americans believe yada, yada, yada. martha: we re back on july, and july, 2020 democrat marianne williamson made a story of herself becoming the most searched for candidates but she was absent from the stage on tuesday night. she announced there s no way that she is dropping out this process and said that she s pointing the finger squarely at the dnc for stifling the democratic process and writing and to the washington post, the democratic national committee has sought to narrow the field of presidential candidates the very moment when it should be opening up. facing a political straitjacket on her primary system and the ridiculous rules the party is risking this, back in the story, great to have you back. coming back in. thank you. it s beyond that s a pretty strong indictment of the proces process. i was mentioning before, the constitution doesn t even mention the part of the local party. george washington warned us against that. we had to be very careful
and now is it the solicitation statute. doesn t it have to fit some kind of law that the american people will understand? it has to be understandable to the american people because impeachment and conviction of political acts conducted by the two houses, but they re not locked in to defining a crime consistent with what s already been passed in the united states code or some criminal statute that exists, right. they can define it differently, they can articulate it differently. s they w that s why when peope talk about obstruction of congress, that s in an effort to obstruct impeachment inquiry, which is different. so you re in a different the right way to think about this, in my opinion, is you ve got to think about it in terms of the constitution itself and not be wrapped around any particular statute. this is just the indictment
it s a complainant that is well informed and going out of his way to file the report consistent with the law. if any prove comes out this man or woman was in concerted action with anyone on the left to work this up, i want to know and blow it out of the water. jim, as we go down the road of this impeachment inquiry, the idea of what is the bar looms large. and i know that high crimes and misdemeanors was done this way on purpose, but in terms of the analysis on ukraine, what kinds of potential criminality would the house be looking at with any chance of proving? well, the house is going to define what those crimes are. they can define them in terms of reference to federal statutes that are already in existence a they can define them differently. as you said, the constitution doesn t exactly spell that out. that s why they keep going on about quid pro quo because you re not going to have bribery without quid pro quo. and now is it the solicitation
informed and going out of his way to file the report consistent with the law. if any prove comes out this man or woman was in concerted action with anyone on the left to work this up, i want to know and blow it out of the water. jim, as we go down the road of this impeachment inquiry, the idea of what is the bar looms large. and i know that high crimes and misdemeanors was done this way on purpose, but in terms of the analysis on ukraine, what kinds of potential criminality would the house be looking at with any chance of proving? well, the house is going to define what those crimes are. they can define them in terms of reference to federal statutes that are already in existence a they can define them differently. as you said, the constitution doesn t exactly spell that out. that s why they keep going on about quid pro quo because you re not going to have bribery without quid pro quo.
statute. doesn t it have to fit some kind of law that the american people will understand? it has to be understandable to the american people because impeachment and conviction of political acts conducted by the two houses, but they re not locked in to defining a crime consistent with what s already been passed in the united states code or some criminal statute that exists, right. they can define it differently, they can articulate it differently. s they that s why when people talk about obstruction of congress, that s in an effort to obstruct impeachment inquiry, which is different. so you re in a different the right way to think about this, in my opinion, is you ve got to think about it in terms of the constitution itself and not be wrapped around any particular statute. this is just the indictment