Dershowitz Says Biden At Risk of Weaponization if Justice Department


    It is said that justice should not only be accomplished and seen, but also be perceived. The appointment of an attorney special counsel to look into Biden's allegations of mishandling in the handling of confidential documents was done not to ensure justice was accomplished, but for an appearance that justice was fulfilled.

    Everyone is aware that President Biden has not been indicted for the presence of classified materials at various locations. The first thing to note is that the president in office cannot be legally accused of a crime. The Justice Department recognizes that in its own guidelines and rules. It is also not a case where other individuals could be indicted. In addition, even in the event that Biden was to be discovered to have committed infractions against the law, they would not be at the level of high-crimes and misdemeanors which are the requirements for impeachment.

    Then why did Attorney General Merrick Garland decide to name the position of a special counsel? The reason is simple: it was because he had already appointed an investigator to look into Donald Trump. Given that both men will be running for president, it's essential that they are treated in a similar manner. Although the facts may differ, the most important thing is that both appear to have handled classified information in a way that is not right.

    At a time when Americans are divided and can’t agree on the smallest of things, there's one thought that seems to unify us all: The vast majority of Americans think there are similarities in the actions Biden and Trump are alleged to have done. This is the consensus. However, a majority of Americans seem to think that the actions of Biden were more damaging and the other half think that the actions of Trump were more damaging. A few people seem to think that both are equally responsible.

    Both the President and Vice-President have likely misused classified material in some way. It isn't because of any malicious motive. Nobody has ever sold or distributed the information to our adversaries. The mishandling of the material was likely reckless or aimed at helping an ex-official write their memoirs. The incident of the former National Security advisor Sandy Berger is an example. He put incriminatingly-possessed material into his socks in order to help the process of writing his memoir. Other recent examples – Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, as well as Joe Biden – seem like examples of laziness, sloppiness, or even convenience.

    The government should conduct full examinations of all these breaches of security to ensure that Congress can make clearer the security guidelines. It shouldn't be the statute that anyone is able to declassify anything without notifying anyone or making any records. However, that appears to be the rule in place at least when it relates to criminal legal liability. Special prosecutors aren't required to be appointed for general investigations, which could lead to changes to the law. This is the responsibility of Congress. Special prosecutors are expected to decide if their target is a person to be investigated and prosecuted. We are fairly certain that the outcome of the investigations will be decisions not to prosecute Biden and Trump.

    If one or both special prosecutors did suggest indictment – a very unlikely scenario, Attorney General Garland is not likely to take their advice. If just one was to be prosecuted, differences in the country would be significantly exaggerated. Therefore, the final result will be that neither of them will be prosecuted.

    In the world of tit for tat, the alleged crimes cancel each other out. It's not the case in the realm of law. One could be much more shady than the other, but it's definitely true as a matter of fact. We live in a society where law and order is subject to political whims.

    Let the two special prosecutors turn their wheels. They should dig deep. Perhaps they'll discover new evidence that differentiates one case from the other so clearly that the public will be willing to accept that one case is being prosecuted without the other. But it is extremely unlikely. Both sides will continue to assert that the other side is the more responsible and deserves to be punished. The partisan demands of “justice for me, but not for thee” will also be in opposition in the court of public opinion.

    The Democrats began this whole thing with their overtly savage reaction to Trump's indiscretions, manifested through an unjustified search and seizures. President Biden could not comprehend why a president would be so insensitive to security issues in putting his sources and methods in danger. In the wake of that, the former president Trump is launching that criticism in the face of his adversaries.

    This is exactly what the tit-for tat legalization has resulted in. We all suffer for it.


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here