Yovanovitch Testimony
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/04/politics/yovanovitch-house-testimony-ukraine/index.html
McKinleyTestimony
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/04/politics/mckinley-house-testimony-ukraine/index.html

These are actually pretty fast reads and probably only take a couple hours each to get through if you want to read all of it. Basically, we already know what the Democrat strategy for impeachment (show quid pro quo, investigating a political opponent, etc.) The Republican strategy, on the other hand, has been a little bit chaotic. There's been a focus on JUST the transcript, smearing the whistleblower, etc. However, behind closed doors, it'll be interesting to see how GOP staffers handle the questioning.

Posting in an impeachment porn thread

I don't want that to happen. I want people to post quotes from the transcripts, ask questions, etc. I don't think this thread will be very popular, but it will at least allow for some substantial discussion.

The really interesting part will come when Reps finally get the chance to question these witnesses too.

Schiff won’t submit to questioning

.....?

What?

Uh, they already do?

EDIT: pages 61-64, Yovanovitch wanted the State department to issue a statement in support of her b/c she was being attacked by Trump Jr., Giuliani, etc. They wouldn't give it b/c they were worried the President would undermine it via tweet LOL

This post was edited by thundercock on Nov 4 2019 06:21pm

the whistleblower(s) are being questioned in a non-closed door setting?

The beautiful thing about this scandal is the differing narratives on both sides.

For Democrats, it's pretty simple. The president corruptly used his power to pressure the Ukrainians to announce and open investigations into a completely baseless, insane conspiracy theory, and his likely 2020 political opponent, for his personal/political benefit.

For Republicans, the narratives are far and wide. They can't agree on a unified one because there's differing levels of denials of reality. It's a matter of how close to reality they want to get. The smarter ones like Andy McCarthy/Rich Lowry admit there was a quid pro quo, but say it's not impeachable, especially a year out from an election. The batshit insane ones like Glenn Beck try to spin the quid pro quo as justified foreign policy to uproot corruption. And guys like Hannity have to stick by Trump's line that there wasn't a quid pro quo, and focus on process instead.

This post was edited by IceMage on Nov 4 2019 06:33pm

I don't think the whistleblower's testimony is necessary and they probably won't testify in private or publicly. Ultimately, the whistleblower acted on second hand information and doesn't seem to be an important figure in terms of government structure. The report itself was important because it allowed Congress to find the necessary people involved i.e. Taylor, Vindman, Sondland, etc.