NYT Refuses to Publish Dershowitz's Defense of Trump.....

How quickly Libs turn on their own the minute they express the truth.

 

Yeah he don't care what side of the aisle is in the wrong. But since that happens to be the Demos most of the time. He is kept busy.

 

More whining from the Trumpsters. Easier to be fake outraged because the Times didn't take Dershowitz's editorial (they are under no obligation to do so), than it is to talk about Trump threatening his own appointees.

 

The illiberals are about shutting down free speech in any way they can. They don't care if its from their own kind. If they don't like it, they don't want to hear it.

 

why wont Fox News post opinions by Progressives?

 

NYT is involved in propaganda for the status quo, interesting food and fashion reviews, and not much more.

 

They do one even better and allow the Leftness to explain themselves out.....live and before the cameras.

 

Exactly! here's an article by the great Victor Davis Hanson on this subject. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428854/liberals-attacking-liberals

 

Lol...Poor reading comprehension? The NYT has dutifully reported on every one of his crimes and scandals over the years- being sued for his racist rental practices, palling around with NY mobsters and taking huge loans from them, using his properties to launder money for the mob, his assaults on his first wife, it goes back decades, if you care to educate yourself.

Capone also had a long and sordid history and stayed out of jail until the tax man caught him.
Too bad you failed to educate yourself about the great orange hope, or maybe you don't care as long as he panders to your prejudices.

 

I guess that's why Trump, in his infinite wisdom decided to do an idiotic rambling interview with them yesterday. Trump's lawyers must be very happy that he invited the Times over to Trump tower to clear the air. Next week Trump is scheduled to do exclusives with The National Lampoon and will be appearing as a guest on Real Time With Bill Maher. Also, Jerry Springer is trying to get Jeff Sessions to appear along with Trump and Bob Mueller.

 

Dershowitz loves him some torture..

 

The NYT is now a political entertainment paper, and not to be taken seriously.

 

Dershowitz obviously wants Trump to hire him as part of his dream team. Alan would defend Hitler and Arafat if he thought he could make a buck and get his picture on the front page of The NY Times.

 

Nah.....I'm not a leftist. So that just don't happen.

Oh I know quite a bit about Trump. But for me the only thing worth noting is how he ****s with you lefties and your heads. As long as he keep dumping on your kind. It is good.

Although, I can show him how to treat the leftness to cause them to go full tilt. Much quicker than what he is doing. Just sayin.

 

They didn't get it before the election and they don't get it now. If they keep this up Trump will be a shoo-in for four more years.

 

Don't tell Thor.....as I want to see him keep up with his daily avg of 5-6 Trump/Russian threads.

 

Proof that you don't read the NYT.

 

I doubt that you know much of anything about Donald Trump, his career or his business. And, I'd wager, that most of what you "know" is false.

 

NYT = Fake News

 

If that us true than your Turd Eating POTUS Trump must be the world' s biggest liberal!

 

Not even.....your Plastic Bits Pelosi or that Helmet wearin Maxine Waters takes that trophy home.

 

The more difficult question involves intent — whether Mr. Trump acted “corruptly” when he sought to stymie the investigation. The president is the head of federal law enforcement, and prosecutorial discretion is a core element of executive power. No court would say that a prosecutor is guilty of obstruction for dropping a case because it is hard to prove, too expensive or even politically unpopular. How can a prosecutor’s boss be guilty of obstruction by telling the prosecutor to stop?

The Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has argued that for just this reason, a president cannot be guilty of obstruction. Mr. Dershowitz notes, moreover, that the Constitution gives the president pardon power. President George H. W. Bush thwarted the Iran-contra investigation by pardoning former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, and President Gerald Ford shut down the investigation of Nixon by pardoning him. Mr. Trump could easily end the Flynn investigation with a pardon, Mr. Dershowitz reasons, so he could also shut it down with a request to the F.B.I. chief.

But Mr. Dershowitz is wrong. The president’s law enforcement discretion is not unlimited. He can’t, for example, order prosecutors to enforce drug laws against black people but not white people. He also can’t drop an investigation in exchange for a bribe. He can stop an inquiry for a wide range of reasons but not for “corrupt” purposes. The same is true with respect to pardons: While the president most certainly has this power, we know of no one who believes that the president can simply sell pardons for cash.

Mr. Mueller must now decide where to draw the line between “corrupt” intent and the legitimate exercise of prosecutorial discretion. He might start by looking at the Justice Department’s own regulations, which prohibit prosecutors from taking part in an investigation in which they have a “personal or political relationship” with the subject. Under that standard, Mr. Trump’s involvement in the Flynn investigation is immediately suspect. If Mr. Trump intervened to save a close associate and political ally from indictment, then the argument that he acted “corruptly” would be strong.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/opinion/the-case-for-obstruction-charges.html

 

Cool story bro.

 

This is what lefties don't get. Forget a conservative SCOTUS for decades-the way Trump drives the left batty is worth it alone.

 

Only the headlines, almost every day. If there is a worthy article, I read it. Been reading that rag for 20 years +. It is a propaganda organ, nothing more.