♪
PETE: WELCOME BACK.
FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN
MANAGER BRIEFLY SENT TO JAIL
AHEAD OF HIS SEPTEMBER
TRIAL.
ABBY: OUR NEXT GUEST CALLS
THE JUDGE'S MOVE OBNOXIOUS
TO OUR CONSTITUTION.
GRIFF: HERE TO EXPLAIN
HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR
EMERITUS, LIFELONG DEMOCRAT
AND THE AUTHOR OF "THE CASE
AGAINST IMPEACHING TRUMP"
ALAN DERSHOWITZ.
GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
GRIFF: WHAT IS YOUR
REACTION.
>> THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TODAY
IN JAIL BEFORE THEY HAVE
BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY CRIME.
MANY MINORITIES, NOW PAUL
MANAFORT JOINS THEM BASED ON
AN INDICTMENT.
INDICTMENTS ARE NOT SUPPOSED
TO HAVE ANY REAL IMPACT QUI
STILL HAVE A PRESUMPTION OF
INNOCENCE.
UNDER THE LAW MANAFORT IS NO
MORE GUILTY OF CONTACTING
WITNESSES OR ATTEMPTING TO
OBSTRUCT JUSTICE THAN ANY OF
US.
THE GOVERNMENT SAYS HE DID
IT HE SAYS NO HE DIDN'T DO
IT.
HE DIDN'T KNOW WITNESSES.
CONVERSATIONS ENTIRELY
WHY DOES THE GOVERNMENT GET
TO WIN WITHOUT A HEARING OR
TRIAL.
PUT ANYMORE IN JAIL ENORMOUS
PRESSURE ON HIM NOT ONLY TO
SING BUT PERHAPS EVEN
COMPOSE AS ONE OF THE JUDGES
PUT IT I THINK IT'S VERY,
VERY UNFAIR.
NOT THE ONLY PERSON IN JAIL
TODAY FOR BEING INDICTED.
THERE ARE TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF PEOPLE.
THERE IS SOMETHING VERY
WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM THAT
PRESUMES GUILT THIS WAY.
PETE: IS THIS PART OF A
PUBLIC SHOW, A DEMONSTRATION
THAT THEY ARE CRACKING DOWN
ON TRUMP, THAT THE NOOSE IS
TIGHTENING?
IS THIS PART OF COMPOSING?
>> WELL, IT'S PART OF
PRESSURE.
IF PAUL MANAFORT WERE PART
OF THE CAMPAIGN, NOBODY
WOULD HAVE EVER LOOKED INTO
HIS BACKGROUND, HIS
LOBBYING.
NOBODY WOULD BE MONITORING
AND FINDING OUT WHETHER HE
IS CALLING WITNESSES.
YOU KNOW, IT'S THE MOST
NATURAL THING IN THE WORLD
WHEN YOU ARE UNDER
INVESTIGATION TO SEE IF
MAYBE THE WITNESSES SHOULD
TELL THE TRUTH.
I'M A LAWYER.
I KNOW YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED
TO DO IT.
BUT MOST PEOPLE DON'T
UNDERSTAND THAT BEFORE HE IS
PUT IN JAIL, THERE SHOULD
HAVE BEEN AN EVIDENTIARY
HEARING, A MINI TRIAL IN
WHICH HE COULD PRESENT HIS
DEFENSE.
HE COULD CALL WITNESSES.
AND ONLY THEN DO YOU PUT
SOMEBODY IN JAIL.
YOU CAN GET THE GRAND JURY
TO INDICT A HAM SANDWICH AS
THE CHIEF JUDGE OF NEW YORK
ONCE PUT IT PROSECUTORS JUST
PLAY WITH GRAND JURIES.
THEY TELL THEM WHAT TO DO.
THERE ARE 23 CHAIRS LINED UP
TO BE MOVED AROUND BY
PROSECUTORS.
AND THE IDEA THAT WE NOW PUT
PEOPLE IN JAIL BASED ON WHAT
A GRAND JURY DOES, HEARING
ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE CASE.
NOT THE ONLY SIDE OF THE
CASE REALLY IS OBNOXIOUS TO
OUR CONSTITUTION.
ABBY: YOUR THOUGHTS, BECAUSE
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
THE IG REPORT ALL MORNING.
WE HAD RUDY GIULIANI ON
YESTERDAY AND HE SAYS THEY
ARE DOUBLING DOWN AND DON'T
WANT TO COOPERATE MOVING
FORWARD BECAUSE THEY FEEL
THAT IT WAS TAINTED THAT THE
EARLY DAYS WE NOW KNOW PETER
STRZOK LEADING THE EARLY
RUSSIA INVESTIGATION DURING
THE CAMPAIGN, NOW WE KNOW
HOW HE TRULY FELT ABOUT THE
PRESIDENT AND OTHER HIGH UP
AGENTS HOW THEY FELT.
DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT
AND HIS TEAM ARE MAKING THE
RIGHT MOVE BY SAYING HOW CAN
WE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY?
WE NOW KNOW THE REAL MOTIVES
FROM THE BEGINNING.
>> I THINK THE MORE
IMPORTANT THING IS THE IG
REPORT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT
THERE WAS JUSTIFICATION FOR
FIRING COMEY.
COMEY IS REALLY THE VILLAIN
OF THE REPORT.
FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL
BENEFIT, REPUTATIONAL
BENEFIT.
HE TRIED TO HAVE IT BOTH
WAYS.
HE THOUGHT HILLARY CLINTON
WOULD WIN THE ELECTION.
THEREFORE, HE WOULD PROVIDE
INFORMATION AGAINST HER AND
THEN IF SHE WON THE
ELECTION.
THE TRUMP PEOPLE COULDN'T
COMPLAIN.
IT WAS JUST COMPLETELY
DESIGNED TO HELP HIS
REPUTATION AND HE SHOULD
HAVE BEEN FIRED.
HILLARY CLINTON WOULD HAVE
FIRED HIM.
PRESIDENT TRUMP SHOULD HAVE
FIRED HIM ON DAY ONE.
AND ONCE THE PRESIDENT HAS
SOME JUSTIFICATION FOR
ENGAGING IN ACTIONS UNDER
ARTICLE 2 OF THE
CONSTITUTION, YOU CAN'T
START QUESTIONING HIS
MOTIVE.
YOU ALSO HAVE ANOTHER
REASON.
WAS HE HAPPY THAT HE WAS
FIRED SO THAT THE RUSSIA
THING COULD COME TO AN END?
ONCE WE START PROBING THE
MOTIVATIONS OF PRESIDENTS,
WE ARE DOING LAW BY PSYCHO
ANALYSIS RATHER THAN LAW BY
ACTIONS.
ALL RIGHT, PROFESSOR, THANK
YOU.
WE HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE