international affairs. the "wall street journal" reports that the call never mentioned a provision of aid. frank did he glues i and legal analyst had a very different take on whether a quid pro quo was different. >> frankly, this is very mob-like. it's all tied together and that was made clear to ukraine. it didn't have to be in one conversation. it's clear that the review of the aid to ukraine was tied to whether or not they complied with this. it can be an implicit quid pro quo. i think here it's pretty explicit. >> it doesn't have to be a direct cited quid pro quo. it could be inferred, it could be implied by trump and inferred by the ukrainian. that's a criminal problem that the president is facing. >> so could that case be argued, that it wasn't directly offered in a conversation? could it be charged as one snoo. >> i've defended these cases.