Can it be proven that Trump "did it because he was paid or extorted"?

[mia]

Dershowitz, who supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, has emerged as a regular voice in the media defending Trump on legal issues, including special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian election interference.

The Harvard law professor, who is an opinion contributor for The Hill, said earlier this month that his new book argues that the Supreme Court could intervene and reverse a vote to remove Trump from office.

Dershowitz also makes the case that if incriminating evidence of collusion with the Russian government emerged, it wouldn’t be a criminal offense because it’s “not a crime to collude with a foreign government.”

Dershowitz writes in the book that impeaching Trump would be possible “if he did it because he was paid or extorted.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/399112-trump-urges-followers-to-read-dershowitz-book-arguing-against

[gordianot]

1. He is a pathetic old fart who badly wants to be relevant again.

Spouting this crap and he knows it is crap gets him air time and probably a stipend. He needs to join Rudy in a nice quiet rest home where he can be medicated.

[Girard442]

2. Dersh is trying to turn impeachment into a criminal trial...

...where all you have to do to escape conviction is to raise a reasonable doubt about some of the crucial evidence and you're home free. Impeachment (and conviction), like it or not, are supremely political processes. It would be entirely legitimate to impeach and convict a POTUS who engaged in a broad range of deeply suspicious activities, even if none of the evidence proves a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

It would be better if it did, but it doesn't have to.

[Orsino]

3. Depends on whether Russian agents were ever dumb enough to have contacted Cohen.

And on whether any evidence can be obtained from Trump's private dance with Putin. I think the whole point is that only Donald himself was ever confronted with the kompromat.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

5. +1

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. It's interesting to think about how this could play

out. Assume no one has trump on tape or print. Would your report just say 5 people said trump knew? Which of course he would just say they were lying. Maybe five people plus money trail of payments to Trussian's? What if no money involved...just favors.

Makes me think of event that seems so important to me, yet rarely mentioned...the people who said they worked for trump who wanted the Republican platform changed.