Dershowitz: 'No way' FBI went after Cohen 'if they weren't interested in' Trump

ABC News Chief Legal Analyst Dan Abrams, Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz and former federal prosecutor Mimi Rocah join "This Week" to analyze legal challenges facing President Trump.
10:03 | 04/22/18

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:



Skip to this video now

Now Playing:


Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Dershowitz: 'No way' FBI went after Cohen 'if they weren't interested in' Trump
Will Michael Cohen flip?nt to dig INT with our panel of legal experts. Alan Dershowitz. Profesemeritus a Harvard law cool. Authf "Trumpedp." Our chief legal analyst Dan Abrams. Rformer fedal sobre STA prosecutor in the southern district network. Now iminal jusce fellow at pace law school. Welcome to all of you. Professor Dershowitz, let me begin with you. The president agitated by the prmichael cohen.leraid on Cohen an attack to our country.after tho raids, how serious is the tt to Cohen and trump? Tn epic battle for the soul and tooperationf and,rosecutors have enormous weaps heir dispol. Than threatehi essentially with life imprison they can threaten his parents, ey can thrten his spouse. They have enormous abilities to put pressure and coerc witness. On the other hand, the president has a unique weapon. That no other Crimi defend or suspect ever has. He has the parwe and go back toistmas, 19.atpower and pardonsper Weinberger. Precluding him from pointing the nger at him. You put a lot on the there. I have to go the de youfirst, Mimi I saw you sort of squinting as professordershowitz was talking about the threats the prosecutors could make. Yeah, iave a respse to that. You know, look. That's that prosecor in my experience, having been onr 16 1/2 yrs. And, , having worked with man ohem across different districts, riding New York. They do not threaten people's parents and children. I , I just D't know -- I soundsood. I don't know where the accusation is coming from. With cooperators, especially a cooperator likecohen, they don't trust him tgin th. They don't take what he Aite it down. They listen to what he says. 'Rl. They test it against other eviden they try to corroborat. They don't juske at face value what a cooperator sa ou can be that a potential cooperator is telling the truth? Abs absolutely. Absolutely not. 'Sr about the issue of cooperating. Right? He can't cooperate on attorney-client matters,ht? The president could invoke the allowed to talk about private conversas attornents. Separate from business matters. Correct. Correct, correct but myoi is, therare going to be -- everyone is presuming that miael Cohen could on erything. He could just turn preside in if he can te sided to do that. If he decides perate, questions as to what he's actual allowed to die. When was he the attorney? When was he not the attorney?etera. I think -- I still think it's unlikely he'll flip. Why? Of the thgst struck me. This media thing. Meely after E raid, Michael cohen phone calls a to mastream media people. It struck me that, gosh, for a team that ows so much disdain for thinstream media, why call these sort of bur in the mnsmedia if, you know, if that'e position Michael cohenlways had deep ties. No question. Doesn't maerhe likes the president or doesn't like the president. Damocles hang pg over head Michael mill kin, they said they were going to indictis brother. Jonathlard, theyaid th were gointo indict his wife. I can go down case after case afcase. Where prosors have gone after -- It may be the -- That's the To say that the government threatens people's relatives -- I said they thrtives and theyate the basis. They wouldn't otherwise go after these people. But theyolese people hostage. Iban a that's what prosecutors do. Evderney knows at. Ank in the camera and say prosecutors don't threaten Reves is to lead the es Han ido American public. Sorry. I disagree. Ously. But, the other point iat, you know, cooperators -- I J have Tep coming back to this. Th're not Goin just take what he says at face value. They're going est it. It's not going te case written down what Michael Cohen says. They already have documents Corr we know that they haveos no va L of evidence. Theyad a S warrant. That W basedn able us Against michaohen. We keep luin Cohen and trump. That's WRE right now. The pois, Michael Cohen now under serious threat. 'S had this raid we have the judge in the stormy Daniels say it's ssible if not likely he'll get indicted. We've seen another attory that he word with flipped, as well. After a raid like ththe chances of indictment quite high. Very high. Veigh that hll be india. We have to separate out the two. Thot a warra here not because there was information on ld trump tt they wanted from Michael Cohen. They gotarrant becse there was information on Michael C poteiay committi a crime. If you believe that, I have a bridge can tell you in Brooklyn. Ou believe that?you're going to say that a judge signed off on a wa-- like Christmas -- To get information on his client. Client, not on him? There's no way in which they would go after Michael Cohen Y intere mie There's no way he could have Ed at what he was doing I weren't the president's lawyer. They're goinr him for twreasons. One, to try to flip him. Lawyer-client il under the crime fraud. Whosecutors. Hich ones? The southern district of new York. Not mer's team? They're working together. If they were not working together, sess would be ckel on the case because he only recused himself. In theory. -- From the rusa investigatn.if theseere separate instigations -- There's no such work on independent -- ot is case. They're all working clo together to try to target the president eople closto What is tignificancof mong it to the southern district? Information if the president chooses to move against rosens or muelle I think that effect. Of protecting it. N'ha I is why it won primarily. Obviou head. I think D what any prosecutor would do. Mueller came across criminal active aently mil Cohen. We know that from the search warrant. What is he supposed sweep under theug? . It doesn't fall within the mandate of what he's lookit.eto. So the absolute propriating, which is referred to a u.sattorney. This is so naive. Cameoss. Mueller is looking for low-hanging fruit. It's callnvestigati. Anything he can find against anybody asso with the prest. So he can flip them. Iuldn't be problem. Of course. Crime. Brfederal criminal statutes. Campaign contributions. Bank records.u can findhem on almt ev -- very complex business person or politic person. The tion is, H hard you look? When you look hard, you have enough for a search Warran which is fairly mal. And then the pressure increases. Let me bring up the issue of don. An brought up earlier. Ts people ??n. Speculated is it moved to the southern district if indeed chis pardoned by president trump, this could move over into state court. It could. But I thk people assuming it would be pretty easy to precute in N state court, for example, on set of facts. It wouldn't. First all,n New York state, the' apecific prohibition ainst try somne for the same facts as they were indicted federal court. And they're ting to getid of that now. TRE trying get rid of it. But it's still anerk STE, as of Tay. Those unting on state courts to come in on the white horse and prosecute anyone that trumons are BETT the Ong horse, so to speak. It's not easy. New York, it's specially , O a pardon could be real protection for Michael Cohen? It co the president is trying to use that. Hepsg T it. I think the tweets and phone cato michaelohe prident shou not be doing that. Ths a witness in casewho, at least potentials infon about thes that is not something you should oi Any danger of that -- that all the tweets build up otion case? I don't think so. I don't think so. When you get president oe united STEs, georgh. Bush paing, and special prosecutor saying the fog -- in lit of prest bush's own misconduct, we are gravely concerned about his conduct -- seems toe it makes clear, you can't go after a president for cising a don. Look, there's another vulnerability in a pardon. He didn' have a fifth dm??ol con el as soon as you pardon him, he doesn't ne immunity. You call him as a witness, he has to testify O goes to il. Thenhesident has to pardon him for contempt. It becomes very, vdi E're just T out of time. Your best judgment right now. Does Michael Cohen fli I Thi it's veryard not to flip when they're threatening imprisonmenttna quinta T I don't think we know the answer to that question. Michaeco I don't think he flips. Crimes.ana lot of J time that he's facing for that on I think he'pardoned. I think he feels confident. About that. Pardon? I don't Thie' rdoned. A of questions left out

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"10:03","description":"ABC News Chief Legal Analyst Dan Abrams, Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz and former federal prosecutor Mimi Rocah join \"This Week\" to analyze legal challenges facing President Trump.","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/ThisWeek","id":"54644825","title":"Dershowitz: 'No way' FBI went after Cohen 'if they weren't interested in' Trump","url":"/ThisWeek/video/legal-experts-break-latest-developments-legal-challenges-trump-54644825"}