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
ducked that exact accountability moment in so many ways. when he s about to go to court in civil trials like with trump university, he has settled. when he s dealt with times where his aides or associates have been indicted or cooperated he s ultimately evaded prosecutors and stiff armed mueller from even doing an interview. but if democrats do impeachment this month, it will tee up a trial. today s hearing shows what that case looks like with the facts, with the reports, with the experts informing how you write an article of impeachment, which is a presidential indictment. and today the experts were sounding an alarm. they write if this stuff isn t impeachable, nothing is. and with our democracy at stake they also tackled tough questions on what is impeachable. professor feldman, did president trump commit the impeachable high crime and misdemeanor of abuse of power based on that evidence and those