make the same arguments that matter who the president is no matter who they're trying to impeach people on the hard left hate me they think i'm with the evil are you saying no president can be impeached no it's very hard to be president if a president commits a crime while in office like like richard nixon did surely he would have been impeached he paid her money he told his horn is the lie of the f.b.i. destroyed evidence he committed crimes while in office and donald trump if there's evidence that he committed crimes of course would be circular to impeachment my argument is you need to commit a crime to be impeached is not good enough to say he's a bad president or we don't want this policies or he's done terrible things you have to find a specific on the constitution says it has to be the bribery treason or other high crimes and missed in the soul when i haven't seen it bill clinton was wrongly impeached i think it was he did according to the allegations commit a crime it wasn't a high crime you know it was covering up for

a sordid affair that's not what hamilton and madison basically wrote the impeachment provisions of the constitution had in mind they had minor crimes that affect the national security crimes like richard nixon's crimes covering up a burglary to help them get elected that kind of thing those are the kinds of crimes we had in mind or real obstruction of justice and if there is evidence that the president committed any of those crimes he would be said to her i think that the buckle of it nobody's below could your book be a little premature what if robert muller. indicts well then. i argue in my book and i think most of the framers good agree with that and i think most constitutional scholars agree with that and judge kavanaugh agrees that they should be able to indict a sitting president but if he does get indicted and he sends that over to the house and there is a plausible case for

a crime then impeachment proceedings will go forward. when i don't like is that they're charging him with things like collusion with russia it would be a terrible thing if he colluded with russia but it's not a crime we're losing peers in the criminal statute books only in relation to business people colluding with each other to violate the and i trust less is not a crime for a political candidate to collude with russia look there are crimes that could be committed violations of the election laws but let's see the evidence the main thrust of my book is that you need to have a crime most scholars this with so i'm out there pretty much by myself making the argument and it will work i went back in history and that's the conclusion i gave you agree with kavanagh on that the president cannot be indicted i do i think the justice department agrees with that as well he can be indicted after he leaves office the constitution specifically provides that only once a president has been impeached and left office he can be charged like any other

citizen by the way the same rules apply to senators congressmen judges prosecutors they all have a form of immunity for conduct that they perform well in office the president to if he fires somebody which is the title to do or if he pardoned somebody which is a title to do that can't be the act element of a crime for example president george h.w. bush pardoned caspar weinberger and five other people on the eve of their trial for corrupt purpose in order to make sure that they didn't come back and testify against him but nobody suggested that would constitute either a crime or impeachable offense alan you know though you are smart and i we go back a long way or an old plan yeah you know. and you know i read that you dined with dirt with the president you appear on fox news regularly that alan dershowitz would become a hero of the far right is an anathema yeah yeah i mean first the i'm not here of

the far right i am hero of some people on the right and i'm a devil to some people on the left look i dined with president obama dined president clinton i don't think any american should turn down an invitation to dying president he wanted to talk about the middle east i'm deeply involved in the middle east peace process as you know and a close friend of benjamin not that you know who i know president abbas and i've been asked for my advice i was asked my advice by president obama president clinton president carter president bush and i'm always going to give advice and i'm always you know except an invitation to have dinner with the way i thought i sort between people in the white house i'm not embarrassed about that first box concern i've been on c.n.n. much more than fox and this in b.c. but i'm not going to keep myself off fox one reason i turned down the out unity to be a special can correspondent for any one channel is i want to be on all counts i want to be able to all americans i think of myself as a teacher and my audience today is no longer harvard law school students is people

who want to learn about constitutional law and i want to be on every channel what does it feel like to have people come over to union russia some options when and publicly argue with you what is that like for alan dershowitz i couldn't care less but what i do clearly out of my grandson argues with me and he smarter than i am and he comes up with brilliant brilliant arguments but we have loving conversations all of my relatives are against what i'm doing that is what hurts me more than people quote restraint take into account why they're against you sure because they think i'm helping a man who they think is a bad president and the you think of him as. the president i'm opposed to almost all of his policies i oppose immigration policies are opposed separation of families i oppose his tax policies i pose health policies i pose as gun policies i oppose his supreme court process of nomination i'm even opposed to the recent

policy of the united states discouraging mothers from feeding their children with breast milk you could this very hard to find anything i agree with except moving the embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem might read with that and i'm always going to agree with some presidential actions and disagree with that as i greet with most of president obama's actions but i disagreed with him when he didn't veto the un resolution declaring jerusalem to be illegally occupied territory or do you think a brett kavanaugh. well i don't know him i you know shaking hands with him in the harvard factually lounge but i don't know him but people i know generally think he's a gentleman and brilliant a great scholar i will disagree with probably ninety percent of his opinion he's a certainly qualified by his background i'm going to wait to hear how he answers questions before i make a final decision but i certainly wouldn't join those and say i'm in order magically vote against i'm not going to do with the republicans that the republicans stole the nomination from barack obama not allowing merrick garland case to even be

considered that i think was a violation of the constitution but i don't think two wrongs make a right so i think this nomination should be considered on its merits when it happen after the midterm elections that would be better the american public would have an ability to speak but the democrats don't really have the ability to slow down and stop with the way the republicans that you know where democracy and good democracy winners of the past election get to establish a lot of the rules subject of course to the constitution what do you think of michael cohen hiring all friend lanny davis as his lawyer and this imbroglio him or is the smartest thing you ever did hiring lanny is a brilliant move lanny davis both great in court lawyer out of court where tech titian strategist media consultant he does it all and it's a brilliant brilliant move and he's a very very lucky man that lanny took this case ok we you confirm cavanaugh

right today. you know why wouldn't confirm anybody today i mean if louis brandeis came forward what will they be but i will wait to hear how they answer questions that we want to fire i want to read much more of what he wrote i've read some of his vengeance and i've read some of his lore of you material but i want to read more on why even studying why can't they ask him his opinion on roe v wade i ask that because it is law so if something is law i can ask his opinion on miranda i can ask his opinion on the red star going to why can't they ask him about roe v wade i don't think they have a problem with that i just ask lee in my class the first year or two that he was up on the supreme court of the united states i asked him about all of this and he gave me he gave the class two hundred people his opinions on

a lot of these issues he wouldn't give an opinion of course on how he would decide a pending case a case that where the court but how you would have voted on dred scott that's a pretty easy thing ok but cavanagh has said that roe versus wade said a precedent when he was appearing to be approved in a circuit court right he said it and he have he he believes in precedent. do you believe he'll vote to keep rolling away i do i think he may chip away at it he's not going to vote to overrule it the rules of precedent are different by the way in the supreme court and in the court of appeals the court of appeals are bound absolute bound by the president and if you violate press that the sprinkle overrule you but the supreme court has nobody to overrule them i think it was justice jackson who said we're not infallible because we are always right we're only weighs right because we're the last word and therefore nobody could ever reverse us but that doesn't mean they're right the law is what the supreme court says it is well

that's what people have said over the years but the supreme court has changed its mind the supreme court validated slavery this very good validated segregation supreme court permitted the confinement of one hundred ten thousand japanese most of the american citizens in detention. centers sterilization of people they thought were mentally unfit some of the worst decisions of the world the conference frequent many of them by liberal judges that japanese detention douglas lack the sterilization cases holmes brandeis also ordered that so you know we don't know what the issues are going to be thirty years from now when kavanagh is reaching perhaps it's retirement age so you don't anticipate how a justice will books you don't know what the issues are all this court did say that the putting those japanese into special places and was wrong they did and justice goldberg said that when i was locklear fifty years ago but this was

a holding by the court that said clearly categorically that they're reversing that the session and thank god for that that was one of the most ferenc decisions in all of american history franklin delano roosevelt supporter forests of hugo black earl warren who are the liberals so when you have a war you just never know and it was some of the conservatives in america were close to it so you know you just never know the court this time of course think that everybody cavanagh is going to be a conservative but nobody doubt that but what kind of a conservative he is remains to be seen now and always great talking with you i love you. we well thanks for your time today. and again the book is the case against impeaching trump it's out right now and available everywhere including for download. stay right then is more politicking right after the break.

to watch the futurama or the jetsons they are traveling inside troops it's a pretty normal office they have formed so the concepts like that there were

several in implementation so what plans in the ninety's in the sixty's. so. when you get on a false idea and he says he was too busy this test on space if you want someone else to pick it up. seventy four design submissions. seven thousand islands. to join judges. and eight hundred sixty nonstop days of. the russian w.b. a championship. and a russian stuff to show you how. the premium bridge was. witnessed the construction really you need to transpose dungaree with no bounce of crimea. most of those while google more familiar could be

brought. to politicking nato tariffs and a closed door meeting between trump and putin lots to talk about with my next guests expert g h joins us from washington he served as white house cabinet secretary and deputy secretary of labor during the obama administration he's now a senior fellow at the university of virginia miller center and david jolly former republican representative from florida james was from ten. take this yesterday for play tonight so trump was in the middle of trump was in the middle of the visit

tomato based on that cruise how's he doing so far well you've had a tumultuous start to the meeting and he has called the germans captive of the russians which i think is a statement that would be called into question by most foreign policy experts as well as most members of congress as well it is it is troubling that telling that he has set the nato alliance is the most successful military alliance in the history of the world and this is a president who seems intent on disrupting that which has dangerous consequences not only for american national security but for the world order as well david your reaction yeah look i would agree largely with chris this is a president who has taken a notably.