I very much enjoyed Dr Hill's testimony. She pretty much destroyed the Republican defences without ever getting into any kind of partisanship. Sondland was more about telling the truth to save his ass but did still produce some pretty damning testimony.
Trump should be toast but the Republicans probably love power more than the truth, so who knows?
Now whilst I will fully admit I was bored to the point I could not be bothered watching Dr Hill or that other dude. Seriously it had been a nothing burger to that point, I can't see how the Democrats up to that point makes a solid case.
If you take away the:
"I do not like Trump's ideas of foreign policy" or
"I do not like the fact that though he was allowed to get rid of Ambassadors, he got rid of Marie whatshername as am Ambassador and said bad things of her" or
"He did not say he wanted quid pro quo or anything and we do not really understand but we inferred/guessed/believed/thought/presumed/speculated he did"
You are left with nothing but a general dislike.
NONE of that is impeachable. NONE of it.
The alleged victim was not victimised. Nothing was said. They got aid without conditions placed on it. It was held up in addition to aid from many other countries. The US is NOT obliged to give aid. Obama campaign did not give aid even though they were supposedly just as important allies back then and they were being invaded by Russia (and it was his right not to then), There was no pressure or understanding by Ukraine that there was any pressure or coercion, Ukraine President ran on a platform of corruption eradication and they have a Clinton era treaty to allow them to address mutually beneficial investigations such as the things he asked to investigate, there is a real argument as to whether or not there is corruption through Burisma Holdings and Hunter Biden was on that board and Hunter is Joe Biden's son, There is a benefit to both countries to ferret out and investigate such corruption IRRESPECTIVE of whether it benefits either or both President's personally.
There is no extortion, bribery or anything to suggest high crimes or misdemeanors
You can try to make a case but UNLESS and ONLY if it can contradict these and in a way that is born out of something MORE than feelings, speculation or thought crime, will it be something I will entertain.
