The first public impeachment hearing is over. Some thoughts.
These are fact witnesses. They brought many facts, several damning to Pres. Trump.
Taylor objected internally and real time to the Ukraine plot. That makes his testimony and context pivotal to the fact-finding in the probe, even though he objects to being a "star witness" in the sense of carrying a specific viewpoint on Trump.
Taylor also speaks as a Trump admin insider who saw the plot and opposed it. So he's a potential instrument of the policy, not its architect. And he has scant firsthand knowledge of Trump or his state of mind, given his spot in the org chart.
A thorough investigation corroborates and seeks firsthand accounts -- Congress is seeking Mulvaney, Bolton and others. Giuliani and Trump would also make interesting witnesses...
But note the Trump WH finds itself illogically arguing against secondhand accounts *and* firsthand accounts -- impugning those who weren't in the room, then fighting to prevent those who were from testifying.
The Committee minority did land some blows, using questions to the press the theory of the case that the plot faltered or failed; that this wasn't "that big a deal," so to speak.
Those would be irrelevant arguments in a criminal trial, but this isn't a trial. For impeachment/removal, there can be a valid argument that a 'bad thing' is not *impeachably bad*
(Defenders of Presidents in both parties have made those arguments, tho not usually about bribery)
(Defenders of Presidents in both parties have made those arguments, tho not usually about bribery)
