From the Mueller Report would be unsupportable in the house and unsustainable in the senate. Do you remember writing that . Yes, i do. Why did you write that . Because i think its true. The fact is this was reviewed by main justice. The special counsel did not reach a conclusion and he should have. I think his justification quite frankly was a bit absurd not reaching a conclusion. The Deputy Attorney general did, and they came to the right conclusion. I dont think this is a real case for obstruction. But then this body would be impeaching the president on the basis of the in verse conclusion. I dont believe it would be appropriate. The gentlemans time is expired. Miss dean. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Words matter. In my earlier life i was a professor of writing. I taught my students to be careful and clear about what they put to paper. That is a lesson the framers of our constitution understood far better than anyone. They were laying the foundation for a new form of government, one that
And the controlling law. Use of an obstruction theory from the Mueller Report would be unsupported, unsupportable in the house and unsustainable in the senate. Do you remember writing that . Yes, i do. Why did you write that . Because i think its true. The fact is that this was reviewed by main justice. The special counsel did not reach a conclusion on obstruction. He should have. I think his justification quite frankly was a bit absurd on not reaching a conclusion. But the attorney general, Deputy Attorney general, did and they came to the right conclusion. I dont think this is a real case for obstruction. But then this body would be impeaching the president on the basis of the inverse conclusion. I dont believe it would be appropriate. The gentlemans time has expired. Ms. Dean. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Words matter. In my earlier life, professors, i was a professor of writing. I taught my students to be
careful and clear about what they put to paper. That is a lesson that the framers
million of congressionally approved aid on the account russia excuse me, ukraine and his chief political adversary. would you describe the president s behavior here and the use of his public office for a private benefit as rising to those levels? the framers considered, as you said, bribery under the constitution to consist of the president abusing his office corruptly for personal gain. if this house determines and this committee determines that the president was in fact seeking personal gain in seeking the investigations that he asked for, then that would constitute bribery under the constitution. thank you. professor gerhardt, i d like to ask you about obstruction of justice. the president categorically refused to introduce congressional subpoenas and
the condition that russia, excuse me, that ukraine announced investigations into his chief political adversary. professor come in your opinion, quick given those facts and the framers specific concerns, would you describe the president s behavior here and use of public office for private benefit as rising to those levels? speak with the framers considered, as you said, bribero consist under the constitution to consist of the president abusing his office corruptly for personal gain. if this house determines and if this committee determines that the president was, in fact, seeking personal gain and seeking the investigations that he asked for, then that would constitute bribery under the constitution. thank you. professor come i would like to ask about ups there obstruction of justice. he refused to produce documents to congressional sows pete don t ask us being as an actual
million in congressionally approved aid on the condition that russia excuse me, that ukraine announce investigations into his chief political adversa adversary. professor, in your opinion, given those facts, and the framers specific concerns, would you describe the president s behavior here and the use of his public office for a private benefit as rising to those levels? the framers considered, as you said, bribery to consist bribery under the constitution to consist of the president abusing his office corruptly for personal gain. if this house determines and if this committee determines that the president was in fact seeking personal gain in seeking the investigations that he asked for, then that would constitute bribery under the constitution. thank you. professor gerhardt, i d like to ask you about obstruction of justice. the president has categorically refused to produce any documents responsive to congressional subpoenas, attacked and