Not a woman of color Warren gets brutally slammed by Alan Dershowitz


Elizabeth Warren, who is quite a few potatoes short of a stew, thinks Alan Dershowitz’s argument is “contrary to law and fact.” She offers no explanation. Her saying it, as a known congenital liar, should be sufficient.

Unfortunately, she messed with the wrong lawyer. He fired back.

When she said she “truly could not follow it,” and added that it was “nonsensical” in a tweet, it didn’t jive. If she couldn’t follow, how did she know it was nonsensical?

Dershowitz is truly a brilliant, non-partisan attorney. People can disagree with his argument but it is an established argument in law and fact. The retired Harvard law professor served as part of the President’s team for the constitutional argument only.

He responded back to her and she looks foolish, and I am being kind here.


He took her comment about not having the ability to follow his easily followed presentation and said, she “doesn’t understand the law.” She called his argument “nonsensical.”


Unsurprisingly, Warren “mischaracterized” what he said. She spoke of “intent’ and he was talking about “motives.”

Warren said, “His characterization of the law simply is unsupported. He is a criminal law professor who stood in the well of the Senate and talked about how law never inquires into intent and that we should not be using the president’s intent as part of understanding impeachment,” said the former Harvard Law School professor, according to The Hill.

“Criminal law is all about intent. Mens rea is the heart of criminal law. That’s the very basis of it. So it makes his whole presentation just nonsensical. I truly could not follow it,” she added.

She knows the law and she deliberately lied.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments