I found out part of what they didn't want the American public to hear. Stewart: "I would now feel compelled to ask you, Madam Ambassador, as you sit here before us, very simply and directly, do you have any information regarding the president of the United States accepting any bribes?" Yovanovitch: "No." Stewart: "Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?" Yovanovitch: "No." "The Democrats second day impeachment witness, Ambassador Yovanovitch, has no information on any of the relevant questions," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows tweeted. "They have no case. This is not serious." So, she knows nothing about the phone call that President Trump is being tried for. What was she doing there? Note that they have dropped the Quid Pro Quo and are now trying him for bribery and witness intimidation. They took a poll to see which would go over better with the uneducated public and bribery won. By the way, Schiff was supposed to be in charge of the trial. How did he know what the president was posting on Twitter? Was he reading it on his cellphone?
Since this is supposedly an evidentiary hearing and not a sympathy evoking one, that question of what was she doing here was quite valid. Congressman Heck from Washington was ridiculous.
We're getting what we could expect to get since the democrats won majority in the house. None of this would have come up had republicians kept control. I expect the House is going to try to to impeach. The Senate won't go along and will not convict and next November, Trump will be re-elected or chosen again by Electorial College.
Sometime I think we pay too much attention to both the stock market and politics. The market is going to go up and it's going to go down. It doesn't much matter who is president, he too will pass, but through it all, we've still got to get out and make a living. I'm trying hard to follow my own advice now, in my retiorement, during this trying time.
What annoys me is that the news reports are always quick to attribute it to one thing or another, generally a president they either like or dislike, or a policy they agree with or disagree with. The attribution is nothing more than an expression of the media's bias.
If you watch the hearings on C-SPAN there is no reporting or opinion. Only the actual hearings, gavel to gavel. Unfortunately you have to listen to viewer call-ins during the breaks, which to me, is more painful than watching news coverage.
C-SPAN does a very good job of hiding any biases. They even alternate the callers from one party to another.