Wednesday night on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin discussed the letter the White House sent to House Democrats criticizing their impeachment efforts.

In the letter, White House counsel Pat Cipollone calls House Democrats' impeachment probe "illegitimate" for multiple reasons, chief among them the fact that the House has yet to hold a vote of the full chamber.

"The House of Representatives is supposed to be involved," rather than just the leaders of a single party, Levin explained. "[The Framers] didn't want one party as a mob, using the Impeachment Clause as a way to reverse a past election and to affect a future election so close the general election."

The White House's letter also cites a "a separate, fatal defect" in the Democrats' probe: Lack of due process stemming from the lack of procedures to afford the president "even the most basic protections." Levin also agreed with this critique.

"Due process is necessary," Levin explained. "The right to call witnesses is necessary. The right to cross-examine other witnesses is necessary. The right to have counsel is necessary. The right to participate fully in the process is necessary."

Ultimately, Levin reminded viewers, this impeachment push isn't about fidelity to the Constitution and historical precedent; it's about undermining President Trump and undoing the election that put him in office:

They used to talk about Russia for two and a half years. They used to talk about the Mueller report. They used to talk about volume 2 of the Mueller report. They used to demand grand jury information. They have failed on every single front.

So now it's Ukraine, and they don't intend to fail this time, you see. Because they are going to violate — violate — the procedures that have been in place in the House of Representatives for Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton.

It is they who are eviscerating our system of law. It is they who need to be held to account.

Listen:

The Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has invited President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to come speak to the panel in order to counter the narrative of the House Democrats' impeachment probe.

In a string of tweets sent out on Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., invited the former New York City mayor to give testimony "to inform the committee of his concerns" regarding allegations of corruption in the Ukraine and the president's efforts to get the country's government to look into them.

"Have heard on numerous occasions disturbing allegations by [Giuliani] about corruption in Ukraine and the many improprieties surrounding the firing of former Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin," Graham said. "Therefore I will offer to Mr. Giuliani the opportunity to come before the Senate Judiciary Committee to inform the committee of his concerns."

In a later tweet, the chairman said that he was "tired of only hearing one side of the story.  It’s now time to give voice to everything Ukraine. Let the chips fall where they may!"

Bloomberg reports that this invitation — which comes at the same time as a rift between Graham and Trump on foreign policy in Syria — comes after "days of pressure from top Trump allies including Donald Trump Jr. for Graham to act" after the chairman had deferred investigation efforts to the probe being run by the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Committee Democrats were eager to respond to the prospect of being able to question Giuliani themselves.

"Good," responded 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, Calif. "I have questions."

“I welcome the opportunity to question Rudy Giuliani under oath about his role in seeking the Ukrainian government’s assistance to investigate one of the president’s political rivals," said committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "Democratic members have plenty of questions for Mr. Giuliani and this would give us an opportunity to help separate fact from fiction for the American people.”

Amy Klobuchar reacted to the announcement with a simple "Bring it on."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. — though not a member of the Judiciary Committee — said, "We welcome Mr. Giuliani testifying" and said that given his role in the Ukraine matter, "he must testify under oath."

Former Vice President Joe Biden — whose son's employment at the Ukrainian energy company Burisma is at the center of the Ukraine controversy — doesn't seem too enthused at the prospect of Giuliani's testimony. A campaign spokesman told Bloomberg that "bringing forward noted conspiracist and liar Rudy Giuliani would further discredit the reputation of the Senate Judiciary Committee under Senator Graham."

Giuliani is a key figure in the story leading up to president Trump's July 25 phone call with the president of Ukraine. According to testimony provided by a former top U.S. diplomat, Giuliani was central in the efforts to get Ukraine to look into the Burisma matter. House Democrats subpoenaed the former New York City mayor after Nancy Pelosi announced "an official impeachment inquiry" last month.

The following is an excerpt from Blaze Media’s daily Capitol Hill Brief email newsletter:

According to a new report, Mitt Romney may not be planning on challenging President Donald Trump on the campaign trail, but he’s making moves to undermine him in a likely Senate impeachment trial. Vanity Fair reports that Romney has “firmly decided” against primarying the president, but he has been reaching out to key Republican Senate offices on the subject of impeachment.

“He could have tremendous influence in the impeachment process as the lone voice of conscience in the Republican caucus,” a Romney adviser told the magazine, though the senator’s office didn’t comment on the story. “Romney is the one guy who could bring along Susan Collins, Cory Gardner, Ben Sasse. Romney is the pressure point in the impeachment process. That’s why the things he’s saying are freaking Republicans out.”

The longtime, intermittent feud between Romney and Trump has heated up again amid Democrats’ push for impeachment and the foreign controversy behind it. After Romney called Trump’s suggestion that China and the Ukraine look into Joe and Hunter Bidens’ alleged corruption “wrong and appalling,” Trump responded the next day by calling Romney a “pompous ass” who “never knew how to win.”

The chairmen of three Democrat-led House committees have sent out a new batch of subpoenas to Trump administration officials as part of the ongoing impeachment investigation against President Donald Trump.

Monday's subpoenas went out to the Department of Defense's recently confirmed Secretary Mark Esper as well as White House Office of Management and Budget acting Director Russell Vought and are for documents related to Ukraine military aid. The legal demands were sent by the Democratic chairmen of the House Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs Committees — Reps. Adam Schiff, Calif., Elijah Cummings, Md., and Eliot Engel, N.Y., respectively.

"Pursuant to the House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry, we are hereby transmitting a subpoena that compels you to produce the documents set forth in the accompanying schedule by October 15, 2019," the chairmen wrote in letters to Esper and Vought.

The news release from the three top Democrats explains that the documents are necessary to evaluate "the extent to which President Trump jeopardized national security" by withholding foreign aid and asking Ukrainian officials to look into the matter of a since-scuttled investigation of a company that employed former Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter.

The release cites one story from the Washington Post and another from the New York Times that the funds were halted ahead of President Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

According to the Times story, Trump "personally ordered his staff to freeze more than $391 million in aid to Ukraine" ahead of the phone call" and "issued his directive to Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, who conveyed it through the budget office to the Pentagon and the State Department, which were told only that the administration was looking at whether the spending was necessary," according to two administration officials.

"The enclosed subpoena demands documents that are necessary for the Committees to examine this sequence of these events," the chairmen wrote, "and the reasons behind the White House's decision to withhold critical military assistance to Ukraine that was appropriated by Congress to counter Russian aggression."

The subpoena schedule for Vought and Esper includes documents, meetings, and communications going back to Jan. 1, 2019.

In prepared congressional testimony given last week, former U.S. envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker told Hill investigators that he became aware of a hold on financial assistance to the country about a week before the phone call "and immediately tried to weigh in to reverse that position."

However, he also testified, "As I was confident the position would not stand, I did not discuss the hold with my Ukrainian counterparts until the matter became public in late August."

"The issue of a hold placed on security assistance to Ukraine also came up during this same time I was connecting [a Zelensky aide] and [Trump's personal lawyer Rudy] Giuliani," the former envoy said elsewhere in the statement. "I did not perceive these issues to be linked in any way."

Does House Democrats' latest impeachment effort stand up to constitutional scrutiny?

On Sunday night's episode of Life, Liberty & Levin on Fox News, LevinTV host Mark Levin spoke with former Whitewater scandal independent counsel Robert Ray about the House of Representatives' impeachment efforts against Donald Trump.

With her late-September impeachment announcement, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., ditched historical precedent by not putting the matter to a vote first, Levin explained. Ray noted that while such a requirement isn't listed in the Constitution, the Framers' idea would be that "the people's elected representatives acting as a body would make a determination to commence impeachment proceedings."

"And that's been the historical practice, and one that we shouldn't ignore," Ray added.

Levin then raised the question of how this current process could be described as a legitimate impeachment process "if half the House isn't involved, and the Democrat Party's driving it, and it breaks with all tradition of past presidential impeachment inquiries. It's a Democrat Party impeachment inquiry."

Ray responded that he doesn't think that the American people have heard the last of that argument and that there will likely be an "opportunity for, as a legal matter, to make the point" that the impeachment process has been perverted.

"I imagine at some point someone may, you know, stand up and raise the flag to say, 'Hey, hold on a second: If there's not a House vote, then it's not an appropriate or lawful inquiry.'"

Ultimately, the question is one of separation of powers, i.e., what actions must the legislative branch take in order to get the other two branches to respect its impeachment efforts. Levin pointed out that "one committee of one part of Congress is not a branch of government and cannot force an entire other branch of government to bend to its will."

"Correct. That is not an insignificant detail," Ray responded. "That's not a detail; that's a concern that animates separation of powers which is inherent, endemic to our constitutional structure."

Watch: