Robbery thats burglary, ill get it right. And in this situation youve got 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 i would 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 mentioned 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 had failed to comply with four legislative subpoenas. Here it is far more than four
that this president has failed to comply with. And he has ordered the Executive Branch as well not to cooperate with congress. Those together with a
misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. it s your abuse of power. you are doing precisely what you re criticizing the president for doing. we have a third branch that deals with conflicts of the other two branches. and what comes out of there and what you do with it is the very definition of legitimacy. let s continue, the impact of what you re talking about. the mcdonald case, was that a split court? were they really torn about that? that case came out how? conveyeah, it came out unani so do cases i cite in my testimony that also refute these criminal theories. one of the things you said also and i think it could be summed up, i use it sometimes, the layman s language here, is facts don t matter. that s what i heard a lot of in the 45 minutes. well, the facts said this, but if this, if that, if this, it rises to an impeachment level, and that was sort of what you re saying, that crimes, i think your word was, crimes have