What Went Down On Day 1 Of The Impeachment Hearings

This from Nunes could be key to defense of Trump: “Some government officials opposed President Trump’s approach to Ukraine, but many had no idea what concerned him.” I’ve been texting with a former Trump aide who made a similar point — that if this becomes a disagreement about foreign policy, that’s a win for the Trump side.

Yeah, Amelia, it’s sorta sad that that is the GOP’s best option politically, as (again) we’re talking conspiracy theories. But still, do I think the GOP can convince 40 percent of voters that “maybe Ukraine interfered”? Yes, I do. And that’s probably enough to mean that acquittal will remain certain in the Senate. (Though it’s likely not enough to win re-election?)

In his opening statement, Nunes isn’t just attacking the process. He’s also contending that Trump had good reasons to be worried about Ukraine having interfered with the 2016 election. And as Micah said, I think that’s probably a smart move, given Republicans’ limited options. He’s delving pretty far into some unproven conspiracy theories, which isn’t great, but strategically it’s probably better than doubling down on “no quid pro quo,” which seems like an increasingly indefensible position.