He was too busy being a totally rad and fresh middle aged man to study weak BOOKS for the Clinton impeachment

If Dershowitz was staying true to his message during the clinton impeachment, he would be saying "There doesn't have to be a crime to impeach." Now his POV is the exact opposite.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/01/20/alan-dershowitz-1998-doesnt-have-to-be-crime-to-impeach.cnn

How conveeeenient.

But he's claiming to be a constitutional interpreter in effect. The constitution didn't change since Clinton was impeached.

Yeah, the old dusty Constitution is too dry for them to bother with.

Well to be fair, it may have been the wrong interpretation THEN. But it should be same in both cases.

I believe Clinton's obstruction of justice by lying under oath was the "crime"

Or allow witnesses.....LOL.....i mean clearly there has been obstruction, not sure how he can get around that.

It seems cute now that that's all it was. Changing your mind once you have more research is totally fine. Lying under oath versus the many corrupt acts of Trump is where the comparison breaks down. Trump literally eats reality and shits lies. He probably can't get aroused unless he detects the barely concealed contempt of the woman he's violating. Loathsome.