They really don't want anyone to hear the whole story.

Don’t think he actually answered the question.

side issue, not really relevant...will citizens be directed to not violate the ____Act re: foreign policy

edit: Logan Act

YES!

to follow the law.

If he's not lying, then this is an admission the House's claims are correct.
If he's lying, this is evidence of their bad faith defense and evidence House is correct.

An individual for the wrong reasons?

Please respond to the tRump defense team’s answer regarding giuliani’s role in conducting foreign policy? - Per MSNBC

Love this man.

I'm not able to watch or listen right now.
What and how undermined their argument?

Rudy was either conducting foreign policy -- illegal for private citizen -- or he was on a personal errand for trump -- abuse of power.

Has that been done so far, senators from both parties asking a joint question?

I must admit, I am old and not as sharp as I used to be.

Would you agree that almost any action a pResident takes is inherently political? Where is the line between permissible and impeachable political actions?

Eta: yep, it’s a lengthy whistleblower SQUIRREL!

as well as those trying to out the whistleblower. I love that he pointed out why an intelligence whistleblower absolutely requires anonymity. He shamed them by pointing out that each and every member of Congress should be willing to stand up and be a whistleblower if they see wrongdoing.

makes one ill...

WH counsel has said Rudy wasn't conducting policy. Fiona Hill pointed out Sondland & co were not conducting policy. It was personal political errands.

Is it too much to ask that we follow the Clinton model to hear witnesses (SOU notwithstanding, Super Bowl not mentioned.)

He concludes: we must!

(eta- sorry I am little behind. can skip the WH dude to catch up)

(doing other stuff around the house, etc. and even had to rewind the TV video feed a bunch of times )

If the Senate subpoenas any documents, trump would refuse and this would prove the House's case.

If the Senate subpoenas any witness still under trump's control, trump would refuse and this would prove the House's case.

Bolton is the only witness the Senate could call without the risk that trump would prove the House's case by his own action.

Been there, done that. Call in former gov. christie and aggrieved public to attest to how well this can possibly work out.

interest.

Example - What would stop the President from withholding aid to a U.S. city if the mayor didn't endorse them?

(sounds like Bridge-gate)

(and had been continually soliciting for the position of AG)

over and over in the media tonight and beyond. Thank you Rep. Lofgren!!

Points out a partisan use of impeachment toward Clinton, compared to Nixon impeachment which involved corrupting the government for his own political gain in an election.

Which one compares to Trump? Nixon, of course.

There were several layers to her reply; it was excellent.

I knew repubs were scummy, but I'm still incredibly disappointed in the way they've chosen to conduct themselves. They don't give a damn about dismantling our constitution and society. They don't give a damn that they're paving the way for us to become Russia-lite. Maybe they want it that way. It's very depressing.

Witness testimony and documentation are the life's breath of any court case.

(the Senate IS the trial)

Did Bob Mueller accuse the Con of Obstruction of justice?

select bullshit - let's make them dance

You can't impeach on policy, because it really does become a partisan misuse of the process.

HOWEVER...

Abuse of power isn't that. This isn't a matter of policy, no matter how many times you say it is. It's just not. You abuse your power, you're likely to be impeached. Full stop.

Man...I'm losing faith in this Union with every passing moment. The Senators need to ask themselves: Do you want this to still be a sovereign nation in five years? At the rate we're going, we will not be.

an investigation announcement against an opponent just before election.

WH counsel arguing about this as though the investigation were not a bogus one.

Missed some of Schiff because MSNBC went to commercial.

Schiff: You only have to look at Trump's reaction to see how valuable he thought it was. Also, illegal. Points out this started the very day after Mueller ended.

How valuable for President to receive an investigation in support of the President's campaign?

He is so lame it's embarrassing.

What does that mean?

Ya know, argue the law.

I don’t know how he and the others on the WH team live with themselves.

“Why did tRump persist in withholding Ukraine aid when DOD officials were sounding the alarm that the freeze would violate the law and shortchange our ally?