Dershowitz to defend Trump at trial

Alan Dershowitz, shown here at the Chilmark General Store in 2018, says comedian Larry David confronted him on the same porch. - Gabrielle Mannino

Updated 12 noon

Alan Dershowitz will be presenting oral arguments before the U.S. Senate at the impeachment trial for President Donald Trump. The trial began in earnest on Tuesday.

In a brief cell phone conversation Friday morning, Dershowitz said, “I can confirm that I’ll be presenting oral arguments.”

Dershowitz, a seasonal resident of Chilmark and a professor emeritus at Harvard, has been an outspoken critic of the investigation surrounding Trump by Robert Mueller, and of the House investigation that centered on Ukraine and led to the articles of impeachment.

Dershowitz declined further comment, referring to his statement on Twitter.

“Professor Dershowitz will present oral arguments at the Senate trial to address the constitutional arguments against impeachment and removal,” the tweet states. “While Professor Dershowitz is nonpartisan when it comes to the Constitution — he opposed the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, and voted for Hillary Clinton — he believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution. He is participating in this impeachment trial to defend the integrity of the Constitution and to prevent the creation of a dangerous constitutional precedent.”

Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School and a frequent Island visitor, also weighed in. “My former colleague Alan Dershowitz knows a lot about criminal law, but not much about constitutional law. He’s flashy but not all that substantive. But flashiness isn’t exactly lacking on Team Trump,” Tribe wrote in an email to The Times. “So adding Dershowitz to the defense team suggests that Trump intends to push the argument that impeachable offenses have to be statutory crimes like blackmail or robbery, but that’s definitely wrong, and reflects serious ignorance about how the U.S. Constitution works. For constitutional expertise and legal acumen, I’d pit my own former student Adam Schiff against Alan Dershowitz any day.”

Schiff is a congressman from California and chairman of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Schiff is the lead prosecutor in the impeachment trial.

Dershowitz will reportedly join Ken Starr, the special prosecutor who investigated President Bill Clinton and has appeared — much like Dershowitz — on network talk shows defending Trump.

In the summer of 2018, Dershowitz made national headlines when he complained that his support of Trump had led to him being shunned at social gatherings on the Vineyard. In an interview in December, Dershowitz said that behavior has continued because of his support of the president. “Oh, definitely, it has continued. The division on the Island is even greater than it is in other places where I live,” he said.

Dershowitz has pointed out in the past that he donated to Democratic candidate Hilary Clinton’s campaign, and that his support of Trump has to do with the constitutional questions at hand.

In September, Vineyarders protested the use of the West Tisbury library as a venue for Dershowitz to talk about his book.

Updated with a comment from Laurence Tribe. -Ed.



  1. Dershowitz–an honest man of integrity. Doesnt support Trump, doesnt agree with him, will vote for a Democrat but knows this sideshow is a farce and supports the Constitution while knowing what it says. Good man.

    • You join a fan club, Andrew. Jeffrey Epstein, OJ, Harry Reems, Jim Bakker, Michael Milken, Claus von Bulow, and Leona Helmsley all really, really, really liked Dersh, too, thought he was a good man. Remember when Alan recently boasted of his “perfect sex life,” (with his wife, I assume), after being accused of sex (rape, actually, since minors can’t consent) with one of Epstein’s minor girls? Maybe that’s like Trump’s “perfect phone call”. Lots of perfection with these self-aggrandizing narcissists. I do have to wonder what part of bribing a foreign government by illegally withholding tax payer aid to get dirt on a political rival seems so perfectly okay with republicans? The farce is the republican party’s disdain for the Constitution and rule of law, all the while yammering about ethics and morality.

      • “[President Trump] bribing a foreign government by illegally withholding taxpayer aid to get dirt on a political rival.” These are your words, and they are the media and Democrat party talking points and spin which seek to frame the narrative that way. The President not only has the right, but the obligation to make sure our tax money is not being flushed down a corrupt toilet in Ukraine, only to trickle into the wallets of the Biden family. Even if the President were to place conditions on that aid, it would be neither illegal nor unethical nor rare. Presidents do it all the time. With the exception, perhaps, of emergency relief after natural disasters, all foreign aid is conditional. We expect something for it. If you want to honestly look at the kind of criminal behavior you seem eager to find, look no further than Joe Biden himself. He literally extorted and coerced the former President of Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, the fracking company which employed his son, Hunter, for some $80,000 per month for a no-show job on that company’s board of directors. And how did Joe Biden accomplish this? By threatening to withhold a billion dollars in U.S.foreign aid unless that prosecutor investigating Burisma’s corruption was fired. And that prosecutor was canned, the investigation of Burisma and Hunter ceased, and Joe Biden bragged about it. I’m wondering if you aware of this, or have seen the video of him bragging about it?

        • Seaman is misinformed. It is congress and not the president who decides where our money goes.It is outside of the president’s authority to determine where our money goes.

          • Congress appropriates the money, and the president can withhold it, or delay its dispersal under certain circumstances, and this falls well within that category. How could any reasonable person (which excludes those with TDS) assert that the President committed a grievous and impeachable offense by suggesting to the Ukrainian president that the blatant corruption of a former vice-president be investigated so that our hard-earned tax dollars are not squandered – and that we should overturn the election as a consequence? Reasonable and honest people see this for what it is: The Democrat-controlled House sees a weak field of its own presidential candidates and seeks to damage the incumbent President by any and all means. Thought experiment: If instead of the corrupt Biden family, what if President Trump asked President Zalinsky to look into the suspected dirty dealings of, let’s say, Mitt Romney’s family? Would the House have been so concerned? Of course not. Does the fact that Joe Biden is running for president give him some kind of super-immunity from scrutiny? Of course not.

          • Seman, your comment is not reality. The evidence, including emails, texts, and phonecalls, witness accounts of people beyond reproach, Trump himself, and Guiliani admit early on that Trump wanted dirt on Biden. And he offered a bribe to Zelensky in a phonecall to get it. And yes, it is illegal for a president to use tax payer funds that have been already been approved and allocated by Congress to bribe a foreign government to get dirt on a political rival. No one else in Ukraine was investigated for corruption and witnesses attest and confirm that Trump was not interested in anyone but Biden and getting dirt on him. He didn’t even care if there was an actualinvestigation, Trump only insisted that there be an annnouncement that there would be a Ukrainian investigation into Hunter Biden/Burisma corruption. Here is an accounting of the timeline from a news source that has never been found to be factually incorrect:

            Also, just so you know, Hillary was never the head of a pedophile ring operating out of pizza parlor and Obama was not born in Kenya. Lol.

        • seaman — I think that comment from Jackie was directed at you, as while your ‘facts” could be construed by some as accurate,[oui The reality “check” , if you bothered to find out even a little bit of truth, rather than listen to fox “news” or the generic “hate radio” You would find that in fact, the entire EC was trying to get rid of that prosecutor, as that prosecutor was not doing squat to prosecute corruption in any company. Burisma included.It is a total fabrication by right wing liars that the prosecutor was investigating anything related to corruption by Hunter Biden.

          So let me even yield that Hunter Biden was benefiting from his father’s political position.
          Can you explain to me how virtually every member of the trump family has suddenly become qualified for the positions they hold?
          I suggest you look up the meaning of the word “nepotism”, and while you are at it, how about looking up “hypocrisy”?

          • Jackie and Don, I was wondering how long it would take before any perceived defense of President Trump would be met with slurs and ad hominem attacks, and it didn’t take long. For the record, once again, presidents withhold Congressionally approved foreign aid all the time. President Obama did so a number of times. In Egypt, for example, in 2013, he withheld aid to the Mansour government after an uprising deposed the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Morsi, who was the Obama administration’s choice in the wake of the “Arab Spring.” We shall see how things play out in the Senate trial, which unfortunately is also a political rather than a legal proceeding. There is so much corruption in Ukraine, and so many trainloads of American taxpayer money funneled into the pockets of political families on both sides of the aisle from dirty dealings there, that I doubt a full airing will ever come to pass.

          • As usual, tRump supporters have to be disingenuous in order to claim their oranged faced messiah is still better than Jesus.

            Obama did nothing like what Trump did, (withholding aide to force a another nation to investigate his political rivals son) Obama withheld aid in conjunction with the wishes of Congress. It was Congress made aid dependent on the U.S. Secretary of State certifying that Egypt was taking certain steps to govern democratically, a delay which angered the Egyptian government. Aid was frozen after the Egyptian army overthrew former President Mohamed Mursi. Obama resisted calling that a coup because it would have resulted in aid being cut completely.

            Republicans need to cling to delusions in order to justify supporting the grabber of women’s private parts.

        • The Dems will nominate Biden, who will choose Sitting Bolshevik as his VP. Once nominated, Sleepy Creepy Joe will continue to commit gaffes, only his slobbering media buddies won’t be able to keep hiding them. Plus, there’s the Crack pipe factor. Hoover Biden, the nominee’s unfortunate Son, will have another crack issue, or another paternity suit, or maybe both – which the garbage media will tell us is none of our business and is not important. But it is. In the end, Trump will improve on his 2016 Electoral College numbers and win the popular vote too, at which point the liberals will turn against the entire concept of voting.

          • Hi Andrew, that’s an interesting prediction. If you have any spare money to bet, put some down on a brokered Democrat convention with either Mrs. Clinton or Mrs. Obama emerging at the top of the ticket. Odds are very good on that.

          • semen– you comment
            “Jackie and Don, I was wondering how long it would take before any perceived defense of President Trump would be met with slurs and ad hominem attacks, and it didn’t take long. ”
            I can’t help but notice you seem to have no problem with andrew’s comment above.

    • My dear Andrew, Are you talkking about the same Dershowitz as the rest of us/ From the sound of things I believe you are describing Elmo Dershowitz, NOT Alan Dershowitz. But, I do laud your attempt in sticking iup for your brother like that.

    • Agreed. Dershowitz isn’t defending President Trump; he’s defending the presidency and the Constitution. And I applaud him for it.

      • He’s doing nothing of the sort. He’s defending his pocketbook. That’s all he’s ever done. He’s well known for protecting smut peddlers and women abusers who are desperate to pay someone to take the spotlight. Then he writes some crappy book that gossip queens and hacks buy for a giggle.


          Why Trump had to hire Dershowitz (who is doing this pro bono):

          By George T. Conway III
          Jan. 19, 2020 at 12:52 p.m. EST

          This is what happens when you don’t pay your legal bills.

          President Trump, whose businesses and now campaign have left a long trail of unpaid bills behind them, has never discriminated when it comes to stiffing people who work for him. That includes lawyers — which is part of the reason he found the need to make some curious last-minute tweaks to his team, announcing the addition of the legal odd couple of Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth W. Starr.

          The president has consistently encountered difficulty in hiring good lawyers to defend him. In 2017, after Robert S. Mueller III became special counsel, Trump couldn’t find a high-end law firm that would take him as a client. His reputation for nonpayment preceded him: One major Manhattan firm I know had once been forced to eat bills for millions in bond work it once did for Trump. No doubt other members of the legal community knew of other examples.

          Of course, being cheap wasn’t the only reason Trump struck out among the nation’s legal elite. There was the fact that he would be an erratic client who’d never take reasonable direction — direction as in shut up and stop tweeting. Firms also understood that taking on Trump would kill their recruiting efforts: Top law students of varying political stripes who might be willing, even eager, to join a firm that provides pro bono representation to murderers on death row, want nothing to do with Trump.

          That left Trump to be personally defended in the Mueller investigation by a random patchwork of counsel, including Jay Sekulow, a lawyer specializing in religious liberty cases, and John Dowd, a Washington solo practitioner who, according to Bob Woodward, viewed Trump as a “f—ing liar.” (Dowd denies that.) Last but not least, Trump had the assistance of Rudolph W. Giuliani — who has done more than anyone other than Trump himself to get Trump impeached.

  2. Dershowitz is a constitutional expert who believes in the original intent of the Founding Fathers in the same vein as did Justice Antonin Scalia.

    • It has been my experience that those claiming to be an “expert” rarely turns out to be true. Furthermore, the first seeds of an “expert” is more often than not, sewn by the claimant himself or herself. IMHO Alan is as much an “expert in the field of law” as Judge Judy or judging jeanine ! And those two ….well….nevermind ………! But while we are on the subject, this “expert” businessman, Donald Drumpf, yes, the Donald Drumpf of six bankruptcies and the book “The Art of the Deal”, has hardly put any “art” into his deals.

    • Islander, it’s pointless to attempt a reasonable discussion with those whose TDS is that severe and whose leftist ideology is so entrenched.

      • Uh yea….looks like it’s the followers of the oranged faced messiah on this string that can’t face reality. Every BS claim you repukes have made has been challenged. So now you’re defaulting to the “liberals are crazy”, narrative cause you’ve got nothing left. I feel so sorry for Republicans. They can’t take credit for anything in the last few decades, so they take responsibility for nothing.

        When your mind is full of deceit, your mouth is full of lies.

  3. It will be interesting to learn whether he will favor or oppose witnesses, as the other impeachment trials have had them. As a highly accomplished trial lawyer, one would presume that witnesses and evidence are crucial to determine the outcome, especially in this instance when so much has come out over the past two weeks: the GAO report determining that withholding military aid to Ukraine violated the Impoundment Control Act, the revelations by Lev Parnas in his dealings with Rudy Giuliani and the Ukrainians, and other matters.

    • JackF. There is nothing in the constitution that requires the Senate to hold a trial. They are not obliged to. So much misinformation here. They can dismiss the entire thing. They likely wont but they are legally allowed to do it.

      • The “hear no evil, see no evil” evil republicans are glomming onto any trick in the book to make themselves less appear less evil in the face of evil.
        “The facts are not in dispute: Trump tried to force a struggling democracy into doing his political dirty work for him. He tried to squeeze a foreign power into meddling in our election. What is very much in doubt is whether enough good people will do something.In the process of this high crime, Trump broke the law, as a nonpartisan congressional watchdog reported Thursday. The greater evil is the violation of the lofty purpose written into this country’s founding documents. The smaller evils are the Republican senators who know the president violated his oath and should be removed, but don’t have the guts to say so.”

        “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.”
        ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 6!/articles/1/essays/17/trial-of-impeachment

        • This is the latest trickery Repubs and fake christians pin their pathetic arguments on to overlook the criminal evil of Trump: “In addition to the requirements in the Constitution’s text, three significant questions have arisen about Senate authority to try impeachments. The first is the minimum the Senate must do once the House impeaches someone. This question arose after the House’s first impeachment in 1797. One day after the House impeached Senator William Blount, the Senate expelled him by a vote of 25–1. Blount claimed the Senate lacked authority to try him because Senators were not impeachable and, in any event, he no longer occupied an office from which he could be removed. The Senate voted to dismiss the impeachment resolution against the expelled Blount for lack of jurisdiction. Subsequently, many Senators have construed this vote as supporting their authority to dismiss an impeachment without a full-scale trial.”

          Regardless, Trump’s legacy is that he will always be the 3rd POTUS in American history to be impeached. Unless the fake christian god is actually evil, Trump was not chosen for any good reasons known to humankind. Even Dershowitz wouldn’t vote for Trump– in 2016 nor again in 2020. Trump is evil and good people know it. Whether on or not the good will win is up in the air.

  4. Dershowitz has a long history of defending nice people
    Harry Reems– convicted of indecency in pornography
    Alan got him off on appeal
    Claus Von Bulow– Convicted of killing his wife.
    Alan got him off on appeal
    Patty Hearst– member of SLA videotaked robbing a bank with assault weapon
    Alan got her of.
    Oj Simpson
    Alan got him off on.
    Jeffry Epstien
    Alan dug up dirt on the victims ,and drug it into court
    Alan got him a short sentence after a plea bargain.
    Epstein was free to continue.
    Alan joined the team to defend Harvey Weinstein .
    No surprise he is defending trump.

      • BS you may find this interesting – a defense lawyer chooses who he will work for . That is their prerogative.
        Just because you are a defense lawyer, does not mean you have to defend the scum at the bottom of the swamp.
        Allen is good at what he does. He could have defended the “central park 5” for example, and they might not have spent years in prison for a crime they did not commit –luckily, the courts did not take the advise of one Donald J trump, and have them executed. Dershowitz chooses to defend people like OJ Simpson Jeffery Epstein, Harvey Weinstein and Donald trump.
        Bs— defense lawyers chooses who they will defend.
        Dershowitz chooses to defend the obviously guilty who can pay for his services.
        He cares nothing about truth, justice or the American way.

  5. Alan has been spoon feeding both Fox News and Trump to get this job. He solely wants notoriety and more money. If he is able to save our mob boss, and the mob boss destroys what is left of our country, Alan forgets he will not be able to walk the streets of any liberal state for fear of ridicule. Is that worth it? Of course Alan will say everyone deserves a defense, but as a home builder, I would not use my talents to build any crooked mob boss a house. I would say find someone else.

    • public trust– ditto…
      We have seen deplorable people like Sarah Huckabee , Betsy DeVos, and Alex Jones get hounded out of restaurants. That happens for a reason. They do not stand for the values of our country– and as such, should not be allowed to to enjoy the benefits of our society. They should be eating their dinner in caves, and allow moral people to enjoy a dinner out without their retched presence fouling the air.

      • Don, that can be a slippery slope. Tiffany Trump was shunned for being Trump’s daughter, but unlike her siblings, I have never heard of her benefitting from or supporting his administration. I think socially blacklisting people does more to deepen the divide than mend it.

        • Aquinnah
          Sapiens have long treated criminals and crooks with “shunning”.
          People of trumps character use to be tarred and feathered and run out of town. Shaming is nothing new. Perhaps we should take personal information out of the court report.

          • Don, I’m aware it’s not a new tactic. I was questioning whether it’s a beneficial one, especially when we start applying it to politics. There are endless things people have done since antiquity that aren’t necessarily wise and warrant more thought.

            I was also questioning where to draw the line. Seems like innocent employees could easily end up being faulted. Should we shun Trump’s security detail for protecting him, for example? Without them, he couldn’t safely do the job, so some may claim they’re enabling him to continue on as president. Personally, I would say they’re just doing what they were hired to do. That is probably true of a lot of people who work in Washington.

            The court report’s reason for existing is not to shun, least as far as I know. It’s a record of cases that involve public services and interests. I understand that in a small community, it can still result in people being judged, but the report itself only provides us with information. It doesn’t dictate what we do with it. I wouldn’t want to dine with Trump, but I’d leave quietly rather than expecting him to go.

          • Aquinnah, shunning is a form of self- moderating in a community. Cronig’s used to post, right next to the exit door, all the names of people who wrote bad checks to the store It got the job done. Some people cannot behave themselves without threat of some sort of embarrassment or punishment if they don’t comply with what is best for a community. The court report is shaming and I’m all for it. Think of those religious zealots who are so concerned with who is going to hell. Why do they care? These are people who have issues over their own antisocial behaviors, like sexual and addiction problems in their own lives.

      • Liberal hatred has no bounds. They are what’s dividing the country. Each day anger merely increases President Trump’s 2020 victory margin.

  6. I really liked his Constitutional argument on Twitter for having sex with 13 year old girls. Look it up.

  7. Poor Dershoshitz, always an outsider looking in for attention and admiration. He’s defended some pretty nasty crooks and criminals in the past to gain recognition, ie, notoriety. To defend Trumphole, a dispicable individual with no morals or integrity, is a joke! It says volumes about Dershoshitz!

  8. I am annoyed by Tribes ridicules. I’m not surprised he trashed Dershowitz…he teaches at Liberal Controlled Harvard..haha. He should know that ALL law is rooted in and coveted by the Constitution so, his personal put down of his “friend” is wrong. Just because a lawyer makes a living defending people doesn’t make him any less knowledgeable of the Constitution.

    • I agree that defending unpopular clients is part of his job, but he often falls back on principle when defending himself. His personal life does not make him sound like a man of ethics.

    • Isn’t Harvard universally considered the top (or near the top) university in the world? And besides the fact Dershowitz taught there, didn’t republican President George W Bush go there? And didn’t republican two time presidential hopeful Mitt Romney go there as well? What was your point again?

      • Mrs, B., as did James Madison, the Father of the Constitution (graduated Harvard.) Ironic, if not comical, that Madison’s Vice President was Clinton. To those who detract from The Crimson, what institution of higher learning meets with your approval? (enough is enough, I am looking at you.)

    • enough is enough, if you were annoyed by Tribe before, what about this:

      Laurence Tribe
      Jan 18
      @AlanDersh’s 2018 book: “Assume Putin decides to ‘retake’ Alaska, the way he ‘retook’ Crimea. Assume further that [President Trump] allows him to do it … That would be terrible, but [not] impeachable.” That’s really Trump’s legal position??????!!!

      Alan Dershowitz is so open-minded his brains have fallen out.

  9. Dersh defends famous people who are obviously guilty because he is good at finding technical reasons to have them acquitted. If I were famous and gulity, I would hire him too. As for his defending the Constitution as his motivation, this appears dubious as there are plenty of poor, nameless faceless people in the dock that could use help defending their constitutional rights. He just likes the instant spotlight #oldandpathetic.

  10. “The facts are not in dispute: Trump tried to force a struggling democracy into doing his political dirty work for him. He tried to squeeze a foreign power into meddling in our election. What is very much in doubt is whether enough good people will do something. In the process of this high crime, Trump broke the law, as a nonpartisan congressional watchdog reported Thursday. The greater evil is the violation of the lofty purpose written into this country’s founding documents. The smaller evils are the Republican senators who know the president violated his oath and should be removed, but don’t have the guts to say so.”

      • It’s sad but no surprise when a person who intentionally calls himself “bs” favors and supports an immoral criminal conman who steals from his own charity, separates babies from parents, and angrily attacks journalistic integrity and truth as “fake news”. Attacking the most reputable, award winning news sources is what fascism does. And, I hope BS realizes this was an opinion piece in the Times, but apparently he doesn’t.

        • You know, Jackie, I have friends just as verbally vicious and, well, let’s say, less than objective than even you. But one thing you really need to credit Donald Trump with is his absolute tenacity and toughness. From the moment he came down the escalator with his elegant wife, he (and she) have been the target of the kind of despicable media reporting and social media commentary that I thought was impossible in this country. And thus far, he’s survived and thrived in the midst of a literal coup. Contrast that with the Vineyard’s newest Netflix mogul, BHO, who just about had a nervous breakdown when one of his cheerleaders – Maureen Dowd of the New York Times – poked a little fun at his big ears. I am glad we have a commander-in-chief with a tad tougher skin.

          • Yea….his wife is so elegant….Trump paid a porn star for sex favors when he cheated on her. Tough skin eh? You’re delusional. He can’t take any criticism….and he’s constantly bragging about himself and his accomplishments like he’s the best at everything. He is a vacuum of grace…….and while you might be getting paid to support that terrible orange man…you know in your heart of hearts he a total hack…..and absolutely out of his element.

          • After you’ve looked up the meaning of the word, ‘literal,’ as in “literal coup,” look up the definition of the word, ‘irony’ before you next write something like this: “I am glad we have a commander-in-chief with a tad tougher skin”. Thanks for the chuckle.

          • Tougher skin ??? Your president demon-strates the very definition of a narcissistic personality disorder (see Mayo Clinic – it’s strikingly accurate !). Please do not confuse his serious mental disorder as an admirable charcteristic….

          • seaman, tough skin? He picks fights with 17-year olds, mocks the handicapped, belittles the Pope, and disaprages POW’s and war dead. Tenacity? Do you mean the way he stood up to Putin and Kim, or made Mexico pay for a wall? Heel spurs, indeed.

  11. Jackie I realize this was an opinion piece in the Times `George Brennan` I continuously see his bias and him trying to be more to the left of our other island rag mag.
    I wonder what you and George will say when Bill Clinton will need Dershowitz`s services when he (Clinton) gets further dragged into the sick Jeffry Epstien`s “Lolita Express Gate” case?
    Googeling that has been so very interesting!
    Actually I would rather have Dershoshitz over for a party at my house than the dosens of others whe were in the previous administration that own homes, visit and run to our island when Washington gets to hot! (Wink)

    • Tis, if one is to continue to be a critic of newspapers and expects to be taken seriously, know that there is a free version of Grammarly at We all make mistakes. I certainly do. An effort to correct them before submitting a critique of a newspaper may help reduce those errors and add credibility to the writer.

  12. I listened to Alan on cnn yesterday. He is feeling the pressure of defending a mob boss, but he says he is defending the constitution. His arguments are Mostly legally sound But if the result is destroying a nation that must be factor. Like I said before I would not use my talents if it would entrench any mob boss. I like to believe I have ethics. Obviously Alan does not. He wanted this role

    • Agree, public trust. This is what happens when a son doesn’t listen to his mother. He still talks a lot about her.

  13. Seaman, I would not at all be surprised if Hilary gets in. Michele maybe but unlikely. Can you imagine the hysteria if Hilary steals it from Bernie once again. Poor dondondon and Jackie who’s hate knows no bounds. Can they not see that the Dems candidates are children?

  14. I’m enjoying the show. The Democrats can’t win an election, so they try to concoct some nonsense to remove a duly elected President. Thankfully we have an electoral college so all the illegal aliens that voted in the liberal Northeast states and Mexifornia (formerly California) weren’t able to subvert the election. (that’s why the liberals give drivers licenses to illegal aliens, so they can check off the box that says ‘that can serve as registration to vote’. Nobody purges voter roles when people die, so you have lots of dead voters in Chicago and CA filing absentee ballots for democrats. Why do democrats say voter ID is racist? Because they don’t want the scrutiny to stop their ongoing voter fraud. Why in the world would Democrats who run s-hole cities and states become ‘sanctuary cities’ and side with illegal aliens over tax paying citizens? Its simple.. its all about ‘control’. Hence their ‘bible’ is Saul Alinsky’s ‘rules for radicals’ book. Its all about creating dependency, and thus control. These community organizers, like Obama, rely upon this as their playbook. And apparently in a good economy, all boats are ‘lifted’ so these dependents have actually gotten jobs and done well thanks to the Trump economy. So the Dumbocrats are in a meltdown, and resort to their kangaroo court with a sham impeachment with Pencil neck Shiff and Nadler the whale. Its so hypocritical that they would not allow witness wanted by the Trump team in their sham hoax hearing, but now they want to change the rules in the Senate to call witnesses, which is NOT their option unless they get a few RINOS like Willard (mitt) to roll over. I’m all for the witnesses. Lets get Hunter to explain how he got $80,000 per month when daddy Sleepy Joe was VP. Lets get Crooked Hillary up there to explain how a donation to the Clinton foundation got foreign aid increased to the countries where the donation originated. Just do me a favor, don’t bring that fraud Christine Blasey for up for round 2 of delusional lies.. And if by some impossible chance Trump got removed from office, President Pence would ‘keep his seat warm’ until he wins again in November… in which case the clock gets reset…so he do TWO more years… These dopey dumbocrats should be careful what they wish for… Pelosi is 3rd in line but she will NEVER ascend to the oval office. I’ll sit back and enjoy the show.

    • Notnewhere, I think that was a rumor. Impeachment doesn’t nullify Trump’s first term as president, so he will not be eligible for another eight years.

  15. Fantastic `notnewhere`! I am surprised the Times allowed your comments that must have been so painful for them! Never in a million years would that be allowed in the other liberal, bias island paper.
    You got to get it while the getting is good as they are just about neck in neck and then we will never have a voice!
    I am glad to see another who feels just like me.
    Good job!

  16. Trump had to persuade Dersh’s wife to support him representing the president. This just keeps getting better and better as it becomes more and more pathetic and desperate to cover up the truth of Trump’s criminal behavior. Why not call witnesses for such a perfect phone call, anyway?

  17. Whatever the outcome of this debacle, it is not good for our great Republic. And, the viciousness and hate filled comments I see in some of these remarks is terribly troubling. Disagreeing with someone’s political positions and beliefs is one thing; horrible attacks and hate filled invective against President Trump and his family are shameful behaviors.

    • Tell it to the viciously racist bum who calls people “human scum”. Trump has 100% earned how despised, disrespected, and ridiculed he is.

      • Jackie, would you mind citing the context of President Trump using the term “human scum?” I could be wrong, but I believe he was referring to MS-13 gang members who’ve committed atrocities, and I think most agree, if that’s the case. But if I am wrong, I shall stand corrected.

        • seaman, see how Jackie and her clan change things completely around when they are in major damage control. They gave up using a shovel to dig their hole deeper they are now renting a back hoe!
          Cant wait until the election and see how our country woke up, saw the light and gives our Trump another 4 years plus we get the house and retain the senate! Jackie and the garden lady are going to totally loose it and will jump into the hole after the election night landslide voting results comes in!
          So exciting watching their panic as it grows and grows!

          • Serious questions, native. Why is it so hard for Trump supporters to use “lose” and “loose” correctly? And who is the garden lady? My clan wants to know.

          • Tisbury Native, it’s not a high school football game. It’s supposed to be about objectively choosing the best leader, not gleefully crushing the other side. You could argue that the satisfaction is just a bonus, but more and more, I think it’s a primary motivator. I do believe Trump will win because your sentiment is shared by so many, but that’s not a reasonable way to decide our future.

          • Hi Jackie, well, given your sentiments expressed here, I wouldn’t think you would have much of a problem with that.

          • Jackie: I don’t know you, so I have no personal worries about or for you. But I do worry about the nation when so many like you are so wedded to a hateful narrative and confirm that narrative with the same media reports that created it in the first place. I think that we can agree that with the exception of our personal lives and perhaps our work -which we can say we know from experience – everything else we “think” we know we believe because the corporate media tell us so. Whether that corporate media is the New York Times, MSNBC, CNN or the controlled opposition such as FOX, it’s an engineered narrative meant to distort and confuse what we think.

          • I am not a member of the paranoid, helpless, conspiracy, confused club. And also unlike you, if someone says something that seems not quite right, as you questioned me about the “human scum” remark by Trump, I don’t make up something entirely untrue and post it in public. It turned out you were very, very wrong. Mistakes happen but why didn’t you Google “human scum” and “Trump” yourself before you said something so false in public? If you read enough from all sources, including far left and far right, and much from the middle and everything inbetween, (including the cult religion, white evangelicals), you needn’t feel as helpless as you do. Plus, if you listen carefully to individuals whose ideas you admire, as well as those whose ideas are nuts, you’ll have a well rounded view and can come to your own conclusions. These are people, no corporations, and if you listen long enough and carefully enough, you’ll have a reliable basis for your views. I follow Trump on Twitter, as well as Dershowitz, for instance. I also listened carefully to the witnessess at the House Impeachment. I watch fox news and cnn and PBS and sometimes network news. I read different newspapers, some pretty junky, so that I know why people who don’t really follow the news believe the stuff they do. I get a lot of news and ideas from individuals on Twitter. Twitter is great for that. You can usually tell when an individual is truthful and hiding nothing when he or she is reliably consistent. People who lie when it’s convenient or to put someone down, (that’s true even on these pages), are, at core, liars and not to be trusted. People make mistakes and change and grow, for sure, but becoming more “sophisticated” for instance, to explain a complete reversal on obstruction of Congress, as Dershowitz now claims, is a damned lie. I also didn’t bother with the dem debates because I filter and can get the info without slogging through hours of that. My views are not controlled by anything except what I believe to be right and good, and that’s been determined by my background. I’m wrong more than I wish, but I always assume there will be disappointment. I don’t idolize anyone in politics because people are human. There remains no question, however, if youve been paying any attention, that Trump is a corrupt, dishonest, inept, unfit person who has no business leading this country. Eveyone knows this, and if they say this is not true, they are lying. And finally, when a man comes out and tells me (and the whole world) that he is a lying, corrupt pig, I believe him. There’s really very little else you need to know about Trump. Just follow his twitter feed. I have no doubt that the whole truth about his Ukraine bribery will come out, maybe not in this Senate trial, maybe not during Trump’s tenure, but it will come out and history will do to Trump exactly what he deserves.

          • I should have been more clear about Twitter. People I follow post links on Twitter, so that way I get to see and read publications from magazines, journals and newsapapers that I normally might not see.

        • ‘Human scum:’ Donald Trump has harsh comments for ‘Never Trumper’ Republicans, David Jackson, USA TODAY Donald J. Trump (

          The Never Trumper Republicans, though on respirators with not many left, are in certain ways worse and more dangerous for our Country than the Do Nothing Democrats. Watch out for them, they are human scum!

    • What about the “hate filled invective” issuing from President Trump? Is he not responsible for those?

    • If a person is a misogynist who talks about grabbing women by ….
      If a person pays off a pornstar and a nude model to stay hush about affairs
      If a person mocks another with a speech handicap
      if a person denigrates a judge of mexican descent
      If a person has a long string of bankruptcies and a history of bilking creditors
      If a person refers to Africans as coming from sh-t – hole countries
      does he not deserve every hate-filled invective ? If not this person, than who ???

      • gusty, All I have to lastly say in this P-ing contest is go look at Google into who is opponent was, do some reading / homework and if you still feel the same way that she was clearly the better candidate to become our president prayers wont help you on bit so sorry.
        All her and her hubby’s past known sleazy actions and pending ones it would be absolutely insane to even consider her for 2 seconds. She has more known skeletons in her closets, foot lockers, everywhere and some fresh one to boot! Enough to fill up a entire landfill.
        I am sure Jackie & the garden lady will be more than happy to let you jump into their hole after our November landslide re-election.

        (BTW the garden lady identity shall remain `classified` at least by me as George could not put my entire comment and my account in the shredder fast enough!!)

        I hope the boats will run later tonight, Vacation time for me! Enjoy each other and I will view possible view you from very far away from time to time but I doubt it very much as I need a long, warm big brake from everything Martha’s Vineyard!

        • Hey TisNative,if you’re going to require people to do homework,can you do a little of your own and spend some time learning spell check?
          I know I for one would take your rants more seriously if they weren’t so full of spelling and grammar errors.
          Thank you

          • Notnewhere, fair enough about spelling and all that. Most of my own posts contain glaring errors.

            But spelling aside, sometimes I need a decoder ring from a cereal box to follow what should be important, serious topics. Who is the garden lady? “Jumping in holes”… what?

            Between this and the vague conspiracies under every article about town leadership, it often feels like I missed a chapter or 36.

          • aquinnah, my post was not directed at you. I should have made it clear that it was in response to Fielding Mellish who choose to unnecessarily criticize Tisbury Native. When commenters have nothing to add they lower themselves to criticize spelling and grammar.

    • No worries, Seman. The case that you’ve made, as far as I can tell, is your inability to discuss the subject. Oh well.

      • Jackie, how about this? I suggest a book for you to read, you suggest one for me. I read your suggestion. You read mine. We then discuss. How about that?

        • Change the subject all you want, you’ve not contributed anything here but debunked misinformation and delusions about a thin-skinned conman who you support but can’t use your words to explain why. So, thanks but no thanks.

  18. Heard today Alan says abuse of power is not an impeachable Or criminal event. So if Trump invites 100 strippers to move into the White House snd then sells our national forest to China for $10 that’s perfectly fine? Those are not criminal actions? Alan please move to Texas and live with the gun advocates.

    • This of course is a contradiction from his view on abuse of power during Clinton’s impeachment 21 years ago, when he was very clear it was an impeachable offense, even if no crime was committed. When questioned about this contradiction, Dershowitz admitted it’s a contradiction and claims he’s become more “sophisticated” in his views. And now, it turns out that the Government Accountability Office finds that Trump committed a crime by illegally withholding Ukraine aid, so there’s that.

  19. I haven’t seen the Democrats this angry since the Republicans freed their (the Democrat’s) slaves. Happy Martin Luther King Day.

  20. So he defends Trump, who cares. Everyone is entitled to a defense – it’s a basic right in our country. Like Trump or dislike him, why be so divisive? Can’t people have differing opinions anymore? Surround yourself with only those that think like you is a very sad way to live. Enjoy life, stop worrying about this stuff, all the politicians on both sides have only their own interests at heart and love to see you all bicker and fight. At the end of the day they will be sipping champagne together and you will be seething in a corner. Wake up!

    • OBBK if you have a differing opinion you are a bigot a homophobe a racist an enabler, mentally unstable and lots of other things. Differing opinions are not allowed. One must march lockstep with left wing wisdom. Everyone can see there is only one opinion that is sacrosanct.

      • “Differing opinions are not allowed” is a lie, Andrew. Why lie? Your opinions are all over his newspaper’s comment feature.

        • Jackie. opinions are allowed by the Editor but not by some readers. You wont allow any disagreement without a vicious rejoinder. Everyone has to line up with you.

          • Andrew, again, why lie? There is not a “reader” on these pages that has any say about allowing opinions. I get to “allow” nothing, not even my own comments, because it is not up to me. You whine about me and my strongly stated opinions, saying I “won’t allow any disagreement without a vicious rejoinder”. That’s your opinion and it is allowed here, not because of me or you, but because of the moderator. How does your opinion of me make it so that I am somehow stopping you from stating any of your opinions? Are your opinions so weak and ill-formed that they can’t stand up to mine? Are you that unsure of yourself? How do I, or how does anyone, other than the moderators, stop you from standing up for your views? And yet you lie when you say “everyone has to line up with me”. That’s a lie. There are about 10 people just on this thread, some of whom mention me in a disparaging way, who have opinions vastly different from mine. FYI, I can’t even count how many of my comments get, uh, dis-allowed by the moderators. Am I publicly whining and lying about this newspaper’s comment feature? I’m sticking up for my strongly held beliefs. Try it some time. Maybe what you really mean is that you have no way to answer my comments that expose yours for being what they are. Quit your whining and quit lying about this newspaper. You invalidate your own beliefs, such as they are, when you sink to lying and whining about someone else’s opinions and what is allowed here.

  21. Ditto, OBBK. All the invective and all the insults cannot change the fact that the USA is where everyone wants to try to get in, legally or illegally, they want to invest here and I watched President Trump’s speech at Davos this morning and he was upbeat, optimistic and he is right. Our economy is humming along and the bottom half is doing better than ever. Everybody take a deep breath and stop the divisive name calling and insulting people with whom you do not agree.

  22. Remember the last laugh is going to happen when he is re-elected. It’s all about the economy. If you don’t agree you have no grasp of reality.
    I dare you to say you are not better off than 3 or 4 years ago.
    And then I dare you to say it was all the previous presidents doing. Remember the “New Normal”

    • In fact, history will have the last word, and there will be nothing to laugh at. The mentality of Trumpers is exactly what they express here: a disregard for facts, ignoring criminal, unethical conduct, and a belief in debunked lies that damage democracy, the Constitution, and the rule of law. Dershowitz’s legacy is in the toilet, where it belongs. Trump’s evil will not be interred with his bones, unfortunately, but will live long after him.

    • Pam Bondi shredded Hunter and Joe Biden last night. If they call for witnesses they will call one Biden or both. In the meantime Sanders is ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire. Call Biden and he gets damaged even more. Then they acquit Trump in the Senate anyway and additionally Biden doesnt get the nomination and he is the only one who can beat Trump. The Dems are not thinking strategically. You dont call witnesses when acquittal is assured because you are damaging your candidate and all you have is Warren and Sanders left.

  23. Sure, wynd – and let’s just forget some of these memorable name-callings and insults:
    Low-energy Jeb
    Little Marco
    Lyin’ Ted
    Crooked Hilary
    Sleepy Joe
    Mini Mike Bloomberg
    Jeff Flakey
    Slimeball Jim Comey
    All from the gaping maw of your upbeat optimistic misogynist racist president

      • why ? Because our pocketbooks should take precedent over our morality ? I’m pretty comfortable financially speaking and I’ve made a fair amount of money under this shameless administration but I’d take a Democratic victory in 2020 and any resultant market downturn over another 4 years of this embarrassment.

  24. That this island is incredibly hateful and corrupt can no longer be questioned, as is simply evidenced by many comments from various “news” stories published by this paper. Poor Martha. :-^

    • Hating evil is a good thing. Hating the truth in order to advance an agenda of white, Christian privilege at the expense of the rest of us, is part of the kind of evil-hating we are talking about. One must speak of this evil with the hatred it calls for. Did Nazis decry the hatred of them and their leaders in power? Even Trump supporters do not like their Chosen One, including bible-quoting Andrew. They fully recognize and accept that the piece of garbage in the WH is a corrupt liar. But Trump supporters hate, truly hate that our government is for all the people, not just their white, Christian, privileged selves. The religious right especially has so much anger and hatred for “otherness”, and that takes precedence over the impeachable offenses of the orange, immoral, unethical, democracy-destroying slob that some weird, fake god anointed in Donald Trump. You bet this sort of evil must be hated, just as all corrupt evil regimes must be hated. Dershowitz will argue why eye witnesses to trumps impeachable offense, eyewitnesses I like John Bolton, will not and should not testify in the Senate trial. Trump supporters do not care about what is right and good and true, but history will make the final judgement. Right is ALWAYS on the side of truth and goodness. It will all come out, if not now, soon.

      • “If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn’t part of ourselves doesn’t disturb us.”

        Hermann Hesse (1877 – 1962)

        • Nice quote, but it’s baloney when we’re talking about corrupt, conmen liars. You have a problem with people hating mass murderers, too? Decent, moral people hate evil personified and they speak out against it. I have no problem hating Hitler, for instance. Are you not disturbed by what he and all his henchmen did? Those not disturbed by evil are the problem. Not being disturbed by evil and not speaking out against it condones and promotes evil. Although Trump is not Hitler, what he and his lying henchmen, like Pompeo, are doing is evil. The ignorant and under informed Trump supporters are no excuse, either, as they fall for every bit of bull presented to them, but the religious right are knowingly embracing lies and evil in the name of some delusional cult fantasies. Trump is a scam and he’s defrauded the nation.

  25. I know a few Trump supporters that are kind, wonderful, non-racists, human beings. I also know a few Democrats like that.

    • It’s not enough to be kind. Not standing up against evils like racism that don’t happen to impact you or your world is how we ended up with Trump. Good people don’t support evil by staying silent in the face of it.

      • Also, the “good people on both sides” is a poor argument against anti-Semitism and White Nationalism, which is exactly how Trump tried to use the same argument you make now. Stand up against evil if you want to be a “wonderful” human being.

  26. Did you guys hear Dershowitz’s defense of Trump at the Senate trial last night? I found a whole bunch of marbles this morning. They must belong to Alan because, clearly, he’s lost his.

Comments are closed.