The Times couldn’t publish this letter because they published another of my letters recently. But if you read its op-ed characterizing my position, please read this response.
“Caroline Frederickson has falsely claimed that I told the Senate that the President can commit “any” act —including criminal conduct— if he believes that remaining in office serves the public interest.
My main argument is that a President cannot be impeached unless he commits criminal-type behavior akin to treason or bribery. This argument, controversial as it may be, is inconsistent with her mischaracterization. (MTC)
I supported the impeachment of Richard Nixon, who believed that his reelection was in the public interest, but who committed numerous crimes toward that end. His motive did not turn criminal conduct into innocent conduct. (MTC)
Nor would a motive to be reelected in the public interest turn non-criminal conduct into a criminal or impeachable offense. As the New York Times reported: (MTC)
“Some democratic Senators and other critics accused [Dershowitz] of suggesting that even Nixon was not impeachable despite his clear crimes. But that accusation is incompatible with Mr. Dershowitz’s main argument:(MTC)
that an impeachable ‘high crime and misdemeanor’ requires an indictable offence.” The danger of characterizing my view is that the mischaracterization could serve as a precedent. (MTC)
Frederickson worries that the Senate vote to acquit may be taken as a confirmation that a president who believes that his reelection is in the public interest can do anything he wants.(MTC)
That is not what I said, nor is it the precedent the Senators who voted for acquittal intend to establish. If President Trump ‘s acquittal were to create such a precedent, it would be the responsibility of those who invented and publicized the bizarre caricature (MTC)
of the argument I actually made before the Senate.”
