SPONSORED:

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

Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenDebate over ICBMs: Will 'defund our defenses' be next? Manchin on collision course with Warren, Sanders Hillicon Valley: Broadband companies funded fake net neutrality comments, investigation finds | Twitter rolls out tip feature | Google to adopt 'hybrid work week' MORE (D-Mass.), who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, knocked a presentation by Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzDershowitz: Maxine Waters used KKK tactics to intimidate Chauvin jury Dershowitz advising MyPillow CEO's lawyers in Dominion case Kushner planning book about time in Trump White House: report MORE, a member of President TrumpDonald TrumpDemocrats, activists blast reported Trump DOJ effort to get journalists' phone records Arizona secretary of state gets security detail over death threats surrounding election audit Trump admin got phone records of WaPo reporters covering Russia probe: report 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 BoltonRepublicans request documents on Kerry's security clearance process Trump pushes back on Bolton poll Hillicon Valley: Facebook Oversight board to rule on Trump ban in 'coming weeks' | Russia blocks Biden Cabinet officials in retaliation for sanctions 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 BidenBiden to meet with 6 GOP senators next week Arizona secretary of state gets security detail over death threats surrounding election audit On The Money: Five takeaways on a surprisingly poor jobs report | GOP targets jobless aid after lackluster April gain 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.