Rep. Gohmert compares President Trump to a domestic violence offender, as a defense for why Trump can't be impeached: "If a victim does not admit to be a victim,... you don't get a conviction. And if you do, it's not sustained, because it's a no evidence point."
Rep. McClintock's description of George Washington's response to the doc requests in the Jay Treaty matter is 100% wrong. As responses from his administration made clear, they recognized Congress's right to those documents when impeachment has been invoked. 
Rep. Chabot wonders why President Trump had people listening in on these calls, says State needs to "tighten up" who can hear the calls because Trump is going to "say things" and speak frankly.
Rep. Gaetz is arguing that President Trump was correct to hold the security assistance to Ukraine until Ukraine proved, by opening an investigation into the Bidens, that they would be responsible with the U.S. aid.
Rep. Johnson says that everyone knows Trump is deeply concerned with combating worldwide corruption and that he tweets about it every time, which makes it "res ipsa loquitur."
Okay well.
Okay well.
Will be interesting to see how GOP's current spin–that Trump made a reasoned policy decision to release the aid following Ukrainian anticorruption measures–will play out before a jury, where one of the jurors was in the room when Trump was finally convinced to change his mind.
Here's what that juror, Senator Portman, heard from Trump himself about why the aid was being held up: because of lack of help from Europeans.
I wonder how Portman will feel about Trump suddenly claiming that wasn't true, that actually he had a different secret reason for it.
I wonder how Portman will feel about Trump suddenly claiming that wasn't true, that actually he had a different secret reason for it.
Rep. Reschenthaler announces, "Facts don't care about your feelings," and says he will proceed to prove that Trump has not obstructed the impeachment inquiry. I can't wait to hear this.
... but he starts talking about examples of when Trump didn't defy Congress in 2017 and 2018.
... but he starts talking about examples of when Trump didn't defy Congress in 2017 and 2018.
Rep. Gohmert just suggested that if any Democratic Senators currently campaigning for President support the impeachment of the President, they should be expelled from office for abusing their position.
Rep. Gohmert argues that Dems are wrong to argue that Trump never previously held up aid over "corruption," says the old president was corrupt so there would have been no point. But the new president was supposed to be a reformer, so it makes sense Trump took harsher action.
I want to ask Rep. Chabot, who just explained why Clinton should've been impeached for high crimes, if he thinks Trump could testify without also committing the same high crime. And if not, then isn't his only objection to Clinton that he did not obstruct enough?
This is going to be a controversial take, but when it comes to representatives with the greatest lack of self-awareness, Rep. Reschenthaler is running circles around Gaetz.
Mathematically speaking, there are not enough words in the 9-page articles of impeachment for any more words to be stricken.
Rep. Gohmert: "Yeah sure Trump is arrogant, but he's got a lot to be arrogant about."
Gohmert on the real election interference: the Democrats "worked with an Australian, they worked with an Italian."
For the record these were allies coming to the U.S. to share their independent intel collection.
For the record these were allies coming to the U.S. to share their independent intel collection.
Still thinking about how Rep. Johnson (GA) arguably broke decorum to call out Gaetz for his hypocrisy, and yet not a single member of the GOP was willing to step forward and use the moment to attack the Democrats for improper process.
