The Democratic drive to remove President Trump reached a milestone during the House Judiciary Committee's marathon hearing to approve two articles of impeachment. At some moment during that 14-hour session, it became abundantly clear that no one involved in the argument had anything new to say. In the absence of any original evidence or arguments, lawmakers on both sides simply said the same things they've been saying for the past two months, over and over and over.

Republicans complain that the impeachment has been rushed, and it has. But now, with House Democrats racing to a final vote next week, it is actually time to move on. There's nothing new to say, and it is time for it to be said in the Senate.

"It's like the old saying: Everything that can be said has been said, just not everyone has said it," Rep. Doug Collins, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee who led the opposition to the Democratic impeachment drive, told me in a text message.

"If the last three or four hours of the hearing showed us anything," added Republican Rep. Andy Biggs, also on the committee, "it was that, as expansive as the English language is, the explanations for and against impeachment have exhausted even our venerable tongue."

"There weren't going to be — and there haven't been — any bombshells to change anyone's mind," said Republican Rep. Chris Stewart, a member of the Intelligence Committee. "It's much of the same thing, over and over, just told by different people."

"Thursday was Groundhog Day," said Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup, another member of the Intelligence Committee.

Indeed, both Democrats and Republicans knew that, even as they kept arguing. The 116,000-word transcript of the hearing — yes, 116,000 words, longer than many novels — contains reference after reference to the sheer repetition of argument taking place.

"We heard that over and over and over again ... "

"We hear time and time again ... "

"I keep repeating this ... "

A search of the transcript shows that on 28 occasions, one lawmaker or another noted that the committee was hearing the same thing "over and over." Even the condemnations of repetition became repetitious.

Although it went unnoticed in much commentary, committee Republicans made substantive defenses of the president — not just protests about process — throughout the session. The aid to Ukraine was delivered on time. The Ukrainians didn't know about the holdup. The Democrats based much of their case on Ambassador Gordon Sondland, who based much of his testimony on presumption. And so on.

Of course, despite the criticism that Republicans were just crying foul about process, all the substance arguments had been made before too — on multiple occasions.

Now, the full House is set to vote on impeachment articles on Wednesday and send the case to the Senate for trial. Senators will have the opportunity to say the same thing over and over again. And they will surely do so.

By then, impeachment could well become boring — precisely the opposite of the nation-captivating drama Democrats hoped to create.

That is precisely what many Republicans would like to see. And it is a reason Democrats are beginning to argue that the Senate trial must include new witnesses and new testimony.

Remember that House Democrats, under Speaker Nancy Pelosi, had subpoena power, the ability to go to court to enforce subpoenas, and unlimited time and money to press their case. They chose to wrap things up in a hurry. The House Intelligence Committee, which served as the investigative body in this case — remember, there was no special counsel or other neutral factfinder to uncover what happened — interviewed 17 witnesses and called it a day. They questioned a dozen of those witnesses a second time in nationally televised hearings.

They did not question some administration figures who declined to appear and some, like key witness John Bolton, who they did not even subpoena. Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff said going to court to enforce a subpoena — the normal way of doing things — would take too long. Democrats, Schiff said, did not want to play a game of "rope-a-dope" with the White House. So, they did not even try to compel Bolton's testimony.

Now, with an impeachment trial approaching, if Pelosi and her Democratic forces didn't lift a finger to try to force Bolton and others to testify, why should Senate Republicans?

Of course, President Trump and some of his GOP allies have talked about calling witnesses of their own — Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, the whistleblower. But the prevailing mood among many Senate Republicans appears to be against that. Why introduce any new imponderables into the case? Why risk something happening that would extend a trial many Republicans would like to dispense with as quickly as possible? In short, why allow impeachment to become exciting?

Better for the GOP to have a get-it-over-with impeachment.

Besides, there is already a detailed indictment in this impeachment — a 300-page document, "The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report," produced by House Intelligence Committee Democrats after their hurried investigation. It is the Democratic case for removing the president. In the Senate, House Democratic impeachment managers will have the opportunity to present that case, and senators will pass judgment on it.

So in the end, what could happen is that senators will spend a couple of weeks saying the same things over and over and over again, followed by a vote to acquit the president. And the investigation, impeachment, and trial of Trump in the Ukraine affair will be over in record time.

