Democrat Lawyer Declares Mar-A-Lago Raid ‘Was an Improper Search’

One Democrat lawyer is defending former President Donald Trump following the FBI raid of his Mar-a-Lago home in Palm Beach, Florida — stating that, while he “voted against Trump twice,” the raid of the former president’s home “was an improper search.”

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, a Democrat, defended Trump during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz” on Sunday.

In the interview, Dershowitz emphasized the fact that he voted against Trump twice and was “looking forward” to doing it again, but made it clear that he believed the FBI had engaged in an “improper search” to obtain the documents.

“Look, I voted against Trump twice. I’m looking forward to an opportunity to vote against him for a third time, but I will not compromise the Fourth Amendment or the Constitution or the principles I’ve stood for all my life in order to get Trump,” he explained.

“This was an improper search,” Dershowitz continued. “They should have enforced the subpoena. That’s what Merrick Garland said the Justice Department generally does — less intrusive methods.”

“Now, the affidavit, if it’s revealed, may indicate reasons why a search warrant had to be effectuated three days after or two and a half days after it was approved, but right now, the burden of proof is heavily on the government to justify this intrusive search,” he added.

While still arguing that the DOJ must be scrutinized for their actions, Dershowitz went on to push the Democrats’ claim that the search of Mar-a-Lago was “not a raid,” despite the fact that one of the definitions of a raid from Merriam-Webster describes it as “a sudden invasion by officers of the law.”

“No, it’s not a raid,” the Democrat lawyer claimed. “It’s a court-authorized intrusive search. But it still has to be justified not only under the letter, but the spirit of the Fourth Amendment.”

Soon after the Mar-a-Lago raid, Dershowitz appeared on Glenn Beck’s radio program, and stated that the raid was “outrageous and unconstitutional.”