background. He’s represented notorious clients like Mike Tyson, Patty Hearst, Harry Reems, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and yes, Donald Trump. It’s made him a target for both the left and right.

Alan also describes himself as a “civil libertarian,” and that’s probably why he and Glenn Beck get along despite their opposing political views. His story is like a history lesson, spanning half a century, and it just might be the key to bridging the political divide.

On this week’s podcast, Alan explained that while he’s a strong defender of the Constitution, he’s never been a big fan of the Second Amendment. In the past he’s called it absurd and outdated, and even today, he admits that he wouldn’t have ingrained it into our Constitution if he was a framer. However, with the whole Bill of Rights under attack, he’s now fully in defense of our right to bear arms. Because if the Second Amendment changes, any amendment could be next.

“I’m now a supporter of the Second Amendment. I don’t want to change it. I don’t want to change one word of it, because I’m afraid that if I get to change the Second Amendment, other people will get to change the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment,” Alan said. “So, I am committed to preserving the Bill of Rights, every single word, every comma, and every space between the words.”

Watch a clip from the full interview with Alan Dershowitz below:

Watch the full podcast below, on Glenn’s YouTube channel, or on Blaze Media’s podcast network.

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck’s channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Alan Dershowitz Attorney General Bill Clinton Child abuse control Denise George elitists flight logs Headline News Intelwars Jeffrey Epstein Larry Summers Lolita Express Naomi Campbell Neglect panic passenger log Pedophilia political power rich victims Virgin Islands wealthy

Virgin Islands AG DEMANDS “ENTIRETY” Of Epstein’s Flight Logs

Wealthy politicians and others are panicking as the Virgin Islands Attorney General demands access to 21 years worth of deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s flight logs. Attorney General Denise George has subpoenaed the recorded in their “entirety” of everyone who has been on Epstein’s Lolita Express.

Wealthy people in all positions (political and corporate) are freaking out after George’s subpoena. Passenger logs for Epstein’s four helicopters and three planes have been subpoenaed by George, who recently sued the disgraced financier’s estate for 22 counts including human trafficking, child abuse, neglect, prostitution, aggravated rape, and forced labor, according to a Sunday report by the UK Mirror.

In addition to the passenger lists, George has requisitioned “complaints or reports of potentially suspicious conduct” and any “personal notes” the pilots made while flying Epstein’s alleged harem of underage girls around the world. She also wants the names and contact information of anyone who worked for the pilots – or who “integrated with or observed” Epstein and his passengers.

Epstein pilot David Rodgers previously provided a passenger log in 2009 tying dozens of politicians, actors, and other celebrities to the infamous sex offender – including former US President Bill Clinton, actor Kevin Spacey, and model Naomi Campbell. However, lawyers for Epstein’s alleged victims have argued that list did not include flights by Epstein’s chief pilot, Larry Visoski, who allegedly worked for him for over 25 years.

“The records that have been subpoenaed will make the ones Rodgers provided look like a Post-It note,” a source told the Mirror over the weekend, claiming that George’s subpoena had triggered a “panic among many of the rich and famous.” –RT

Epstein’s private plane, which was dubbed the Lolita Express, has several rich and famous passengers, including the UK’s Prince Andrew, celebrity lawyer Alan Dershowitz, actor Chris Tucker, Harvard economist Larry Summers, Hyatt hotel mogul Tom Pritzker, and model agency manager Jean-Luc Brunel along with Campbell, Spacey, and Clinton (who the logs show flew with Epstein over two dozen times).

Alan “The-State-Can-Plunge-A-Needle-In-Your-Arm” Dershowitz Is In Epstein’s “Little Black Book”

However, the passengers who enjoyed his other aircraft have not been made public yet. Epstein supposedly committed suicide last year in a Manhattan jail facility. Epstein’s madam, Ghislaine Maxwell, remains imprisoned in a Brooklyn detention center awaiting trial on charges related to child trafficking

Trump’s Words For Epstein Sex Trafficking Accomplice: “I Just Wish Her Well”

The post Virgin Islands AG DEMANDS “ENTIRETY” Of Epstein’s Flight Logs first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Alan Dershowitz Fox News Intelwars Jeffrey Epstein Suicide Tucker Carlson

Dershowitz floats theory about Jeffrey Epstein’s suspicious death: ‘It seems to me very difficult’

Alan Dershowitz floated a theory on Friday suggesting that Jeffrey Epstein was responsible for his own death.

Speaking to Fox News host Tucker Carlson, the former Harvard Law professor explained he does not believe Epstein was murdered, but still finds his death suspicious.

“I think he committed suicide,” Dershowitz said. “But, I think he may have paid off guards to allow him to commit suicide.”

“It seems to me very difficult that he would’ve been allowed with video cameras off, cellmate taken out of the cell. I wouldn’t put it beyond him to have paid guards to close their eyes. I don’t think he could bear the possibility of having to spend the rest of his life in jail,” he continued.

Epstein, a financier whose net worth swelled north of $500 million, was arrested last July on federal sex trafficking charges. It was long alleged that Epstein trafficked teenage girls for sex, using his network of powerful friends to shield himself from law enforcement.

Just weeks after his arrest, Epstein was found dead inside his jail cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center where he was awaiting trial. Conspiracy theories quickly erupted about Epstein’s untimely death, but New York City’s chief medical examiner ruled his death a suicide.

The Epstein case was thrust back into the national spotlight this week after newly unsealed court documents claimed former President Bill Clinton, a known friend of Epstein’s, visited Epstein’s private island.

Although Clinton’s team earnestly denies the allegations, the court documents — from a now-settled defamation case between accused Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts — also claim that Dershowitz had sex with Roberts at the direction of Epstein.

During his interview with Carlson, Dershowitz vigorously denied those accusations. He claimed that Roberts is lying, and denied being a close friend to Epstein.

Both Roberts and Dershowitz are suing one another for defamation.

Alan Dershowitz Bill Clinton Bill clinton epstein Epstein island Ghislaine Maxwell Intelwars

Bill Clinton went to Jeffrey Epstein’s island with ‘young girls,’ witness says in unsealed court docs

A trove of court documents involving the late convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell were unsealed Thursday night. The documents include allegations that former President Bill Clinton visited Epstein’s private island.

Judge Loretta Preska ruled last week that documents from a 2015 defamation case against Maxwell by Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre could be unsealed. Giuffre brought the case after Maxwell accused her of lying about being exploited and abused by Maxwell and Epstein.

The batch of 47 documents and more than 600 pages unsealed from the now-settled defamation case include the deposition transcripts from Giuffre, email correspondence between Maxwell and Epstein, and the draft of Giuffre’s memoir she was writing about her experiences inside the alleged sex-trafficking ring that provided young women to wealthy and powerful men.

Giuffre claims she was first recruited by Maxwell when she was 15 years old and working at the Mar-a-Lago Club, a Palm Beach resort owned by President Donald Trump. She alleges that she was turned into Epstein’s “sex slave” from about 1999 to 2002, which included having sex with Epstein’s acquaintances.

During a court questioning, lawyer Jack Scarola asked Giuffre, “Do you have any recollection of Jeffrey Epstein’s specifically telling you that ‘Bill Clinton owes me favors?'”

“Yes, I do,” Giuffre responded. “It was a laugh though. He would laugh it off. You know, I remember asking Jeffrey what’s Bill Clinton doing here [on Epstein’s island] kind of thing, and he laughed it off and said well he owes me favors.”

“He never told me what favors they were,” Giuffre added. “I never knew. I didn’t know if he was serious. It was just a joke. … He told me a long time ago that everyone owes him favors. They’re all in each other’s pockets.”

Scarola then asked Giuffre, “Were sexual orgies a regular occurrence on the island at Jeffrey’s house?”

Giuffre responded, “Yes.”

“Ghislane, Emmy [another girl who was allegedly a regular at Epstein’s house], and there was 2 young girls that I could identify. I never really knew them well anyways. It was just 2 girls from New York,” Giuffre answered.

She said they were all staying in Epstein’s house on Little Saint James, the accused sex trafficker’s private 70-acre Caribbean island off the coast of St. Thomas.

In a May 2016 deposition, Giuffre said Maxwell acted as a “helicopter pilot” to Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Maxwell allegedly told Giuffre that she flew Clinton to Epstein’s island. Last year, Clinton denied having a close relationship with Epstein and being at the private island.

“President Clinton knows nothing about the terrible crimes Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to in Florida some years ago, or those with which he has been recently charged in New York,” a statement from Clinton’s press secretary Angel Ureña said. “He’s not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade, and has never been to Little St. James Island, Epstein’s ranch in New Mexico, or his residence in Florida.”

According to records obtained by Fox News, the former president reportedly took at least 26 trips on Epstein’s private Boeing 727 plane, which was nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

A 2015 article from Gawker, which included flight logs, stated, “Bill Clinton took repeated trips on the ‘Lolita Express’ — the private passenger jet owned by billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein — with an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein’s address book under an entry for ‘massages.'”

“Clinton shared more than a dozen flights with a woman who federal prosecutors believe procured underage girls to sexually service Epstein and his friends and acted as a ‘potential co-conspirator’ in his crimes,” according to the Gawker report.

“Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of twenty-first-century science,” Clinton told New York magazine in 2002 through a spokesperson. “I especially appreciated his insights and generosity during the recent trip to Africa to work on democratization, empowering the poor, citizen service and combating H.I.V./AIDS.”

Epstein had an oil painting of Clinton wearing a blue dress and red heels lounging on a chair in the Oval Office “prominently” displayed in his Manhattan townhouse, according to law enforcement sources.

Former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz was also named in the unsealed documents. Then-minor “Jane Doe #3,” identified in court documents as Giuffre, alleged to have been trafficked to Dershowitz.

Dershowitz has denied the allegations.

“I demanded release of these documents,” Dershowitz told Forbes on Friday. “They contain no new accusations that were not made public in Guiffre’s prior lawsuits. The reason I wanted them released is because they contain smoking gun emails and a manuscript that prove in Guiffre’s own words that she never met me and made up the entire story.

“The documents prove I never had sex with anyone associated with Epstein,” the attorney told Newsweek.

“I knew they would repeat her false accusations against me, Al and Tipper Gore and others, which her own lawyers admit are ‘wrong,'” Dershowitz wrote on Twitter.

In 2016, former attorneys, Florida plaintiffs attorney Brad Edwards and former federal judge Paul Cassell, for Giuffre said it was a “mistake” to have accused Dershowitz of sexual misconduct.

“Given the events that have transpired since the filing of the [court] documents …in which Dershowitz was accused of sexual misconduct, including the court order striking the allegations in the federal court filings, and the records and other documents produced by the parties, Edwards and Cassell acknowledge that it was a mistake to have filed sexual misconduct accusations against Dershowitz; and the sexual misconduct accusations made in all public filings (including all exhibits) are hereby withdrawn. Dershowitz also withdraws his accusations that Edwards and Cassell acted unethically,” the attorneys said.

Giuffre also claims she was “forced” to have sexual relations with Prince Andrew on Epstein’s private island. Prince Andrew has denied the accusations.

Epstein died in his Manhattan prison cell on Aug. 10, 2019, while awaiting trial for federal sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide by the New York City medical examiner.

Maxwell was arrested in New Hampshire earlier this month. Epstein’s alleged confidante was charged with two counts of conspiracy, enticement of a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, transporting minors for illegal sex acts, and two counts of perjury. She has denied the charges and pleaded not guilty.

Maxwell, 58, is being held without bail at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.

Alan Dershowitz Bill Clinton body autonomy Donald Trump Ghislaine Maxwell Headline News Intelwars Jeffrey Epstein Lawyer left-right paradigm little black book Lolita Express pedophiles power Prince Andrew ruling class slaves swamp creatures the government owns you tyranny tyrants

Alan “The-State-Can-Plunge-A-Needle-In-Your-Arm” Dershowitz Is In Epstein’s “Little Black Book”

Alan Dershowitz, the infamous lawyer for Donald Trump who said the government can “jab a needle in your arm” is in Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book of people who flew on the Lolita Express no fewer than 12 times.

Dershowitz, who defended President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial says you have no right to decide what goes into your body. That is for the government to decide. Americans need to wake up. There is no left or right. The rulers are all on the same team. It’s us vs. them.

Top Lawyer Says The Government Has THE POWER To “Plunge a NEEDLE IN YOUR ARM”

So. who among Epstein’s infamous black book will need a good lawyer if Ghislaine Maxwell starts singing? At the top of the list are the usual scandal magnets, Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, and Alan Dershowitz. They all hung around with Epstein, but each has a history of slithering out of jams.

Other Epstein associates with less experience in the hot seat might also start to squirm. Billionaire hedge fund owner Glenn Dubin, for example, who is one half of an accomplished Manhattan super-couple: His striking wife, Dr. Eva Andersson-Dubin, founded the Dubin Breast Center of the Tisch Cancer Institute at the Mount Sinai Medical Center.

Dershowitz is little more than a Nazi, with views that you have no right to your own body. He’s borderline senile, like Biden, and thinks the government can use any force necessary to “plunge a needle in your arm.” He’s a member of the elitists and ruling class and should be afraid that his ties to known pedophiles have surfaced.

But don’t expect justice. As we mentioned a few days ago, if Maxwell even comes close to signaling that she’s going to “name names,” she will meet a similar fate as Epstein. We’ve seen this before. The mainstream media will cover it up as a suicide and the tyrannical pedophiles will go on terrorizing the public and enslaving the masses.

The dirtbag Dershowitz also helped ensure Epstein never paid for his crimes. When Jeffrey Epstein found out in 2005 that he was being investigated by police for the sexual abuse of underage girls, he called Dershowitz.  The allegations were that Epstein had sexually abused girls when they were underage, sexually assaulted them, or masturbated in front of them during massages at his mansion. Dershowitz went to work discrediting some of Epstein’s accusers. One young woman, identified as A.H., said that she had started going to Epstein’s house when she was 16, that he had photographed her naked, and that he had attempted to rape her. Dershowitz sent the lead investigator a letter intended to call into question her character, culling information from her social media accounts. This character assassination helped Epstein get a “cushy plea deal” without actually having to pay for his crimes.

Epstein’s legal team arrived at a “non-prosecution agreement” with the office of the US attorney in Miami, then led by Alexander Acosta, who went on to become President Trump’s secretary of labor (he announced his resignation earlier this month after criticism of his role in the Epstein case). Under the deal, Epstein spent 13 months in jail and was able to go on work release to a nearby office — where, according to an attorney representing his accusers, he was able to continue preying on women. –VOX

Before SHTF, Let’s Revisit Jeffrey Epstein’s Little Black Book

Dershowitz isn’t the only high profile tyrant in Epstein’s book, but considering he thinks the government owns the bodies of millions of people, it’s imperative we shed some light on the distasteful character that he is as he continues to slither his way into positions of power.

It isn’t really shocking now that Dershowitz thinks he can violate the consent of those who don’t want to be vaccinated. After all, it looks like he has a habit of violating others without their consent and defends those who do the same.



Alan Dershowitz born free civil disobedience democide despotism forced vaccinations freedom Government Headline News human rights Intelwars Murder no rights oppression Pentagon Police State power grabs social unrest swat raids TOTALITARIANISM tyranny violence by the state voluntaryism

The Slippery Slope to Despotism: Paved with Lockdowns, Raids and Forced Vaccinations

This article was originally published by John W. Whitehead at The Rutherford Institute. 

“You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business… And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”—Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor

You have no rights.

That’s the lesson the government wants us to learn from this COVID-19 business.

Well, the government is wrong.

For years now, the powers-that-be—those politicians and bureaucrats who think like tyrants and act like petty dictators regardless of what party they belong to—have attempted to brainwash us into believing that we have no right to think for ourselves, make decisions about our health, protect our homes and families and businesses, act in our best interests, demand accountability and transparency from government, or generally operate as if we are in control of our own lives.

We have every right, and you know why? Because we were born free.

As the Declaration of Independence states, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights—to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness—that no government can take away from us.

Unfortunately, that hasn’t stopped the government from constantly trying to usurp our freedoms at every turn. Indeed, the nature of government is such that it invariably oversteps its limits, abuses its authority, and flexes its totalitarian muscles.

Take this COVID-19 crisis, for example.

What started out as an apparent effort to prevent a novel coronavirus from sickening the nation (and the world) has become yet another means by which world governments (including our own) can expand their powers, abuse their authority, and further oppress their constituents.

Until now, the police state has been more circumspect in its power grabs, but this latest state of emergency has brought the beast out of the shadows.

We are on a slippery slope to outright despotism.

This road we are traveling is paved with lockdowns, SWAT team raids, mass surveillance and forced vaccinations. It is littered with the debris of our First and Fourth Amendment freedoms.

This is what we have to look forward to in the months and years to come unless we can find some way to regain control over our runaway government.

The government has made no secret of its plans.

Just follow the money trail, and you’ll get a sense of what’s in store: more militarized police, more SWAT team raids, more surveillance, more lockdowns, more strong-armed tactics aimed at suppressing dissent and forcing us to comply with the government’s dictates.

It’s chilling to think about, but it’s not surprising.

We’ve been warned.

Remember that Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command? The one that anticipates the future domestic political and social problems the government is grooming its armed forces to solve through the use of martial law?

The chilling five-minute training video, obtained by The Intercept through a FOIA request and made available online, paints a dystopian picture of the future bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots.

But here’s the kicker: what they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.

This COVID-19 crisis is pushing us that much closer to that dystopian vision becoming a present-day reality.

For starters, let’s talk about the COVID-19 stormtroopers, SWAT team raids, and ongoing flare-ups of police brutality.

With millions of dollars in stimulus funds being directed towards policing agencies across the country, the federal government plans to fight this COVID-19 virus with riot gear, gas masks, ballistic helmets, drones, and hi-tech surveillance technology.

Indeed, although crime rates have fallen dramatically in the midst of this global COVID-19 lockdown, there’s been no relief from the brutality and violence of the American police state.

While the majority of the country has been social distancing under varying degrees of lockdowns, it’s been business as usual for the nation’s SWAT teams and police trained to shoot first and ask questions later.

In Kentucky, plain-clothed cops in unmarked cars used a battering ram to break down Breonna Taylor’s door and carry out a no-knock raid on her home after midnight. Fearing a home invasion, the 26-year-old emergency medical technician and her boyfriend—who had been in bed at the time of the invasion—called 911 and prepared to defend themselves. Taylor’s boyfriend shot one of the intruders—later identified as police—in the leg. Police fired at least 20 shots into the apartment and a neighboring home, killing Taylor. The drug dealer who was the target of the late-night raid lived 10 miles away and had already been arrested prior to the raid on Taylor’s home.

In Illinois, police opened fire in a subway station, shooting a 33-year-old man who allegedly resisted their attempts to tackle and arrest him for violating a city ordinance by passing between two cars of a moving train. Ariel Roman, a short-order cook, claimed he was suffering from an anxiety attack when he was “harassed, chased, tackled, pepper-sprayed, tasered and shot twice” by police.

In Maryland, police dispatched on a nuisance call to break up a crowd of neighborhood kids( half of them teenagers, and the other half youngsters around 4 and 5 years old) gathered in an apartment complex parking lot opened fire on a 29-year-old man seen exiting his car with a gun. An eyewitness claimed “the officer pointed a flashlight and his gun at the group immediately and began chasing and shooting a minute or two after getting out of the patrol car.” Police reportedly shot the man after he threw down his gun and ran in the opposite direction.

In Virginia, more than 80 local, state, and federal police agents risked spreading COVID-19 to “a highly vulnerable population” when they raided a low income, public housing community in an effort to crackdown on six individuals suspected of selling, on average, $20 to $100 worth of drugs.

In Texas, a SWAT team backed up with a military tank Armored Personnel Carrier raided Big Daddy Zane’s Bar whose owner and patrons were staging a peaceful First and Second Amendment protest of the governor’s shutdown orders.

Police have even been called out to shut down churches, schools and public parks and beaches that have been found “in violation” of various lockdown orders.

Now there’s talk of mobilizing the military to deliver forced vaccinations, mass surveillance in order to carry out contact tracing, and heavy fines and jail time for those who dare to venture out without a mask, congregate in worship without the government’s blessing or re-open their businesses without the government’s say-so.

There are rumblings that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will start thermal screenings to monitor passengers’ temperatures in the coming weeks. This is in addition to the virtual strip searches that have become routine aspects of airport security.

Restaurants in parts of the country are being tasked with keeping daily logs of phone numbers, emails, and arrival times for everybody who participates in dine-services, with no mention of how long such records will be kept on file, with whom they will be shared, and under what circumstances.

With the help of Google and Nest cameras, hospitals are morphing into real-time surveillance centers with round-the-clock surveillance cameras monitoring traffic in patients’ rooms. Forget patient privacy, however. Google has a track record of sharing surveillance footage with police.

And then rounding out the power-grabs, the Senate just voted to give police access to web browsing data without a warrant, which would dramatically expand the government’s Patriot Act surveillance powers. The Senate also voted to give Attorney General William Barr the ability to look through the web browsing history of any American — including journalists, politicians, and political rivals — without a warrant, just by saying it is relevant to an investigation. If enacted, privacy experts warn  that the new provisions threaten to undermine the free press by potentially preventing the media from exposing abuses of power or acting as a watchdog against political leaders.

If we haven’t already crossed over, we’re skating dangerously close to that line that keeps us on the functioning side of a constitutional republic. It won’t take much to push us over that edge into a full-blown banana republic.

In many ways, this is just more of the same heavy-handed tactics we’ve been seeing in recent years but with one major difference: this COVID-19 state of emergency has invested government officials (and those who view their lives as more valuable than ours) with a sanctimonious, self-righteous, arrogant, Big Brother Knows Best approach to top-down governing, and the fall-out can be seen far and wide.

It’s an ugly, self-serving mindset that views the needs, lives and rights of “we the people” as insignificant when compared to those in power.

That’s how someone who should know better such as Alan Dershowitz, a former Harvard law professor, can suggest that a free people—born in freedom, endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights, and living in a country birthed out of a revolutionary struggle for individual liberty—have no rights to economic freedom, to bodily integrity, or to refuse to comply with a government order with which they disagree.

According to Dershowitz, who has become little more than a legal apologist for the power elite, “You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business… And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

Dershowitz is wrong: while the courts may increasingly defer to the government’s brand of Nanny State authoritarianism, we still have rights.

The government may try to abridge those rights, it may refuse to recognize them, it may even attempt to declare martial law and nullify them, but it cannot litigate, legislate or forcefully eradicate them out of existence.

Up to now, we’ve been largely passive participants in this experiment in self-governance. Our inaction and inattention has left us at the mercy of power-hungry politicians, corrupt corporations, and brutal, government-funded militias.

Wake up, America.

As I  make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, these ongoing violations of our rights—this attitude by the government that we have no rights—this tyrannical movement that is overtaking our constitutional republic and  gaining in momentum and power by the minute—this incessant auction block in which government officials appointed to represent our best interests keep selling us out to the highest bidder—all of these betrayals scream for a response.

To quote the great Rod Serling: “If we don’t listen to that scream—and if we don’t respond to it—we may well wind up sitting amidst our own rubble, looking for the truck that hit us—or the bomb that pulverized us. Get the license number of whatever it was that destroyed the dream. And I think we will find that the vehicle was registered in our own name.”

Alan Dershowitz Americans democracy enslavement freedom Harvard professor Headline News Intelwars Jason Goodman majority rules the minority my body my choice rights sheep slaves subjugation tax cattle Trump lawyer tyranny wake up

Top Lawyer Says The Government Has THE POWER To “Plunge a NEEDLE IN YOUR ARM”

A top American lawyer, Alan Dershowitz has shown just what he thinks of the tax cattle, saying the government has the power to “plunge a needle in your arm.” According to Comrade Dershowitz, you have “no right not to be vaccinated.”

Dershowitz, who infamously defended President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial says you have no right to decide what goes into your body. That is for the government to decide. Americans need to wake up, or before we know it, everyone save a few will have “the mark of the beast” in no time.

Speaking with Crowdsource the Truth host Jason Goodman over the weekend, Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz said the public’s safety outweighs any private liberty concerns of U.S. citizens who do not wish to be vaccinated for the coronavirus. “Let me put it very clearly, you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread disease, even if you disagree,” he said. “You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business.”

In the “land of the free,” you have no rights that the government doesn’t give you, according to Dershowitz. He later says that “this is what democracy is all about.” Meaning that if a majority of the population wants to take your rights and freedom, you have to submit to your slavery.  Democracy has become nothing more than a cruel joke played on people for thousands of years giving them the illusion of choice. When is enough, enough?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Yes, I know the U.S. is “supposed” to be a “Constitutional Republic,” but anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it hasn’t been for a long time and never will be again. 

If you refuse to comply with mandatory vaccinations, Dershowitz says you will be forced to comply.  “And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

The lawyer said that U.S. residents don’t have a right to infect others and that if they wish to opt-out of vaccination, they could be given an alternative in which people rejecting the state mandate could remain in their homes permanently so as not to risk infecting others. “That’s what a democracy is about,” he said. “If the majority of the people agree and support that, for public health measures, you have to be vaccinated, you have to be vaccinated. They should give you an alternative. The alternative is to live in your home, don’t get vaccinated, but never ever leave your home or live in a bubble. But if you want to interact with other people, you cannot become Typhoid Mary. The Constitution doesn’t give you the right to spread your illness to other people.”

The Constitution also doesn’t give the government the right to enslave the public, but that’s exactly what’s happened in a matter of months.  The government is not coming to “save” us.  We are the ones we have been waiting for and the only way this stops is by waking people up to their slavery.

 “I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.” -Often attributed to Harriet Tubman

Alan Dershowitz COVID-19 Intelwars Interviews mandatory vaccines

Alan Dershowitz says the state has every right to ‘plunge a needle into your arm’ and forcibly vaccinate its citizens

Alan Dershowitz, liberal Democratic lawyer, civil liberties advocate, and Harvard Law School emeritus professor, says that the state has a “right” to “plunge a needle into your arm” in a forced vaccination scenario if necessary.

What are the details?

During a recent discussion with Jason Goodman, Dershowitz — who defended President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial — said that the U.S. Constitution permits the government to forcibly vaccinate its citizens in an effort to stop the spread of contagion.

Goodman, who is host of web series “Crowdsource the Truth,” asked Dershowitz where in the Constitution it says the government can forcibly vaccinate a person.

“Let me put it very clearly,” Dershowitz said. “You have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease, even if you disagree. You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business.”

The famed law professor added that if the disease in question is not contagious — for example, cancer — a person can refuse treatment.

He continued, “[But] If you refuse to be vaccinated [for a contagious disease], the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

“You have no right to refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease,” Dershowitz added. “Public health, the police power of the Constitution, gives the state the power to compel that. And there are cases in the United States Supreme Court.”

What else?

Dershowitz explained that this is all part of living in a democratic society.

“That’s what a democracy is about,” he said. “If the majority of the people agree and support that, for public health measures, you have to be vaccinated, you have to be vaccinated. They should give you an alternative. The alternative is to live in your home, don’t get vaccinated, but never ever leave your home or live in a bubble. But if you want to interact with other people, you cannot become Typhoid Mary. The Constitution doesn’t give you the right to spread your illness to other people.”

Alan Dershowitz Addresses the Systematic Destruction of the U.S. Constitution

Alan Dershowitz Ben Shapiro Intelwars

Alan Dershowitz says Barack Obama ‘conned’ him and he would now reconsider his 2012 vote for him

Renowned liberal Democratic lawyer and civil liberties advocate Alan Dershowitz accused former President Barack Obama of betraying the state of Israel and personally deceiving him in a recent interview with Ben Shapiro that aired on Sunday.

Dershowitz explained to Shapiro that Obama assured him in a private meeting that he would vigorously defend Israel, but then did the opposite.

Obama stabbed Israel in the back, Dershowitz says

“I think President Obama, for whom I voted twice, and would now reconsider my second vote for him, he conned me,” he said. “He called me into the Oval Office and he said ‘I have Israel’s back’ and I didn’t realize what he meant is to put a target on it and stab them,” Dershowitz said, referring to former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power’s abstention from during a December 2016 vote condemning Israel.

“As he was leaving office, he ordered his representative to the U.N. to not veto a resolution which declared…the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism to be occupied territory,” he continued.

“It was outrageous,” the Harvard Law School professor added while explaining how Obama’s decision “legitimized” anti-Israel activism among the political center-left and the Democratic Party.

It is not the first time that Dershowitz has blasted Obama.

In February, Dershowitz claimed he had information that indicated Obama directed the FBI to investigate someone at the request of billionaire philanthropist and left-wing donor George Soros.

“I have some information as well about the Obama administration — which will be disclosed in a lawsuit at some point, but I’m not prepared to disclose it now — about how President Obama personally asked the FBI to investigate somebody on behalf of George Soros, who was a close ally of his,” Dershowitz claimed.

‘Guilt by Association’

Dershowitz made the comments regarding Obama’s Israel policy on Shapiro’s “Sunday Special” show where he promoted his most recent book “Guilt by Association” and discussed his work as an expert witness in Trump’s impeachment trial.

The criminal defense and constitutional lawyer also used the opportunity to blast “idiots” who misrepresented the arguments he made as to what constituted an “impeachable offense.”

“When I did my argument in front of the Senate, no one ever took it on based on the merits,” he said. “If I had been on Hillary Clinton’s side, if she had been impeached, I’d be the greatest scholar in the history of constitutional law, according to the left. But they don’t like where I came down on this case, so they attacked me personally.”