Alan Dershowitz says 'friends on Martha's Vineyard' are shunning him for defending Trump.

[Cattledog]

POOR ALAN

Alan Dershowitz says he has been shunned — first by old political allies who have stopped inviting him to dinners, and now by liberal elites who are trying to exclude him from their social circles on Martha's Vineyard.

The reason, he says, is his unrelenting defense of President Trump's civil liberties — a position that Dershowitz says he would have also taken for Hillary Clinton had she won the presidency and was similarly under investigation amid calls for impeachment.

The Harvard law professor and attorney who defended O.J. Simpson says that he is a lifelong liberal but a hard-liner on civil liberties and that he's not about to flip his views just because of attempts to ostracize him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/07/03/alan-dershowitz-says-friends-on-marthas-vineyard-are-shunning-him-for-defending-trump/?utm_term=.5f86ecb51390

[dalton99a]

1. Fuck you, asshole

[dameatball]

2. It would really piss him off he knew that they were inviting me instead. But I'm special.....:)

[MontanaMama]

3. Too bad so sad Alan.

Maybe Dotard and Melanie will invite you over.

[Zambero]

4. Alan doesn't seem to understand cause and effect

1. Sow
2. Reap
3. Whine (Alan's personal add-in, ignoring the first two)

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

5. Then go home Alan...

Get the message and give everyone ELSE a nice holiday, and carry your carcass home.

[KG]

6. becoming irrelevant has a special aroma of its own.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

7. Damn

People are having their children taken from them but Alan has it worse. He's no longer getting invited to some cocktail parties on the island.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. Clutching my pearls . . .

30 years ago, Dershowitz would have been shunned for being Jewish.

Nobody wants him around just because he's Dershowitz.

[JDC]

9. Guess he'll have to start going to Block Island instead

Or maybe the Cape

[thucythucy]

10. Alan Dershowitz has friends?

Who knew?

[Chemisse]

11. If his stance is based purely on civil rights and not politics, then he shouldn't be ostracized.

And his history as a Democratic voter suggests that is the case.

Just like we support the ACLU, which fights for civil rights for issues on all sides of the political spectrum, someone should be able to support the civil rights, even for the most reprehensible person alive, and still be accepted in polite society.

I respect someone who has the conviction to argue for fairness even when it's unpopular. I don't share his views on the Mueller investigation, etc, but I can see where he can make that argument (although there is certainly far more cause for investigation now than there was for Bill Clinton, and the scope is more narrow).

I am far too emotionally invested to assess its validity, and I don't even care. The stakes are astronomically high; if this is the only way to get rid of this catastrophe, then I am all for it.

[Tarc]

12. "a position that Dershowitz says he would have also taken for Hillary Clinton"

Bullshit. Dersh whould have been a nightly guest on Fox News, screeching about Hillary's transgressions.

[UTUSN]

13. His follow-up is that he's "not whining, (am) reveling" in the shunning.

[Gothmog]

14. From Betty Bowers

Link to tweet

[yellerpup]

15. No one to talk to, Alan?

Maybe you should get together with other Trump supporters and have an intellectual conversation. Sounds like fun, no?

[lamsmy]

16. Shunned

Dershowitz has always argued for civil liberties and for that he should be commended.

But he is also a constant attention-seeker, actively going out of his way to stay in the limelight. He doesn't take obscure, random cases of civil rights violations, he takes the cases that get the most play on national television. The OJ Simpson trial is a case in point - a simple "did he or didn't he?" and nothing to do with civil rights, but was on every TV in the country.

That he is now on Fox News constantly taking controversial positions is hardly surprising. He argues the obscure details of constitutional law that, while they may be technically correct in isolation, go completely over the heads of the average Fox viewer and host. They come away thinking the law is on Trump's side (which is a best debatable ) and he does nothing to correct this lopsided view.

He also ignores the larger picture of Trump's malfeasance. Taken in isolation, one or two of Trump's actions may be defendable under the law. But it is the totality of his behaviour that gives the clearest picture of his unethical and probably illegal intent.

This is why he is being shunned. And rightly so. The civil rights expert is supplying the authoritarians with very dubious and very public cover. Hitler may have acted within the bounds of German law - that does not mean he did not violate the spirit or intent of those laws.

And seeing as he brought up Clinton, I could be wrong but I don't remember him ever defending her against 20+ years of serial persecution and threats of prosecution despite zero evidence.

Dershowitz has lost the plot entirely.

[beachbum bob]

17. Lol...so people don't have a right to shun?

Dershowitz would have defended hitler and Stalin too as he has no moral center

[lapfog_1]

18. I seen a few of his comments defending Trump

and they have nothing to do with "civil liberties".