Dershowitz, Turley Weigh in on Trump Case - Then There's Eric Swalwell's Reaction

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

Former President Donald Trump was found liable in a New York court for sexual abuse and defamation, but the jury rejected the claim of rape.

Now, one of the interesting questions in the matter was how do you find defamation by Trump for saying she was not telling the truth about him raping her — calling it a “hoax” and a “lie” — if you also find that there wasn’t rape?


Alan Dershowitz raises this very question.

Then you have other potential issues regarding what was allowed in and what was kept out. As George Washington Law professor Jonathan Turley explained, there are possible appealable issues there.

He allowed in a lot of evidence, including the Hollywood access tape and these other witnesses. Obviously, Trump had never been convicted or found guilty, either criminally or civilly in those cases. So there was a lot of evidence here that the defense could say should not have been brought into the case or should have been handled differently.

As we’ve noted the suit was funded by a big Democratic political donor, Reid Hoffman, who was an acquaintance of Jeffrey Epstein. There were also a lot of questions raised about the case from Carroll’s bizarre remarks, including what she told Anderson Cooper about rape.

Trump has already announced that he will appeal. It remains to be seen how much it will affect his run for president.


There is no doubt that the Democrats will do all they can to pump it up. But while we had lawyerly comments from folks like Dershowitz and Turley, what we got from Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) shows just how ignorant he is. While people might not know the difference between civil and criminal matters and might misuse terms, someone who is a member of Congress — charged with passing laws — should have some knowledge. Not to mention that Swalwell is a lawyer and a former deputy district attorney, so he should have more understanding. Yet what he said about the Trump case was just incredibly wrong, not to mention his attempt to smear House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (D-CA).

“Donald Trump has been convicted of sexual assault. And Kevin McCarthy is all in with his sexually abusive pal,” Swalwell claimed.

He got called out on it by Twitter Community Notes, which explained that no, Trump was not “convicted,” since there was no criminal case against him, he could not be convicted. He was found liable in a civil action which is not the same thing and doesn’t even have the same burden of proof which is by a preponderance of the evidence versus the criminal standard which is beyond a reasonable doubt.


How does a lawyer not know the basic difference between a civil and a criminal case? So we have two choices here: Swalwell is dumber than dirt or he’s lying to attack Donald Trump knowing that he will manage to mislead some people. Given his past remarks, people could believe either one about him. After all, he did fall for Fang Fang. And speaking of defamation, he’s tripping all over that here. But now with Community Notes, he can’t get away with the falsehood.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos