Dershowitz: America Would Have Been Better Off If Trump Not Prosecuted

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz knows a LOT more about how politics impact the world than I do, and he has a dire message for this country:

America should NOT have tried to prosecute Donald Trump.

Dershowitz argued that the "Nixon standard" of destroying evidence and bribing witnesses is simply not there in this case. As a result, it's a terrible idea to upset the 2024 election process.

Dershowitz admitted that Trump's been acting difficult in recent years, but being difficult is no reason to throw the country's entire presidential election off kilter. He said:

Trump would be a difficult client, but being a difficult client doesn’t mean that you should be prosecuted for a crime when you’re running for president against the incumbent president. There has to be the strongest possible case to justify that. I call it the Nixon standard. In Nixon’s case, he destroyed evidence, he bribed witnesses, and Republicans and Democrats alike wanted him to be removed from office. That standard hasn’t been met here. And in order to prosecute somebody who’s running for president against the incumbent, it has to be not only slam dunk, but it has to be something that’s just inescapable.

"And I think the country would have been better off if he had not been prosecuted, even though clearly, by his own admissions, he did possess classified material," Dershowitz concluded. "Also, nobody should mention the word espionage here in court or out of court. This is not an espionage case. He didn’t sell to enemies. He didn’t hurt national security. This is a documents case. And the question is, should you bring a documents case, even if it’s a strong documents case, and interfere with the election in this way? I think that’s a hard, hard question."