HIS FATHER OVER SAW UKRAINIAN
RELATIONS WITH OBAMA.
>> OUR NEXT GUEST HAS BEEN
TEACHING HIS POLITICAL SCIENCE
STUDENTS THIS WEEK ABOUT THE
IMPEACHMENT PROCESS.
DAVID CANNON IS HERE.
>> GOOD TO BE HERE.
>> FIRST OF ALL, WHAT STOOD OUT
TO IN THIS WHISTLE BLOWER
COMPLAINT?
>> WE HEARD THE PHONE CALL AND
THE DETAILS OF THE TRANSCRIPT
AND ONE THING THAT BROKE OUT TO
ME WAS THE COVER UP ANGLE.
THE PEOPLE IN THE WHITE HOUSE
RIGHT AFTER THE CONVERSATION
WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
CONTENT OF THAT PHONE CALL.
AND THEN IMMEDIATELY PUT IT INTO
LOCK DOWN MODE ON THIS SERVER
THAT WAS PASSWORD PROTECTED THAT
ONLY TOP-LEVEL PEOPLE HAD ACCESS
TO.
THAT WAS A STRONG INDICATION
THEY KNEW THERE WAS SOMETHING
PROBLEMATIC IN THE PHONE CALL.
CALLING IT A COVER UP IS
BASICALLY ACCURATE IN TERMS OF
HOW THEY'RE DEALING WITH THIS.
>> IS WHAT IS HAPPENING
UNPRECEDENTED.
>> IT REALLY IS.
A PRESIDENT ASKING A FOREIGN
COUNTRY TO DIG UP DIRT ON A
RIVAL.
BASICALLY USING THE POWER OF THE
PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE AND
POTENTIALLY UNDERMINING FOREIGN
POLICY AND SECURITY BY WITH
HOLDING $400 MILLION IN AID TO A
CRITICAL COUNTRY WHILE THIS
WHOLE PROCESS UNFOLDS IN TERMS
OF WILL UKRAINE DO HIS BIDDING
AND DO THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT
HE'S ASKING FOR IN THIS PHONE
CALL.
THAT REALLY IS UNPRECEDENTED.
>> CAN IT NO, THOUGH, BE
DESCRIBED AS THE PRESIDENT
DESCRIBES IT AS A WITCH HUNT?
I DON'T THINK SO, BASED ON THE
FACTS WE KNOW ALREADY AND THE
FACTS THE PRESIDENT ADMITTED TO,
HE DID BRING UP VICE PRESIDENT
BIDEN AND HUNTER BIDEN IN THIS
PHONE CALL, THAT I THINK IS
UNCONTESTED IN TERMS OF THE
FACTS HOW PEOPLE DIFFER, IS
WHETHER OR NOT THERE NEEDS TO BE
AN EXPLICIT QUID PRO QUO AND
HELP YOU OUT.
OR IS JUST THE ASKING ENOUGH?
YOU DO GET DIFFERENCES OF
OPINION THERE.
WHERE AND PEOPLE ARE SAYING
WITHOUT THE EVIDENCE OF QUID PRO
QUO BUT ASKING IS ENOUGH.
ONE THING THAT I THINK REALLY
HAS COME OUT IN LAST 24 HOURS IS
THE CIA OPERATIVE, SOMEONE WHO
HAS INSIDE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT
UKRAINE HAS INSIDE INFORMATION
AND POLICY IN THE AREA.
IT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION TO
BRING UP IN TERMS OF WHAT WAS
THIS ALL FIRST HAND INFORMATION?
I WASN'T ON THE PHONE CALLS BUT
FROM OTHER THINGS I HEARD FROM
PEOPLE WHO WERE INVOLVED.
GIVEN THE PERSON'S POSITION AS
THE CENTER OF DIGESTING ALL OF
THE CRITICAL INFORMATION FROM
THAT REGION, IT REALLY IS VERY
WELL SITUATED FOR MAKING THIS
WHISTLE BLOWER COMPLAINT BECAUSE
THEY KNOW THE STRATEGIC
QUESTIONS INVOLVED.
>> IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS, YOU
HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTING YOUR
POLY-SCI STUDENTS ON
IMPEACHMENT.
>> SOMETIMES PEOPLE USE THE WORD
IMPEACHMENT AS REMOVAL OF
OFFICE.
IT'S A TWO-STEP PROCESS.
THE FIRST IS THE HOUSE
IMPEACHING WITH A MAJORITY VOTE.
THAT'S THE CHARGES AGAINST THE
PERSON AND THE TRIAL GOES TO THE
SENATE.
THAT'S WHERE BY A TWO-THIRDS
VOTE THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE
REMOVED IF CONVICTED.
BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED BUT
NOT REMOVED.
HE MAY BE IMPEACHED BUT NOT
REMOVED IF REPUBLICANS DON'T GET
ON BOARD.
YOU NEED 20 REPUBLICANS TO VOTE
FOR CONVICTION IN ORDER TO
REMOVE THE PRESIDENT.
THAT'S THE FIRST POINT.
THE SECOND IS WHAT IT TAKES TO
GET IMPEACHMENT CHARGE AND THE
CONSTITUTION IS VERY SPARSE IN
ITS LANGUAGE.
BRIBERY AND MISDEMEANORS.
IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT A GIVEN
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SAYS IT
IS AT A GIVEN POINT IN TIME.
THERE'S NO CRIME THAT HAS TO BE
INVOLVED.
IT'S JUST IF THERE IS A