i don't buy extortion. i didn't see a threat of force. but loosely speaking you're in the same genre of activity. why not put bribery in here? why not include mueller in the obstruction? >> it's a great question, and you're exactly right that we've sort of been attuned to talking about these things as whether or not they're criminal acts. part of that is a carryover from robert mueller and the collusion coordination question. we're so used to talking about did trump break the law that i think that's sort of how mind-sets have sort of -- my guess is if you look at the articles of impeachment, if you read through them, you see what they are laying out. they're first of all laying out this is a pattern. they tied both of the articles back to what was alleged or uncovered by robert mueller, which i think is very pointed. but both of them also play to something we were talking about shortly before the show went on, which is an appeal to the house as a body of power itself, right? so i think what they're trying to do is reach out to republicans and say, hey, this seen just about donald trump's relationship with the constitution. it's about our collective relationship with the constitution and the extent to