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

Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenPoll: Sanders leads 2020 Democratic field with 28 percent, followed by Warren and Biden More than 6 in 10 expect Trump to be reelected: poll Sanders has wide leads in two of three battleground states: survey MORE (D-Mass.), who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, knocked a presentation by Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzA disgraced Senate and president have no business confirming judges Dershowitz files defamation suit against Boies, alleging extortion Sunday shows - 2020 Democrats make closing arguments in New Hampshire MORE, a member of President TrumpDonald John TrumpSchiff blasts Trump for making 'false claims' about Russia intel: 'You've betrayed America. Again.' Poll: Sanders leads 2020 Democratic field with 28 percent, followed by Warren and Biden More than 6 in 10 expect Trump to be reelected: poll 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 BoltonTrump directly sought to block publication of Bolton's book: WaPo 'Parasite' studio fires back after Trump criticism: 'He can't read' Trump swipes at 'little wise guy' Brad Pitt, Korean film 'Parasite' during rally 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 BidenButtigieg campaign claims 'irregularities' in Nevada caucuses Poll: Sanders leads 2020 Democratic field with 28 percent, followed by Warren and Biden More than 6 in 10 expect Trump to be reelected: poll 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.