Dershowitz: Democrats Indicted Trump For What They Did In 2000

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz accused the Democrat party of indicting former President Donald Trump for doing what they did in 2000 when they challenged a Republican win.

Dershowitz was former Counsel to former Vice President Al Gore when the Democratic nominee challenged President Bush’s win in 2000.  

The Havard professor told Fox News Digital that Trump’s latest indictment in Georgia charges the former president for what Democrats did when they contested Bush’s win. Dershowitz added that Trump is being indicted for actions similar to Al Gore’s legal strategy in the 2000 Bush v. Gore case. 

“We challenged the election, and we did much of the things that are being done today and people praised us. I wrote a bestselling book called ‘Supreme Injustice.’ Now they’re making it a crime,” Dershowitz said

One key piece of evidence presented against Trump to the Georgia grand jury was a call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. In the call, Trump asked the Georgia officials to help him find 11,789 votes. 

Dershowitz dismissed the call while adding that actions like that were part of Gore’s legal strategy in 2000.

“It’s pretty much the same thing I did and Professor Lawrence Tribe did, and those of us who were on the Al Gore team,” Dershowitz said. “We did the same thing and Professor Tribe wrote a legal memorandum essentially laying out a strategy very similar to the strategy for which these folks are being indicted today. So if you look back at the 2000 election and the protests, I still think to this day, and I’ll say it here on television, that that election was stolen from Al Gore by Bush. That he won the actual election. I’m saying that — are they going to come after me now?” 

Dershowitz blasted the Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ office for mistakenly posting the indictment before the Grand jury voted. The Harvard professor maintains that the indictment should not be taken seriously. Dershowitz argued that posting the indictment before the grand jury’s decision proves that the grand jury is “just a rubber stamp.’