Parts of Trump Indictment Are ‘Damning’ But Most Isn’t Different from what Hillary and Others Did 

On Friday’s broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “The Record,” Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz stated that most of the indictment against former President Donald Trump alleges conduct that has “no difference” to “what Hillary Clinton and others have done,” but there are a couple “damning paragraphs” that Trump or his legal counsel are going to have to explain.

Host John Huddy asked, “So, is this a damning indictment against the former President? What do you think?”

Dershowitz responded, “Part of it is, part of it isn’t. The material about simply possessing classified material is not a damning indictment. We knew it was coming. The [Presidential] Records Act probably is at least a potential defense to that. There are two damning paragraphs, just two, paragraph 34 and paragraph 35, where they have tape recordings of the former President basically acknowledging that some of the papers that he possessed and showed to a writer — I’ll just read you — so ‘as President I could’ve declassified it. Now I can’t, you know, but this is still [a] secret.’ … So, I think this is a serious indictment on these two charges. Everything else I think is exactly what we expected. There’s no difference between that and what Hillary Clinton and others have done, not enough to justify this. It doesn’t meet what I call the Richard Nixon standard, which was very clear obstruction of justice, destroying evidence, paying bribes. This is too close a case to bring against a man running for president against the incumbent president. The only exception to that are these two paragraphs, and we’re going to have to hear an explanation from Trump’s lawyers or from Trump as to how he can justify having shown, to somebody who doesn’t have security clearance, allegedly some information about a plan to attack Iran.”