The President announced his \u201cdream team\u201d to defend him in the Senate. Their job is to convince Senators that the President did not commit a crime. If that doesn\u2019t work, then whatever crime he did commit, it doesn\u2019t fit the Constitutional definition of \u201ctreason, bribery, or high crimes and misdemeanors\u201d. And if all that fails, then the team will try to show that the process was so flawed, that even a President who abused his power should not be removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It\u2019s \u201chave it my way\u201d anyway you look at it.\u00a0\u00a0Two stellar attorneys lead the \u201cteam\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0First is Ken Starr, the man who left the bench to serve as Solicitor General under President Bush (41).\u00a0\u00a0He then became Justice Department Special Counsel, and began the investigations of Bill and Hillary Clinton soon after they entered the White House.\u00a0\u00a0Starr trundled through their financial, social, and finally personal lives, and after four years, finally hit pay dirt.\u00a0\u00a0Big Bill had a sexual relationship with \u201cthat woman\u201d Monica Lewinsky, a twenty-one year old . <\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was a national scandal, and Clinton compounded it by testifying in a court-ordered deposition. He tried to split legal hairs about the nature of oral sex.\u00a0\u00a0It didn\u2019t work, and a Court found he committed perjury.\u00a0\u00a0And for that, Starr convinced Congress to impeach him.\u00a0\u00a0The Senate never came close to removing him from office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Starr\u2019s career continued to representation of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in his 2006 sex scandal with underage girls in Florida.\u00a0\u00a0Starr helped Epstein get a \u201csweetheart deal\u201d with South Florida US Attorney Alexander Acosta.\u00a0\u00a0Afterwards, Acosta became Secretary of Labor under the Trump Administration, but resigned when the Epstein scandal broke out once again less than a year ago.\u00a0\u00a0Epstein, of course, was re-arrested and imprisoned awaiting trial, where he died under questionable circumstances.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After a stop as Dean of Pepperdine Law School, Starr landed in Waco, Texas, for a six-year stint as President of Baylor University.\u00a0\u00a0Sexual abuse came back to haunt him once again. Members of the football team and a fraternity president were convicted of multiple sexual assaults.\u00a0\u00a0The coach and athletic department tried to coverup the crimes. In the end Starr lost his job, along with the coach and athletic director.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So now he\u2019s got plenty of time to represent the President.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Then there\u2019s the redoubtable professor of Constitutional law from Harvard, Alan Dershowitz.\u00a0\u00a0The Professor has spent a career defending the infamous: from Claus von Bulow\u2019s murder case to the OJ Simpson \u201cdream team\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0He is currently involved in defending movie producer Harvey Weinstein in his sexual abuse trial. Dershowitz claims to be a life-long liberal Democrat, and says he voted for Hillary Clinton.\u00a0\u00a0He also has been a die-hard supporter of Zionism and Israel, which might explain some of his ongoing defense of Donald Trump.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dershowitz was also on the 2006 Epstein team, and has been implicated in some of Epstein\u2019s sexual improprieties.\u00a0\u00a0Dershowitz claims his only sex was with his wife. His statement, that he was never was \u201cout of his underwear,\u201d is contested by multiple girls who claim that he was involved in \u201cmassage\u201d activities and more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Besides the Epstein connection, the Trump legal team has one other strong bond: commentating for Fox News<\/em>. Starr, Dershowitz, Trump personal attorney Jay Sekulow, former Florida Attorney General Pam Biondi, and Starr\u2019s successor as Special Counsel Robert Ray are all part of the team, and all passed the apparent \u201ctry-outs\u201d in their Fox News<\/em> appearances. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So what arguments can we anticipate from the Trump \u201cEpstein\/Fox News<\/em>\u201d Team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the beginning of the Trump Administration, Professor Dershowitz has taken a consistent view. He advocates the Constitutional theory of the \u201cunitary executive\u201d, an argument that states that all actions of the executive are direct outgrowths of Presidential power. The Professor argues that the President wouldn\u2019t \u201cinvestigate himself\u201d and therefore the Justice Department has no jurisdiction over Presidential actions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Dershowitz saw the Mueller investigation as unconstitutional, and that the President had the authority to fire Mueller at any time for any reason. His argument that \u201cthe President cannot obstruct himself\u201d gives Mr. Trump total leeway to prevent any investigation of his administration\u2019s actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition, Professor Dershowitz reads the US Constitution as giving the President near absolute powers in the area of foreign policy, thus making many of the accused actions in the Ukraine affair perhaps scandalous, but not illegal. And finally, Dershowitz reads the impeachment powers in the Constitution as extremely limited to the strict reading of the words, \u201ctreason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors\u201d. Since the President hasn\u2019t been indicted or convicted of any Federal crimes, he cannot be impeached.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Judge Starr is likely to make his argument based on his work as Special Counsel.\u00a0\u00a0He will claim that the House of Representatives exceeded their authority be opening the investigation of the President, a job he sees defined as a job for the Justice Department.\u00a0\u00a0He will argue that the U-Haul truck load of evidence he passed to Congress in 1998 was that kind of investigation, and that the four month House Intelligence Committee inquiry is unacceptable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So Starr will argue that unless the President is facing Federal Criminal charges, he cannot be impeached.\u00a0\u00a0And Dershowitz will argue that the Justice Department cannot investigate or charge the President.\u00a0\u00a0The sum of their position:\u00a0\u00a0\u201cheads I win, tails you lose\u201d.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Others will argue that the House \u201cprocess\u201d denied the President due process rights. And somewhere, someone, probably Jay Sekulow, will recite the famous Jim Jordan litany. It has four stanzas:<\/p>\n\n\n\nUnitary Executive<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Federal Indictment<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Back to Law School<\/h3>\n\n\n\n