if it came to that than we would get by doing months and months litigating the matter. there s no guarantee. i think it s possible. ultimately one thing is clear. because we ve adduced so much evidence of guilt of this president, so much evidence of serious misconduct i m joined now by legal analyst ross garber who teaches impeachment law. i enjoyed your insights this past week. it s been helpful in my understanding. do you agree with chairman schiff that if, you know, there is merit to the fact that the senate will have the ability to call these witnesses that apparently the house has not been able to do? i think there he said theoretical theoretically, and that would probably be the keyword. it s not going to happen. and here s why. so the constitution says that the chief justice presides, but it doesn t say what that means. and historically in the two impeachment trials of
that s not good. but in terms of why he s saying what he s saying about ambassador sondland, michael cohen he s my lawyer talk to him. michael cohen, he was never by lawyer. rudy giuliani, great man. he s my lawyer. is he still my lawyer? i don t know. you re going to have to talk to rudy. kaitlan collins, thank you very much. this president knows when you are in trouble, get away from the people who are part of the trouble. joining us now to discuss, staff writer for the new yorker and cnn global affairs analyst susan glasser. and professor of impeachment law at tulane law school and cnn legal analyst ross garber. you can t get more spot on the expertise than that. all right. so let s play with both of these concepts. forget about what the president is saying this morning. that s what he does. all right? let s not have that be the focus. that s the distraction. there are two ideas. one is it s okay that he went
not only about what happened with ukraine but give insight into the president s mind-set on russia because you saw what manu said about her opening statement where she said she wasn t going to be a party to this conspiracy theory that it was ukraine that interfered in the election and not russia. the main person pushing that is the president himself who says he believes ukraine tried to take him down in the election. it is an interesting set of defenses that the president doesn t know better than to think ukraine was involved with the 2016 election. he doesn t know better than to discuss foreign policy with someone that he barely knows. it s interesting. kaitlan, thanks very much. back with me, cnn global affairs analyst susan glasser and cnn legal analyst ross garber. he teaches impeachment law at tulane law school. i mean, ross, that s essentially how they are trying to get him out of the necessary mind-set here for being party to a bribe
in which gordon sondland told the president the ukrainians were willing to move forward with investigations into the president s political opponents. that, of course, very significant. holmes said while this phone call wasn t on speakerphone, the president was speaking so loud he could hear it through the phone. ana? lauren fox, we ll let you get to those depositions that were just released, and you can report back on any new information you discover. with us now, cnn legal analyst ross garber, who teaches impeachment law at tulane. his past clienlts who faced impeachment include former south carolina governor mark sanford. also with us, cnn legal analyst and former federal prosecutor. so the state department aide corroborated bill taylor s testimony about that phone call between president trump and ambassador sondland the day after the ukraine call. holmes says this. quote, i then heard president
significance of it until we hear from him. we do know that he overheard the president make reference to investigations. i actually think the news story for the time being is that an ambassador to the united states actually sat in a public setting in a restaurant on an unsecured cell phone call with the president of the united states violating every national security protocol. in ukraine. imaginable. i would bet a large sum of money were it legal that the russians actually listened in word for word on that call. it is a gross violation of national security protocol for him to have done that. an ambassador would normally go to the embassy to a secure location to talk to the president. you know that. congressman heck, i appreciate your time. you re welcome, sir. thank you for coming in. appreciate it. our panel is back this hour. joined by ross garber who teaches impeachment law at tulane university law school and all the regular folks are here as well, which we re very ap