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 .
three of those witnesses called by democrats. they testified that president trump s actions do indeed rise to the level of an impeachable offense or offenses. the fourth called by republicans disagreed. we have a lot to talk about. let s start with jeffrey toobin. what do you make of what we heard so far? if you ll septemb pretty dry stuff compared to the witness testimony that we heard prior? really? i love this. i m a law nerd. i hope this goes all day. no. it is a little abstract. but i think there are certain principles that have come through even with jonathan turley who is the republicans witness today. the first is that an impeachable offense does not have to be a crime. the words in the constitution high crimes and misdemeanors do not refer to a federal criminal
we ve got text message, testimony from these ambassadors. there s already enough to draft one article of impeachment on the ukraine scandal. joining me now is progressive commentator and radio talk show host rashad ritchie. do you believe they have enough for articles of impeachment right now and if so, why don t they move forward with the vote? they had enough the day he was sworn in. let s look at what the articles of impeachment really are. it is not a criminal indictment. it is for according to the constitution high crimes and misdemeanors which means that is language adopted from the british common law tradition and the british common law tradition interpreted high crimes and misdemeanors as anything that is either an abuse of power or a
of course. by the justice department. we have seen investigations that led to president nixon s resignati resignation. we know that he would have been impeached by but that was wasn t that the responsibility of congress, if you don t like what the president is doing or you feel the president committed a crime, it s up to the congress to impeach the president, the house of representatives votes to impeach and then the senate votes to either convict or acquit. we saw that in the bill clinton impeachment. and that s that s correct, under the constitution high crimes and misdemeanors, then is goes to the congress to impeach and remove from office. so, remember, gerald ford had to pardon president nixon from any further charges that would have been brought against him and criminal prosecution. that s after he left office, though. after he left office, correct. so should director comey update the american voters between now and next tuesday, a