Thread by @DirkSchwenk

I agree, and I'll explain, since there are so many doubters: 1) The Dem managers are brilliant, and made this choice based on their superior fund of information- this is not incompetence. It is therefore either strategy, or determined by things outside the impeachment @gregolear

https://twitter.com/gregolear/status/1360338250037161987

My best guess as to those reasons: 1) live witnesses are unpredictable and can say things that hurt a case. Hostile witnesses are hard to control - much easier/better to use their own videotaped in real time words, where you know what they'll say.

2) live witnesses take much more time than video clips, and preparing for a live witness takes much more time than the testimony. Adding 1 and 2 together, I'd guess the managers decided to make sure this case was TIGHT and done on time, so Dems can move on to their agenda.

3) I think Dems rightly guessed that no amount of evidence would get enough Rs, and Rs are happy to run out the clock on the Dem agenda - again good reasons to get this thing over with.

4) Most participants who could be called as a witness are potentially under FBI investigation, and would have to plead the 5th, or they are witnesses to the investigation and calling them may screw up the FBI's investigation. WHICH IS MASSIVE.

5) At least some of the Senator/jurors are targets of this investigation, and giving them too much information before the FBI is ready would be a mistake. nytimes.com/live/2021/01/1…

6) Congress is also conducting a massive investigation, which Pelosi has already said may result in criminal referrals. The targets of this investigation are primarily people that work in the Capitol, including law makers. No need to tip them off. nbcnews.com/politics/congr…

Did not know this ... maybe it changes things.

https://twitter.com/21law/status/1360446620114984960?s=20

Update: if Raskin wants witnesses, I trust Raskin

UPDATE if Raskin doesn't want witnesses I trust Raskin