Alan Dershowitz reveals exact moment he knew Trump would be held guilty but Internet not convinced

WASHINGTON, DC: Alan Dershowitz, an American lawyer, told Daily Mail that he predicted Donald Trump's conviction was a forgone conclusion, despite the obvious weakness of the case against him.

Notably, he expressed little doubt that the outcome would have been different if the case had been filed in a different region of the nation, or even in a different section of New York State, where the political balance between pro and anti-Trump people was more equal.

Alan Dershowitz reveals how he knew Donald Trump would be held guilty

During an interview with Daily Mail on Friday, May 31, Dershowitz said, "On Thursday, Trump became the first former president to be found guilty of a crime – convicted on all 34 flimsy counts of 'falsifying business records'. Why? Because this case was tried in Manhattan, where practically every man on the street wants to keep one Donald Trump out of the White House."

He added, "Perhaps the most important function of an independent jury in criminal trials is to check the biases of prosecutors and judges. However, for this constitutional protection to work, jurors must not be biased against a defendant. It's quite apparent that this essential protection was absent."

He further stated, "Nor did this case seem to be based on the evidence or the law. I saw no credible evidence of a crime. The case brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg – elected to 'Get Trump' – was so woefully weak on the facts and the law that it makes Trump's conviction even more dangerous."

According to him, this implies that in the future, prosecutors will be able to fabricate flimsy cases against political rivals and guarantee a conviction—that is, provided they choose the appropriate courtroom and jury.

Additionally, he stated that no one has ever been punished in American history for, as Trump's defense claimed, incorrect accounting by a business underling who neglected to reveal the payment of 'hush money'.

He said, "Since the 1790s when Alexander Hamilton paid to keep his adulterous affair secret, many such payments have been made by politicians across the spectrum. And of course, none of these will have been disclosed on corporate forms – which would defeat the point of keeping something secret – and no one has ever been prosecuted for failing to make such a disclosure."

He also mentioned, "The infamous conversation between Stalin and the head of his KGB Lavrenty Beria is often quoted: 'Show me the man, and I will find you the crime'. This prosecution was even worse because, though DA Bragg tried desperately to find a crime with which to charge Trump, he failed to find one, as did his predecessor Cyrus Vance."

Internet weighs in as Dershowitz revealed how he knew ex-prez would be held guilty

Many people on the internet shared their views as Alan Dershowitz predicted that Donald Trump's conviction was a forgone conclusion despite the obvious weakness of the case against him.

Some of the online comments read, "It was a foregone conclusion from the first. He was doomed. Like Navalny---when the powers that be are out to get you, they do. It may take years, but they do. If the system is against you, you have no hope. There is no beating the system at its own game; it devised the game, it wrote the rules."

Another comment stated, "Even as a layman, I knew Mr Trump was going to be found guilty long before the New York City jury was selected" while one read, "Trump got only 15% of the vote in Manhattan so there was no way that jury would find him not guilty."

A comment also stated, "The Trump Organization is privately owned. There would be no requirement to publish the accounting records of the corporation since there are no stockholders except the Trump family. These transactions were booked after the election so they would never have made the public record even if they were required by law to be published."

A comment also read, "This is another Pandora’s box that Democrats opened. Just like when they opened the box so they could use the nuclear option in 2013, that same nuclear option ended up years later, allowing Trump to get two Supreme Court Judges seated."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.