Alan Dershowitzஉறுதிசெய்யப்பட்ட கணக்கு

@AlanDersh

Professor at Harvard Law School for 50 years, now emeritus. Active in litigation, writing, and defense of civil liberties and human rights.

Cambridge, MA
செப்டம்பர் 2011 -இல் இணைந்தது

கீச்சுகள்

@AlanDersh -ஐத் தடைசெய்துள்ளீர்கள்

நிச்சயமாக இந்தக் கீச்சுகளைப் பார்க்க விரும்புகிறீர்களா? கீச்சுகளைப் பார்ப்பது, @AlanDersh -ஐத் தடைநீக்காது.

  1. 22 மணிநேரம் முன்
    மீளமை
  2. 23 மணிநேரம் முன்

    It is McCarthyism to accuse a lawyer of dirt for representing a despised client. That’s exactly what Joe Mccarthy used to do. Do you want us to back to that terrible time?

    மீளமை
  3. 23 மணிநேரம் முன்

    I’m sure you would have favored a right of reply by Hillary Clinton to Comey’s expression of his critical views. 2/2

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  4. 23 மணிநேரம் முன்

    If a prosecutor indicts/announces that he won’t indict, there's no need for a simultaneous rebuttal. But if a prosecutor publishes his critical views beyond that, fairness dictates a right of reply.1/2

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  5. பிப். 22

    The judge did not find that the non-prosecution agreement or plea bargain broke any rules. That is all I was involved with as Epstein’s defense lawyer.

    மீளமை
  6. பிப். 16

    Congress has authority to rescind Tump emergency. It can amend emergency power law to exclude expenditures not authorized by Congress. It will take bipartisan support but Trump is circumventing constitutional grant of power to congress to authorize expenditures.

    மீளமை
  7. பிப். 15

    It is unconstitutional to use the 25th Amendment to circumvent impeachment provisions. The 25th can be used only if POTUS is physically or psychiatrically incapacitated. Any other use is unconstitutional. I challenge anyone to argue differently.

    மீளமை
  8. பிப். 15

    Let’s assume the president of the United States was in bed with the Russians, committed treason, committed obstruction of justice. The 25th Amendment is simply irrelevant to that.

    மீளமை
  9. பிப். 11

    Investigating the National Enquirer for extortion raises concerns regarding the First Amendment which needs breathing room and applies equally to tabloids and to the Times. See attached abc interview.

    மீளமை
  10. பிப். 8

    I’m waiting to read attacks on the next Dem. president whose investigated by a special counsel and his defense of that special counsel. I suspect he'll be silent. His critiques are all partisan. He fails the shoe on the other foot test of morality and equal justice

    மீளமை
  11. பிப். 7

    I’m pleased that there will be a full investigation which will prove that the accusations against me were made up for financial reasons. I will fully cooperate with the investigation because I have nothing to hide.

    மீளமை
  12. பிப். 6

    Henry Ford devoted his life to two passions: making cars and demonizing Jews.

    மீளமை
  13. பிப். 5

    I also wish he would pass the shoe on the other foot test: would he tweeting as much and as angrily if Clinton has been elected and these tactics were being used against her? I leave that to the readers to judge. FINAL/

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  14. பிப். 5

    I just wish he were not so results oriented in his get-Trump-at-any-cost approach regardless of the implications for civil liberties. 3/

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  15. பிப். 5

    If after completing his investigation, Mueller comes up with no one in this core category, will admit I make an important point? Im sure Abramson deserved his grade and I commend him for thinking for himself. 2/

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  16. பிப். 5

    In his multiple tweets, avoids responding to my challenge: name one American who Mueller has charged with unlawfully conspiring with Russia to influence the 2016 election. I have patience. 1/

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  17. பிப். 5

    This misrepresents my feelings on the matter. I have written that process crimes are “serious” but they are secondary to Mueller's primary mandate.

    மீளமை
  18. பிப். 2

    Some of my highest grades were given to students who fundamentally disagreed w/ me. Abramson is projecting how he evaluates facts & arguments. If you agree politically you “find” the law and facts differently than if you disagree. That’s not the way I evaluate students or issues.

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  19. பிப். 2

    Abramson concluded his screed with a lie that typifies his mendacious approach to “facts.” He suspects that I gave him a good grade “because he felt I think as he does.” Anyone who knows me can attest that I would never grade based on whether a student thinks as I do. 7/

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை
  20. பிப். 2

    I challenge him to dispute this pattern in which “nearly all” of the charges “fall into 3 categories.” I urge all readers to read the attached article to determine whether he has fairly represented my actual argument, or has instead constructed a strawman

    இந்தத் தொடர்ச்சியைக் காண்பி
    மீளமை

சுமையேற்ற அதிக நேரமெடுக்கிறது போல் தெரிகிறது.

Twitter -இல் அதிக கொள்ளளவு அல்லது தற்காலிக சிக்கல் ஒன்று ஏற்பட்டிருக்கலாம். மீண்டும் முயற்சிக்கவும் அல்லது மேலும் தகவலுக்கு Twitter நிலை என்பதைப் பார்க்கவும்.

    நீங்கள் இதையும் விரும்பலாம்

    ·