there's a reason why every past impeachment has established crimes. it's not that you can't impeach on a noncrime. you can. noncrimes have been part of past impeachments. it's just they've never gone up alone or primarily. if you prove a quid pro quo, you might have an impeachable offense. but to go up only on a noncriminal case would be the first time in history. so why is that the case? the reason is that crimes have an bhished definition and case law. so there's a concrete independent body of law that assures the public that this is not just political, that this is a president that did something they could not do. you can't say the president is above the law if you then say the crimes you accuse him up really don't have to be established. >> i think that's a problem that