Stay updated with breaking news from Gerhardt weber. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Of whether it is congress s job alone to deal with the matter of impeachment. let s listen. the constitution says the house has the sole power to impeach. constitution only uses the word sole twice. once with reference to the house in this area. once with reference to the senate with respect to impeachment trials. sole means sole. what what question does that answer? it answers the question of who gets to define bribery in particular. there was a really interesting and important exchange between professors gerhardt and turley. professor gerhardt said the house, in its sole power to define bribery, can identify the president s conduct even if it didn t rise to the level of illegal crime because he said the framers wanted to prohibit bribery even before it was a federal crime. professor turley s response. it s got to meet the legal definition for a crime in order to be impeachable. and it s ultimately up to the supreme court to decide. and professor gerhardt s response, which i t ....
so that s interesting. she s saying by doing something that is otherwise the right of the american citizen, the american people, to do. that is the legal problem with what the president was doing. that s right. and in doing so, professor karlan picked up on themes that professors gerhardt and feldman struck. this is what the framers believe was the core of an impeachable offense. it is an abuse of power, all of them said, to solicit a foreign government to interfere in an election for the president s personal gain. rather than for the public good. and that led michael gerhardt to say if this is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable. professor turley s response for the republicans was it could be impeachable if the facts were proved. but there are just not enough facts and we shouldn t impeach on the basis of what he called jazz rather than an iron-clad case. let s talk about professor gerhardt. michael gerhardt is a law professor at the university of north carolina. and he ....
Based on the facts. heidi, the democrats questioned the witnesses about three articles of impeachment. let s listen. you testified the president s conduct here immaterial pla indicates three categories of high crimes and misdemeanors. abuse of power, betrayal of the natural interest and corruption of elections. is that right professor karlan? yes, it is. and professor feldman and professor gerhardt, do you agree? yes. yes, sir. any one of these actions alone would be sufficient to impeach the president according to the founders, but is it fair to say that all three causes for impeachment explicitly contemplated by the founders abuse of power, betrayal of our national security, and corruption of our elections are present in this president s conduct, yes or no, professor feldman? yes. and professor gerhardt? yes, sir. and professor karlan? yes. you all agree. are any of you aware of any other president who has essentially triggered all three concerns that animated ....
This point. i want to come back at the topic of getting laughed at the world stage. we are joined by bob acosta, washington post. do we have this right that the finest articulation that we have seen so far in terms of what the republicans are arguing and will argue, is what the professor is doing. he s simply arguing a technical case that it has not reach an impeachable level. is that from your conversation with sources sort of the thinking republicans to the degree. is that their best argument? do they think that s being made today? i just got back from the capitol hill and talking to republican lawmakers. but, it is not the important republican action right now on ....
Have for the minority members of the committee, if you were convinced the president held up aid because you thought it would help his re-election, would you vote to impeach him? because i think that s really the question that everyone on this committee should be asking. and if they conclude yes, then they should vote to impeach. mr. gerhardt? yes, i agree. and one thing i would add is that much talk has been made here about the term bribery. in court decisions with respect to bribery. it s your job. it s the house s job to define bribery, not the court s. you follow your judgment on that. i want to thank the witnesses. all of the witnesses for coming and testifying today. this is not an easy decision. it s not a comfortable decision. but it s one that s necessary. we all take an oath to protect the constitution. our military men and women go and put their lives on the line for the constitution. and we have an obligation to follow the constitution, whether it s convenient or easy. ....