SPONSORED:

Warren: Dershowitz presentation 'nonsensical,' 'could not follow it'

Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenBudowsky: Democracy won, Trump lost, President Biden inaugurated Top Senate Democrat backs waiver for Biden Pentagon nominee Consumer bureau director resigns after Biden's inauguration MORE (D-Mass.), who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, knocked a presentation by Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzGiuliani won't be part of Trump defense at Senate trial Sunday shows preview: Washington prepares for an inauguration and impeachment; coronavirus surges across the US In calling out Trump, Nikki Haley warns of a more sinister threat MORE, a member of President TrumpDonald TrumpClinton, Bush, Obama reflect on peaceful transition of power on Biden's Inauguration Day Arizona Republican's brothers say he is 'at least partially to blame' for Capitol violence Biden reverses Trump's freeze on .4 billion in funds MORE's legal team, calling it "nonsensical." 
 
"His characterization of the law simply is unsupported. He is a criminal law professor who stood in the well of the Senate and talked about how law never inquires into intent and that we should not be using the president's intent as part of understanding impeachment," Warren told reporters.
 
"Criminal law is all about intent. Mens rea is the heart of criminal law. That's the very basis of it. So it makes his whole presentation just nonsensical. I truly could not follow it," Warren, a former Harvard Law School professor, continued. 
 
Dershowitz, who currently teaches at Harvard Law, provided lengthy remarks during the impeachment trial on Monday. He argued that issues such as abuse of power and obstruction of Congress "are outside the range of impeachable offenses."

"You cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like ‘quid pro quo’ and ‘personal benefit.’ It is inconceivable that the framers would have intended so politically loaded and promiscuously deployed a term as ‘abuse of power’ to be weaponized as a tool of impeachment. It is precisely the kind of vague, open-ended and subjective term that the Framers feared and rejected," Dershowitz said.
 
Dershowitz acknowledged that he had said during the impeachment of then-President Clinton that a technical crime was not required to impeach but said he has since done research that has changed his mind on the issue.
 
Dershowitz, an opinion contributor for The Hill, also directly touched on allegations included in former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonPence, other GOP officials expected to skip Trump send-off NSA places former GOP political operative in top lawyer position after Pentagon chief's reported order After insurrection: The national security implications MORE's forthcoming book. Bolton, according to The New York Times, claims that Trump tied Ukraine aid to the country helping with investigations into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenKaty Perry and her 'Firework' close out inauguration TV special Arizona Republican's brothers say he is 'at least partially to blame' for Capitol violence Tom Hanks: After years of 'troubling rancor,' Inauguration Day 'is about witnessing the permanence of our American ideal' MORE and his son Hunter Biden. 
 
“Let me repeat: Nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution,” Dershowitz said.