...then why are they trying to call witnesses to justify the quid pro quo? That is the point of calling Hunter Biden, right? To show that there was sufficient national interest in the quid pro quo. Otherwise Hunter Biden's testimony is irrelevant. If there was no quid pro quo, then we don't need to know whether it was justified. Basically, republicans are calling Hunter Biden to testify because they are desperately searching for a distraction. The same is true of the whistleblower. It is readily admitted that the whistleblower wasn't on the infamous Ukraine call. He learned everything second hand. So what new information do republicans think he has that will clear Trump's name? The answer: none. The fact of the matter is that the whistleblower didn't know all of the facts--nor what he required to know all of the facts when disclosing his concerns to the inspector general. In his letter, the whistleblower admitted that his knowledge was largely second-hand, but that what he had heard warranted an investigation. Republicans, in their desperation for a distraction, plan to seize on this. Basically, they want to ask the whistleblower "did you have first-hand knowledge of the events described in your letter." Obviously the whistleblower will say "no," as stated plainly in his letter. But then the republicans will scream from the hilltop "HUR DER HOW CAN TRUMP BE GUILTY IF THE WHISTLEBLOWER DIDN'T KNOW HUR DER HUR?!?!" To which everyone with an IQ above 40 will respond "because all of the evidence in the record points to quid pro quo." But by that time it won't matter because the GOP tribe just needs one fact--however irrelevant--to totally write off the impeachment inquiry.