up talking to, every piece of of evidence, whether it s the memo from the phone call or the transcripts of the diplomats that were involved. everything they ve seen so far supports that central allegation. now woo have a second wh whistleblower and the further they go into the investigation, they may not uncover any new core allegations. but they will further support and shed light on that thing that we ve been pursuing from the beginning and that make as a stronger case. this ain t legal. this is political. i don t know why he kept saying it s legal. it s an entire itly political process with legal trapings. and even if you get it to thesont the trick is if you don t have a big crime to hang it on, you re not going to get buy in with people even though
soliciting dirt on his campaign rival. with every witness that they end up talking to, every piece of evidence, whether it s the memo from the phone call or the transcripts of the diplomats that were involved in it, everything that they ve seen so far supports that central allegation. now we have a second whistle-blower. now we have reason to believe there are people inside the white house who were just as concerned by the call. the further they go into this investigation, they may not uncover any new core allegations but they will shed light on that thing and that makes it a much stronger case. here s the difference between this world and the world that you were in, this ain t legal, this is political. i don t know why matt schlapp said it was legal. it s not legal, it s a political process with some legal trappings. but even if you get it over to the senate, the trick here, andrew is if you don t have a
the defense and if impeachment moves forward it does so based on if not consensus, at leastso broad support within both houses of congress. laura: andy mccabe spoke out tonight. former deputy director of the fbi. they may not uncover any new core allegations, but they will further support and shed light on that thing that we have been pursuing from the beginning and that makes it a much stronger case. t here s the difference between this world and the world they were in. this ain t legal. this is political. the opposite.y i have a column in the wall street journal saying the framers did not want impeachment to be political in the sense of partisan. hamilton in federalist 65 said he doesn t want to depend on the comparative strength. he wanted to depend on the guilt or innocence of the accused, to charge a president with at least criminal like behavior. we are saying nothing like this here.