If Dershowitz is right about abuse of power not being bad, we should say to the UK "didn't mean it"

[ck4829]

If you read the Declaration of Independence, go to the indictment portion; the sentences that begin with "He has..." or "For..." and read them.

In my opinion, I would say 13 of the 17 lines that begin with "He has..." and 7 of the 9 lines that begin with "For..." have to do with a ruler overstepping his authority, doing something the governed have not agreed to, and it all to me sounds like they perceived that King George III, well, abused his power.

For a country that was founded on resistance to abuse of power and so if abuse of power ain't that bad now, we might as well phone the queen up and say "Heh... so, guess what... we didn't really mean those things we said."

[Karadeniz]

1. There's another post that details lots of issues that were covered by high crimes and

Misdemeanors and those issues could certainly result from an abuse of power. Dershowitz zeroes in on minutia and literalness, missing the forest for the trees. He'll go down defending collusion on the grounds it's not a crime, when the crime can just be given another label.