https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...41888.html
"...Knowing his sentiments, Democrats on the panel had steered clear of Turley, mostly quizzing the three other liberal legal scholars. Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School all agreed that Trump had committed impeachable offenses.
Only Turley dissented. For that reason, he was shut out of the first 45 minutes of questioning except for one yes-or-no question. When Turley tried to elaborate, the Democratic counsel shut him down.
“You're now well rested,” ranking member Doug Collins told the legal scholar when Republicans finally got their turn to ask questions. Was there anything he would like to respond to from the initial round of inquiries that skipped over him?
“It's a challenge to think of anything I was not able to cover in my robust exchange with majority counsel,” Turley quipped. “But I'd like to try.” And then he held forth, explaining why it would be improper to impeach Trump, a president whose actions he didn’t think were particularly proper....
--If Democrats want to charge Trump with obstruction of justice by refusing to comply with subpoenas, they ought to willingly fight him in court, a legal avenue rightly open to the president: “If you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It’s your abuse of power....""