Vindman explains ‘stray voltage.’

In Colonel Vindman’s testimony, he was asked if Mr. Bolton had any advance concerns about the July 25 call between Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky. The exchange that followed introduced a term that seemed particularly Trumpian:

Vindman transcript, Page 46: “Certainly after the July 10 meeting, there was some concerns that, you know, there could be some stray voltage in these calls, so, yes. Q Sorry, what did you say? A Stray voltage. Q What does that mean? A It means things that had — it’s a term of art where, you know, things that had nothing to do with, you know, the substance at hand could somehow be brought into the discussion. So, yes, I think there were some concerns.”

— Danny Hakim

Security officials drafted a flurry of memos trying to lift the hold on aid to Ukraine.

Vindman transcript, Page 180: “Basically we were trying to get to the bottom of why this hold was in place, why OMB was applying this hold. There were multiple memos that were transmitted from my directorate to Ambassador Bolton on, you know, keeping him abreast of this particular development.”

After learning in mid-July that military aid to Ukraine had been abruptly frozen, Colonel Vindman told investigators that members of the National Security Council sent a series of memos to Mr. Bolton seeking to understand what they considered an “abnormal” process that led to the flow of aid being stopped.

Days later, Colonel Vindman drafted a “presidential decision memorandum” for Mr. Bolton to present to President Trump. The memo discussed the importance of the aid for Ukraine and recommended that Mr. Trump release the hold. Colonel Vindman testified that he was told the memo came up at a meeting with the president, but that he took no immediate action.

— Michael D. Shear

Ukrainians were aware of what Mr. Trump meant by ‘do us a favor.’

Vindman transcript, Page 228: “It was a demand that the Ukrainians deliver these investigations in order to get what they have been looking for which is the presidential meeting.”

Colonel Vindman told impeachment investigators that there was little ambiguity about what Mr. Trump was conveying on the July 25 call with Ukraine’s president when he asked for a “favor.” Mr. Trump and his allies have defended the call as “perfect” and have regularly pointed to the reconstructed transcript as evidence. Colonel Vindman also told investigators that specific words in the transcript were deliberately omitted from the version shared with the public.

— Eileen Sullivan

Hill said she was the subject of right-wing smears and death threats.

Hill transcript, Page 41: “I had had accusations similar to this being made against me as well. My entire first year of my tenure at the National Security Council was filled with hateful calls, conspiracy theories, which has started again, frankly, as it’s been announced that I’ve been giving this deposition, accusing me of being a Soros mole in the White House, of colluding with all kinds of enemies of the president, and, you know, of various improprieties.”

Ms. Hill, a longtime Russia expert and hawk, said that from the moment she started working on Mr. Trump’s National Security Council in 2017, she was subject to the same kind of “mishmash of conspiracy theories” that targeted Ms. Yovanovitch. At points, she received death threats and calls to her home.

Among other things, she was called an ally of George Soros, the liberal billionaire philanthropist whose work to promote democracy in Europe and the United States had made him reviled by some on the right, Ms. Hill testified. At one point, the lobbyist and former congressman Connie Mack IV went to Vice President Mike Pence’s staff and “asked for me being removed,” calling her a “Soros mole in the White House” and providing an article from the conspiracy theory website Infowars. (That description dovetails with this May 2017 article, which cited Roger Stone, the former Trump adviser who is now on trial.)

One question raised by this is, who was targeting her and why? Ms. Hill said it was clear to her that Mr. Giuliani and other Americans and Ukrainians working with him on business dealings were behind the smears on Ms. Yovanovitch. But she speculates that there were other, larger interests that were threatened by American officials advocating anticorruption and a tough stance against Russia.

— Nicholas Fandos and Charlie Savage