trying to give republican allies of president trump some talking points to use in his defense as they try to run out the clock here. but house speaker nancy pelosi has made clear that this argument made by the white house has no legal ground that it's not based on the constitution, certainly not based in-house precedent. and so what we've heard from adam schiff is that in the face of anymore stonewalling past democrats aren't going to seek legal remedy through the courts. what they're going to do is chalk that up as a new potential avenue, another article of impeachment, and beyond that adam schiff says they're going to draw an adverse inference. that means if the white house won't give them documents on a subject, they will assume the underlying evidence, the underlying claim is true. they will take that stonewalling to be some sort of confirmation. on the sondland point which i think is fairly instructive as as you mentioned my colleagues and i confirmed today there was