‘History in the making’: Politics junkies get their fix as live impeachment hearings begin

By the time the doors opened for the first public hearing in the House intelligence committee’s impeachment inquiry into president Donald Trump, the line outside the ways and means committee’s hearing room stretched all the way down the hall and around the corner on the first floor of the Longworth House Office Building.

It was a crowd of a size more commonly seen outside the box office of a Star Wars film, but with a queue packed not with rabid fans but with the only-in-Washington mix of press, lobbyists and other visitors from all walks of life, all of whom came to see something that has happened only three times in American history – a congressional committee hearing testimony to help decide whether to impeach and remove the country’s chief executive.

While television crews set up live shot positions at various points along the hall, tourists mingled among the suit-and-tie crowd of DC operators hoping to gain entry into the room.

One of those tourists, 66-year-old Maryanne Meador, flew in from Georgia to visit the nation’s capital, but made her way to the Longworth building in hopes of witnessing acting ambassador to Ukraine William Taylor and deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs George Kent testify.

“This is history in the making. I lived through Watergate, Nixon, and Clinton and I’ve been a political junkie my entire life,” she said.

Ms Meador told The Independent that she was “not a fan” of president Donald Trump, who she called “an embarrassment” to the country.

Standing next to Ms Meador in the line was her friend Susan Malphurs, 57, who’d arranged the pair’s airfare to Washington with frequent flyer miles.

“We were hoping the impeachment hearings would start while we were here, and as luck would turn out, it was,” Ms Malphurs said. “This is history in the making and how this hearing goes is going to affect our government and the nation from here on out.”

The pair were joined by another tourist who’d come to Longworth for the occasion, 45-year-old Chris Rasmussen of Tuscon, Arizona.

“As soon as I found out that this was going on I wanted to participate,” Mr Rasmussen said. “I’m not a fan of the president, but the most important thing is to get facts out one way or the other.”

But not everyone in line was of the same political persuasion.

Self-described “Trump supporters” Marilyn and Ken Lewis said they had come all the way from Tampa, Florida for the hearing to support the president.

“I want to see what happens but I’m here to support the president,” she said. “We don’t feel like there’s enough people supporting him here.”

Asked if any testimony could change her mind, Ms Lewis said it was possible.

“The media puts out a lot of stuff that we don’t know is true, but we’re open-minded people and we want to hear what’s going to be said,” said Ms Lewis, who added that the witnesses’ record of nonpartisan public service – including Mr Taylor’s record of service in Vietnam - wasn’t an indicator that his testimony would be on the level.

“My husband is a veteran, too, but people are people and when it comes to truth, I think they walk the line no matter what their background is,” she said. “Most people have an agenda, but that’s not to say they [witnesses] can’t be truthful.”

When the doors opened at 9.45am, the Lewises were lucky enough to be among the few who were permitted to make their way into the ways and means committee’s ornate hearing room, which served as the House’s meeting place from 1949-1951, when the House chamber underwent renovations.

Joining them were countless journalists from all parts of the country and the world, as well as more than 40 members of congress, each of whom had a seat reserved.

One of them, representative David Cicilline, had already seen both Mr Taylor and Mr Kent testify to a closed deposition in his role as a member of the House foreign affairs committee. But Mr Cicilline told The Independent that he wanted to hear and see them again, as well as bear witness for history.

“I think everybody has a responsibility to watch and listen carefully, and to consider the evidence that’s going to be presented,” said Mr Cicilline, who added that he was mindful of the gravity of Wednesday’s events.

“The oath we take when we’re sworn in is to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. This is a central part of that responsibility,” he said. “Nobody comes to congress with the intention of having to engage in this kind of impeachment inquiry, but when the facts and evidence require it, we have to uphold our oath of office and fulfil our responsibilities.”

Also there to be part of the history-making opening hearing was congresswoman Karen Bass.

“I will be watching some from my office but I at least wanted to begin [in the room]...for a moment of history,” Ms Bass said, adding that she’d already seen both witnesses in her role as a member of the House oversight committee, but she still wanted to see her colleagues on the Intelligence Committee ask questions.

Texas Republican congresswoman Louie Gohmert who was not on any of the committees that conducted the closed-door interviews of Mr Kent and Mr Taylor, said it was important for him to be there as a member of the “grand jury” that could eventually vote on articles of impeachment, but said that he would be “surprised” if a vote actually takes place.

But Mr Gohmert wasn’t pleased with the accommodations afforded to him and his colleagues. He complained that the press was blocking his view of the witnesses, and that he couldn’t see the witnesses faces.

“I’m voting, I’m on the committee of jurisdiction, I should be able to see their faces, but it’s obviously very important to chairman [Adam] Schiff that the media see everything more than those who are going to vote,” he said. “That tells you everything you need to know about this sham hearing.”

Still, Mr Gohmert remained in his (less than ideal) seat when the hearing began just after 10.00am, and stayed for more than six hours of testimony, which included rounds of questions from majority counsel Daniel Goldman, a former NBC legal analyst, and minority counsel Steve Castor.

The testimony offered largely tracked what the witnesses had said in their depositions, except for Mr Taylor’s revolution that he’d overheard Mr Trump on a phone call, talking to ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland about his demand for investigations into former vice president Joe Biden and what is essentially a conspiracy theory which posits that Ukraine – not Russia – interfered in the 2016 election.

While only the 19 members of the House Intelligence Committee participated in the hearing, all who were present appeared to be mindful of Wednesday’s place in history.

Some members, like New Jersey’s Tom Malinowski, ventured to the front of the room to snap a photo on their phones and record the moment for posterity.

And aside from a few point of order and parliamentary inquiries from Republicans, the proceedings avoided the circus atmosphere that some had feared would result from house minority leader Kevin McCarthy’s last-minute decision to swap Ohio Republican Jim Jordan, one of Mr Trump’s most vocal defenders, onto the intelligence committee in exchange for Arkansas’s Rick Crawford.

After the last question had been asked and the witnesses had left the room, intelligence committee chairman Adam Schiff gaveled the hearing to a close, leaving the reporters, tourists, and congresspeople in the audience to ponder what they’d heard. But it’s unclear whether the hearing, the first of many which Mr Schiff will lead over the next few weeks, ended up changing any minds.

For her part, Ms Lewis was dismissive of the testimony offered by Mr Taylor and Mr Kent.

“I think it’s all hearsay and opinions. Everybody has an opinion, everybody has a perspective. I want facts, but I’m not hearing a lot,” she said, adding that she was “looking for a correlation” between the withholding of aid and what Trump had asked for.

“The word investigation, they’re saying Trump was using it as code to look into Biden,” she said.

When it was pointed out to her that the US president had directly mentioned investigating Mr Biden during his July phone call with Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelensky, Ms Lewis responded that “it wasn’t direct”.

“There were also other things he asked [Zelensky] to have him look into. If we’re handing over that much money, I think we have a right to know...where that money is going – is it going to corrupt hands again? Is it going into Biden’s hands? I don’t think [Trump] was out of line to ask for investigations,” she said.