Somebody really caught in the middle of it, and that doesnt excuse the person from the consequences. Professors, weve talked about abuse of power and bribery. When we started, we said we would also discuss Obstruction Of Congress. So id like to ask you some questions about Obstruction Of Congress. Professor gerhardt, in your view, is there enough evidence here to charge President Trump with the high crime and misdemeanor of Obstruction Of Congress . I think theres more than enough. As i mention in my statement, just to really underscore this, the third article of impeachment approved by the House Judiciary Committee against president nixon charged him with misconduct because he failed to comply with four legislative subpoenas. Here it is far more than four that this president has failed to comply with and hes ordered
the Executive Branch as well not to cooperate the congress. Those together with a lot of other evidence suggests Obstruction Of Congress. Professor karlan, do you agree .
go right ahead. i d also caution you about obstruction. obstruction is a crime with meaning. it has elements. it has case authority. the record does not establish obstruction in this case. what my esteemed colleague said was certainly true. if you accept all of their presumptions, it would be obstruction. but impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumpti s presumptions. that s the problem when you move forward on this abbreviated schedule which has not been explained to me why you want to set the record for the fastest impeachment. fast is not good for impeachment. narrow, fast impeachments have failed. just ask johnson. so the obstruction issue is an example of this problem. he here s my concern. the theory being put forward is