educate the public. i think they re actually trying to educate members of congress. i would suspect a very few have probably plowed through about the 448-page documents. it is not a page-turner. it is written very well. it is outlined in a form you can really start with the table of contents and get the overview of it all. and then each section, the executive summary of it is great so you can work your way into the detail. but what s devastating, don, is the 142-contacts between the trump campaign and the russians. now, there may be not be a conspiracy but there s just an unusual amount of contact with the russians by that campaign, very unusual. and then in volume 2, the obstruction, five of those cases of obstruction no jury could walk away from them. they re pretty much slam dunks.
448-page document. it is not a page-turner. it is written very well. it s outlined in a form that you can really start with the table of contents and get the overview of it all. and then each section, the executive summary of it, is great. so you can work your way into the detail. but what s devastating, don, in volume one, for example, is the 142 contacts between the trump campaign and the russians. now, there may not be a conspiracy, but there s just an unusual amount of contact with the russians by that campaign. very unusual. and then in volume two, the obstruction, five of those cases of obstruction are you no jury could walk away from them. they re pretty much slam dunks. the other five, a little closer. they need more evidence, because people didn t address all of the facts they had.
toing on their side, especially when it relates to congressional subpoenas. and the course don t get in the way that so they re going to lose these cases one after another because they re not tough cases, they re easy cases, they re slam dunks. that s one of the things that still almost when a subpoena was issued to bill clinton, it a subpoena, it legal, you have to comply. moe man is above the law. yet the stra i didn ts been pr hopefully it all plays out
this president now. she keeps telling them privately, let the committees do their work. let jerry nadler and adam schiff and all the other chairs build the case against the president. she keeps telling them privately, i m told, the country is not fully aware of the pleasant president s behavior. as you said, paint the picture. for now don mcgahn, annie donaldson, hope hicks, another level of cory lewandowski, all the characters from the mueller report. this could take the rest of 2019. that s what the speaker s strategy is. you couldn t rush the process, begin impeachment proceedings even though the president is defying congress. billed witness by witness to process it with more than a document in front of you. a lot of analysis, none of these would be slam dunks for democrats. the democrats don t need a slam-dunk. they simply need someone to put words and videotape to what s already in the four corners of the mueller report. democrats run the risk of setting the expectation there s
shaky legal justification. so while yon roberts has indicated that he may let precedent stand, there are occasions where precedent should not stand. if the social mores or customs or understanding of people s rights have changed over time then that is a reason to strike down precedent. on the other hand, if as is the case possibly with roe, people have come to rely on these rights and part of the fabric of our society, then even a case wrongly decided like roe as many people say, could remain as precedent. donald trump said as a candidate if he got two justices on the court he would overturn roe. he did indicate he would try to do that. justice roberts and justice kavanaugh are not slam dunks for overturning roe. gorsch maybe more so. all three of those justices indicated they have a healthy respect for precedent.