43
top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] bitteroldcoot@piefed.social 66 points 1 day ago

Alan Dershowitz is a Horrible, horrible human being.

(fixed it for you)

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 24 points 1 day ago

Like this: "Horrible, horrible human being Alan Dershowitz on Rep. Ilhan Omar probe"

[-] GorGor@startrek.website 11 points 1 day ago

“Horrible, horrible human being and Epstein friend Alan Dershowitz blathers about Rep. Ilhan Omar probe”

[-] Malica@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

He's not human

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

What even the fuck?

This guy is talking about someone else going to jail?

Mr. "I got a massage at Epstein's house, but it's totes cool, trust me bro" guy?

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago

Defender of OJ, Epstein, Harvey Weinstein, and Trump. And who lobbied for a pardon for a man who was convicted of transporting CSAM twice. He served his first term. Got out. And did it again. And Dershowitz thought he should be pardoned!

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

He also argued for lowering the age of consent to 15 or possibly 14:

Dershowitz publicly argued in 1997 for lowering the age of consent to fifteen or possibly fourteen, and he defended the constitutional basis of that position in 2019.

https://epsteinwiki.com/knowledge-base/alan-dershowitz/

[-] Whostosay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Gotta keep the plug active

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 27 points 1 day ago

I was wondering who would be talking to Epstein-associate and defender of pedophiles, Alan Dershowitz, about who's a good person after his many disgraces, but News Nation is just another news organization telling its staff to push right-wing perspectives. And the show he was invited on is from a former Fox host.

[-] DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago

Dershowitz argued that public opinion could shift if federal investigators are able to prove she provided false information on her citizenship application or that someone else submitted false information on her behalf.

According to Wikipedia, she became a US citizen when she was 17, and if the latter was the case, presumably another, not her, would be culpable.

Is Dershowitz becoming kind of like a birther?

[-] Rhaedas@fedia.io 22 points 1 day ago

Also

if federal investigators are able to prove

I totally read this as "able to make up convincing enough proof"

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

He was running with Epstein, so it's not like him being a questionable character started recently.

https://epsteinwiki.com/knowledge-base/alan-dershowitz/

[-] fonix232@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago

Dershowitz is a paedo, in his opinion 17 year olds are perfectly capable of making their own decisions regarding their citizenship, among other things...

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Possibly fourteen:

https://epsteinwiki.com/knowledge-base/alan-dershowitz/

Dershowitz publicly argued in 1997 for lowering the age of consent to fifteen or possibly fourteen, and he defended the constitutional basis of that position in 2019.

[-] fonix232@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago

Well, that does include 17 too 🤷‍♂️

[-] Malica@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

Pedophile Zionist scum

[-] Zak@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago

The lawyer who defended OJ Simpson, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and Donald Trump has no shortage of experience with horrible, horrible human beings, but doesn't seem to be very good at identifying them.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago

Everyone on the Epstein files needs to shut the fuck up about being a judge of character. Even the ones who did nothing wrong are obviously terrible at that.

[-] heavyboots@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 day ago

This should be getting so much more major press attention. Like, nightly. Flip the script and say Biden was in power and did a 5am raid on Boebert, or basically any other random MAGA figure. How badly would they be losing their minds then?

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago

That's exactly what we should be doing. We never properly finished the civil war, and now we have concentration camps and fascism. We need to deport or permanently detain all conservatives. This is their plan for the normal people, so they should see this strategy as fair game.

Conservatives have no place in a modern society. We would be significantly healthier and safer without them.

[-] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago

Why should I or anyone else care about what douch-o-witz has to say? The fucking ghoul

[-] deHaga@feddit.uk 15 points 1 day ago
[-] Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I don't think the Trump administration really wants to open that door

[-] Corvidae@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[-] tburkhol@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 day ago

As I understand, her father may have made some misstatements in his citizenship application, so his citizenship may be invalid, and since she was a minor child at the time, her citizenship-by-derivation may would be invalid. He is conveniently dead now and unable to defend or clarify any allegations. But also, she lied about being 12-not-13 when they arrived, and was really 18 when her father was (potentially fraudulently) naturalized, so she's not even eligible for parental-derived citizenship. But also, she married her own brother to help him get citizenship, which is both fraud and icky. But also, she suddenly reports a multi-million dollar net worth, shortly after marrying multi-millionaire Tim Mynett (not her brother), which obviously means she's been taking bribes from Al Qaeda.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

Okay, but none of that is true.

[-] DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Would there be a statute of limitations in this?

Also, what if Dershowitz succeeded in getting her deported. How would this affect a Democratic majority in the House; or GOP, particularly Trumplican, chances in her district, before or after 2028?

this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2026
43 points (80.3% liked)

politics

31507 readers
2485 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS