meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
The Dershow

Can Biden also be removed under the 14th amendment?

The Dershow

Alan Dershowitz | Kast Media

News, Politics

4.41.9K Ratings

🗓️ 22 August 2023

⏱️ 30 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Alan Dershowitz's podcast. Dershow media

APPLE PODCAST: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dershow/id1531775772

SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7Cx3Okc9mMNWtQyKJZoqVO?si=1164392dd4144a99

_________________________________________________________

FOLLOW ME:

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/AlanDersh

RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/user/Sav_says

LOCALS: https://dershow.locals.com/

YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheDershowWithAlanDershowitz

_________________________________________________________

SUPPORT MY WORK:

SUBSTACK: https://dersh.substack.com/

 

-- 

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

Welcome back to the Dershow. Yesterday, I talked about what I consider one of the greatest

0:07.2

dangers currently facing, our constitutional rule of law, the attempt by some get Trump

0:14.2

lawyers, judges, law professors to try to invoke the 14th Amendment to prevent Trump from

0:22.8

running for president of the United States. It's a bizarre idea, plainly unconstitutional,

0:30.7

but when it comes to get Trump, nothing is sacred, not the Constitution, not the rule of law.

0:39.5

Recently, Professor Lawrence Tribe and Judge Aleutek, who was called by MSNBC,

0:47.0

a modern-day poll revere, I would change it a little, a modern-day Joe McCarthy,

0:52.5

would probably be a little clear. I've argued in front of Judge Aleutek, he was a result-oriented

0:59.3

judicial person who didn't really ever consider legal analysis more than the results. I was never a

1:10.7

fan, a lot of Republicans liked him now, a lot of Republicans are leading the get Trump charge.

1:19.9

30 or so more of them, former Republican professors, judges, etc, wrote a brief

1:26.6

and amicus brief to the court in the District of Columbia urging them to rush to injustice by

1:33.9

putting Trump on trial in January 2nd, which would be so clearly unconstitutional, as I've said.

1:39.2

If I were one of the lawyers in that case, I would stand in front of the judge and say,

1:42.1

sorry, Your Honor, I'm not trying this case on January 2nd. You can't make me violate my oath

1:49.6

of office to provide a zealous defense. You would be inviting an ineffective assistance of counsel.

1:56.2

I am not an ineffective assistance of counsel. I am not trying this case in four months and three

2:03.2

weeks after the indictment. It's unheard of. I don't care what these law professors think.

2:07.7

I'm not doing it. I'm not doing it and I urge every other lawyer to refuse to step into court

2:14.0

and to defend anybody on this kind of a rush to injustice schedule. It violates the defendant's

2:21.4

rights to a fair trial. It confuses the government's obligation to provide a fair trial with some sort

2:29.1

of speedy trials. Speedy trial in the Constitution only applies to defendants, but these get Trump

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Alan Dershowitz | Kast Media, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Alan Dershowitz | Kast Media and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.