because he is among many top officials who have firsthand knowledge for the president's reasons for witoldingid from ukraine. the legal question of abuse of power is a fairly -- is fairly well settled, even among republicans. you do not need a crime. abuse of power is enough. the lingering question is, did pres tentmp abuse his power? laa: as you say, democrats focused the first article -- focused on the first article of abuse of power. th president's lawyer said there are multiple schools of thought. you le that has acknowledging that democrats have a case? >> they have wafed on that. the exception of perhaps alan dershowitz who is a lawyer on trump's team. most constitutional scholars including my colleague at cbs news and the history of the impeacent clause and prior to the constitution in england or the constitution was based on english law -- all of the points to the fact that crime is not necessary to remove someone from office. when the constitution was ratified, there was not a criminal code.ld that w be impossibl i think the democrats did a solid job of laying that piece out. whe be