A legal expert from one of the nation’s most prestigious institutions slammed a group of lawmakers for making unclear and incorrect allegations against the president.

Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz criticized impeachment managers for making “vague” and “wrong” charges against President Donald Trump during the Democrat led impeachment inquiry in the House.

“I am sorry House managers, you just picked the wrong criteria,” he said at the Senate trial according to a video uploaded by Fox News. “You picked the most dangerous possible criteria to serve as a precedent for how we supervise and oversee future presidents.”

Dershowitz, who previously voted for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), challenged the team led by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) because “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” are not even close to impeachable offenses.

“Purely noncriminal conduct such as abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are outside the range of impeachable offenses,” the professor said.

He warned the entire impeachment inquiry serves as a “dangerous” precedent for any future president with “opposing legislative majorities” to face “vague charges of abuse of obstruction.”

Dershowitz claimed there was a “long list” of presidents who had allegedly abused their power without ever being impeached, including George Washington who would not provide documents about the 1794 Jay Treaty, John Adams who approved the Alien and Sedition acts, Thomas Jefferson who bought the entire state of Louisiana without any congressional authorization, and more. He also speculated former presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush would have also been impeached based on the Democrats’ rules for impeaching President Trump according to Fox News.

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton had alleged in his upcoming book the president wanted to link Ukraine aid to an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden’s son. However, Dershowitz believes even if a “quid pro quo” had actually happened it would still not constitute an impeachable “abuse of power.”

“Nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power, or an impeachable offense,” the professor said. “That is clear from the history. That is clear from the language of the Constitution. You cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using terms like ‘quid pro quo’ and ‘personal benefit.'”

He concluded the term “abuse of power” had been a “vague” term that had been “promiscuously deployed” throughout the course of the nation’s history.