The second day of the question-and-answer session in President Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial was held Thursday. Here is a recap.

Please note: there is a numbering error that sets in after Question #155.

91st question (I had numbers wrong after 65 yesterday) from @PattyMurray to House: elaborate on sole power of impeachment despite WH contesting validity of subpoenas.@RepZoeLofgren: These were

valid subpoenas re House rules. WH argument has bad consequences.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

It's somewhat rich for @RepZoeLofgren to cite the House rules as authority for subpoenas when @JerryNadler completely disregarded those same rules when Democrats denied Republicans a day of minority witnesses in House Judiciary Committee: https://t.co/oA8tenI5dX #ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/1GJgvKmzJg — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

.@RepZoeLofgren argues that because H. Res 660 told the committees to "continue" their investigations, the subpoenas offered before authorization for impeachment inquiry were valid. WH argues that House failed to retroactively authorize the subpoenas in the text of the resolution https://t.co/1GJgvKmzJg — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

92nd question — HERE WE GO. @SenRandPaul submits question with name of whistleblower … stay tuned … (1/3)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

"The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted." (2/3)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Expect this to be a major point of contention among Republicans. Why can't the name ERIC CIARAMELLA be read in the Senate, if we want all the facts? #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

93rd question, from @SenatorBaldwin to House: since WH could not say WHEN precisely Trump ordered aid paused, what witnesses would help?@RepJasonCrow reads a list of witnesses and claims … but it's clear they want Bolton and Mulvaney.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

94th question, from @SenToomey et al. to WH: how much weight should Senate give to fact that removal would undo democratic election and kick president off ballot in #2020? Sekulow: You're right, this is taking the vote away from the American people.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

95th question, from @SenatorTester to House , misquotes Dershowitz as saying that ANY presidential action he believes is in the public interest is not impeachable.@RepAdamSchiff: You're right, WH believes it "doesn't matter how corrupt that quid pro quo is."

#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

FALSE. Dershowitz said that "quid pro quo" impeachable if the "quo" is ILLEGAL (or crime-like).@RepAdamSchiff says WH argument is what you say when your client is "guilty and dead to rights. that is an argument made of desperation." [He's the desperate one]#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/g2rSt9zSbZ — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

96th question from @SenKevinCramer et al. to WH asking to respond to Schiff's claim that an innocent defendant would waive his rights. Philbin: Democrats' argument is "striking and shocking … contrary to the very spirit of our American justice system."#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

97th question, from @SenDougJones to House: cite rules authorizing subpoenas (this already happened?) and list subpoenas after H. Res. 660 passed.@RepAdamSchiff: reads a few names. Repeats that WH argument means president can defy congressional investigation.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

98th question from @SenTedCruz et al. to both: @RepValDemings refused to answer if Biden sought ethics advice about Burisma. Media show @JoeBiden and Hunter stories conflict. Did House ask either one that question? Pam Bondi: Biden was Ukraine point man (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

@RepValDemings: I don't know what @JoeBiden and Hunter Biden discussed. But that's not why we're here. [The question, and answer, sets up Republicans to call the Bidens as witnesses.]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Another brilliant question from @SenTedCruz, who has forced the Democrats to admit they don't know what the Bidens discussed. This sets up a reason for Republicans to call the Bidens as witnesses if witnesses are called by the Senate #ImpeachmentTrial for any reason. https://t.co/SSSFmh72Wf — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

99th question, from @SenJackyRosen to House: what precedent do Trump's actions set for future presidents?@RepJasonCrow: Bad! Then plays deceptively-edited video of Trump talking about Russia finding Hillary's emails in July 2016.#impeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

100th question, from @senrobportman et al. to WH: Dems keep quoting Turley, but didn't he oppose this impeachment and say "abuse of power" is hard to prove without accompanying crime? Philbin: Exactly right. And no precedent ever impeached without a crime.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

101st question, from @SenSherrodBrown to House, tries to call out Philbin's answer the day before about foreign information in a campaign. (@ChrisCoons NEVER specified from a foreign GOVERNMENT.)@RepJeffries: Terrible message to autocrats, invite interference#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Here's the question and answer Democrats are referring to.https://t.co/sgHhOHT8Qk@RepJeffries is misquoting the question, which was about LEGAL violation for receiving ANY foreign info — like the Dems did with the Steele dossier Philbin's answer was 100%.#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/hetB0jVxF2 — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

102nd question, from @HawleyMO to WH: court have held not unlawful for public officials to condition official acts? Philbin: There's not even proof of a quid pro quo. But foreign policy [as Democrats admitted] is all about conditioning one thing for another.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

103rd question, from @SenatorCantwell to House: were Mulvaney, Barr, Pompeo etc. involved in "scheme"?@RepValDemings: Cites an email, bunch of other stuff, Sondland. Argument for more witnesses.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

104th question, from @SenJohnThune et al. to WH: @SpeakerPelosi said impeachment must be bipartisan. Hamilton also warned against partisan impeachment in House. Cipollone: "Absolutely you should take that into account. That's dispositive. That should end it."#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

105th question, from @SenJackReed to both: who pays Giuliani's fees and expenses?@RepAdamSchiff: I don't know, but Giuliani is "open for business"! Sekulow: @JoeBiden was "open for business" in Ukraine!

Cites Dems' letter to Ukraine demanding help w/Mueller#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

106th question from @SenatorLankford et al. to WH: were there any consequences for most U.S./Ukraine past aid being delivered in September? Philbin: No danger to U.S. or Ukraine national security because funds were obligated in September. As in 2019. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

107th question, from @maziehirono to House, cited Mulvaney — any precedent for such "quid pro quo"? — and uses the word "bribe." [Again. Not alleged.]@RepAdamSchiff: says WH is arguing opposite on obstruction in court today, says aid improperly held. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

I wouldn't take @RepAdamSchiff's version of WH court argument at face value. It's possible WH said (as it has before) that you need impeachment inquiry to demand certain kinds of information. That is different than saying House must impeach to enforce subpoenas#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

108th question from @JohnBoozman et al. to both: would acquitting prevent voters from making informed decision in #2020 Cipollone: That's who should decide. Replies to @RepAdamSchiff: says Dems told court after articles passed they're "still impeaching" (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

109th question, from @TimKaine to House: what precedent would it set if Trump is acquitted of obstruction?@RepAdamSchiff [sounding upset]: Parade of horribles. Impeachment is the tool of enforcement. [Does not explain why they didn't try courts.]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

110th question, from @SenRickScott et al., for WH: if House Dems were so confident in overwhelming, why were WH and GOP denied rights/process that Democrats had in Clinton impeachment? Cipollone: Dunno. They violated all. They're not confident of facts. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Cipollone adds Schiff doesn't want witnesses that the president wants. He adds: he went to @RepAdamSchiff at start of process and offered cooperation in oversight. But we also have obligation to Constitution to stand for rights of executive. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

111th question, from @RonWyden to House: did Trump abuse power by "outsourcing" investigation to Ukraine? [Trump never asked Ukraine about using intelligence investigations.]@RepAdamSchiff: You betcha! He'll do it again! #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

.@RepAdamSchiff keeps calling Trump's theory about CrowdStrike "Russian propaganda." It probably wasn't — plenty of Americans thought similar things independently — but if the president had a good faith belief that was wrong … so WHAT? Not impeachable. #ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/KDiIHU9sHy — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

112th question, from @SenatorBraun et al. to WH: respond to House claim [earlier] US must be "saved" from this president? Herschmann: Trump's approval all-time high! "American people are the happiest they've been with the direction of the country in 15 years."#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

113th question, from @SenatorBennet et al. to House: consequences if Senate accepts president's assertions of privilege? Are president's advisers subject to same protections as whistleblower [none, btw]? [Two straw men.]@JerryNadler: Privileges are limited.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

.@JerryNadler: The consequence of acquitting @realDonaldTrump for obstruction would be "Total dictatorship"! "The motives are clearly dictatorial." LOL#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/MDLZTJmIRz — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

114th question, from @senatorperdue et al.: describe procedural violations and Schiff leaks. Do they make evidence "fruit of the poisonous tree"? Philbin: Y. "This entire proceeding here is now the fruit of a poisonous tree." House not engaging legal arguments#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

115th question, from @SenDuckworth, for House: Is there documentary evidence of investigation into Ukraine corruption during aid hold?@RepJasonCrow: There was no reason for Ukraine hold, and we can't get that evidence from the administration. That's the point#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

116th question from @SenatorCollins et al. to both: are there circumstances in which president could investigate political rival not already under investigation?@RepAdamSchiff: "Hard for me to contemplate circumstances were that would be appropriate." (1/3)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Here's @RepAdamSchiff arguing in the @washingtonpost last year that the Obama administration's investigation (later found to have lied to FISA court) of then-candidate Trump was necessary: https://t.co/QK6uYgXZap (2/3)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Philbin: Trump asked about a situation in which @JoeBiden fired a prosecutor. Regardless, yes! — a situation could arise. It would be in our national interest to have info about bad overseas conduct by candidate, even non-criminal. (3/3)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

117th question, by @ChuckSchumer, to both: repeats question from yesterday about whether a single document/witness was handed over Philbin: [No.] All subpoenas invalid.@RepAdamSchiff: No, so impeach. [For 2 answers in a row, Schiff has mentioned "bribery"]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

118th question, from R (missed who) to WH: how many witnesses/documents have we seen? Philbin: 17 witnesses in House, 12 public, 192 clips from 13 witnesses, 28578 pages of documents.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

119th question, from @SenatorSinema et al. to WH: doesn't Logan Act bar private citizens from diplomacy [implication is Giuliani] Philbin: Ukrainians wanted to talk to Giuliani, saw him as conduit. Many presidents rely on close confidants for diplomacy. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

120th question, from @SenJohnKennedy to both (I'm 35 min. behind): should POTUS be impeached for investigating possible rival, if he does so objectively in the national interest, if majority of House believes otherwise?@JerryNadler: Not the case here. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Philbin: No, president should not be impeached. House managers themselves have recognized this: they themselves said NO legitimate basis for investigations. "No scintilla" etc. [They fail their own test.] That leaves them with guessing motives; pointless (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

.@RepAdamSchiff's response to the question about why there is a different, lower standard for investigating Trump vs. Biden is a complete dodge. He tries to answer question that wasn't asked about the FISA process, says it's distraction from Trump misconduct.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

121st question, from @SenatorDurbin to House: respond to WH on Sinema question about Logan Act?@RepAdamSchiff: "Breathtaking admission" [not] by Philbin – Giuliani not conducting policy! #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

122nd question, from @lisamurkowski et al. to both: Aren't all actions by politicians inherently political? Where's the line between permissible/impeachable? Philbin: Exactly. Difficult to determine motives. This came up in ratifying debates. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

.@RepAdamSchiff: Dodges — Says line is between corrupt activity and not. (Plays selective video of Dershowitz that omits where Dershowitz says POTUS can be impeached for crime-like "quo.") [Schiff can't quote anyone without misquoting them, it seems.] (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

123rd question, by @SenatorMenendez, to House: claims Trump has called for foreign interference in our elections [blatant lie].@RepJasonCrow: Picking up on false premise, tries to debunk idea Ukraine interfered.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

124th question, from @SenRonJohnson et al. to both: w/out mentioning whistleblower, asks about Schiff hiring NSC staffer Misko (story in @RCInvestigates by @paulsperry_)@RepAdamSchiff: [Angry] Accuses of trying to out whistleblower. Claims not to know. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

(2/2) Sekulow: @RepAdamSchiff once said whistleblower should testify. Law protects only against retribution. Name might not be relevant, but process of complaint is relevant especially when Schiff lied about it. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

125th question, from @PattyMurray to House: if no consequences to defying subpoena, how can Congress do oversight?@RepSylviaGarcia: "Devastating, dire consequences. … end of congressional oversight as we know it today."#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

126th question, from @SenDanSullivan for WH: how can Senate be accused of "cover up" if Senate makes decision based on House "overwhelming" evidence? Philbin: Exactly.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

Philbin then took on the idea that Ukranian interference in the 2016 election was a "conspiracy theory," and walked through the evidence from Democrats' own witnesses. Points out BOTH Russia and Ukraine interfered, in different ways, and for different reasons. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 30, 2020

127th question, from @SenatorLeahy, for House: MISQUOTES Dershowitz on quid pro quo; what would stop a president from extorting a U.S. city?@RepJeffries: Trump solicited dirt. He could do what hypothetical suggests. Senate can't let him escape accountability.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

128th question, from @SenBillCassidy et al. for both: @RepZoeLofgren once said impeachment was wrong to voters & bad precedent; what now? Cipollone: I agree with Lofgren. They falsely accuse president of cheating but want to remove him from the ballot. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Cipollone then replies to Schiff on staff, says questions on whistleblower are legitimate and he should stop accusing others of bad motives.@RepZoeLofgren past impeachments different; Clinton's crime was not misuse of POTUS power. Nixon & Trump did so. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

129th question, from @Sen_JoeManchin et al. to both: ever had a trial with no witnesses?@RepValDemings: We need witnesses! Wouldn’t it be nice? Philbin: House denied Republican witnesses, and I’ve never been part of trial when prosecution wasn’t ready.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

130th question, from @SenMikeLee et al., for WH

Wouldn’t past presidents be impeached for their actions, under Dems’ standard? Philbin: Under their standard, every president subject to impeachment for everything. Also: hold them to the articles. No crimes. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

131st question, from @SenStabenow to both: past FEC chair said illegal to receive anything of value from foreign national in election. Philbin: DOJ rejected claim investigation is a “thing of value.”@RepAdamSchiff: Wikileaks valuable for Trump. [Back to Russia.] #Impeachment — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

132nd question, from @LindseyGrahamSC et al. to both: low predicate for FBI investigating Trump — why higher for Biden?@RepAdamSchiff: Dodges, defends FISA. Sekulow: FBI misconduct serious. Clear double standard.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

133rd question, from @SenatorDurbin to both: why did Trump keep withholding Ukraine aid when DOD complained? Philbin: No harm, and some aid unspent each year carries over.@RepJasonCrow: No witnesses could explain.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

134th question, from @SenJohnBarrasso et al. to WH: can POTUS personally address corruption with foreign leader if he believes the U.S. process has been unsuccessful? [Great question.] Philbin: Yes, POTUS has entirety of executive power under Article II.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

135th question, from @ewarren to House: is Chief Justice undermined by this process when GOP rejects witnesses? [That'll swing those moderate Republicans!]@RepAdamSchiff: No. Trial without witnesses reflects badly on "us" (Senate) [No witnesses in House LOL]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

136th question, from @SenShelby to WH: House alleging bribery, would Supreme Court agree under McDonnell? Philbin: No. No bribery/extortion in articles. Plus, SC said a mere meeting w/government officials is not "bribery."#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Philbin adds that the reason the subpoenas were rejected is tthey were issued under House's oversight (legislative) authority, not impeachment (investigative) authority. The WH seems to know House rules better than House Dems do. No damage to future oversight.#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/2JMSZAbUaS — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

137th question, from @MarkWarner et al. MISQUOTES Philbin and asks if acceptable to receive intel from Russia/China to interfere.@RepAdamSchiff: Yes [goes on to misquote Dershowitz]#Impeachment Trial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

138th question, from @JimInhofe et al. for WH: will Dems accept acquittal as "fair trail"? Sekulow: No. And has to end sometime. Notes @JerryNadler had unequal ratio of witnesses. Poisonous tree gets worse.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

.@RepAdamSchiff keeps saying the Bidens are irrelevant, victims of “baseless smears.” But he and the House managers brought up the Bidens in their opening. They also claimed “no scintilla” of evidence Trump had legit purpose. Bidens are relevant to disprove that #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

139th question, from @SenatorCarper et al. to House: how does Trump's hold on aid differ from U.S. using aid to achieve foreign policy?@RepJasonCrow: Witnesses said no reason. [Ignores David Hale, who said same happened with Lebanon]#ImpeachmentTrials — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

141st question, from @SenatorBaldwin to both: can you assure Jennifer Williams docs were not classified for bad reason? Philbin: Proper. Referred to another classified document at the time (transcript).@RepAdamSchiff: Read for yourself, ask whether legit.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

142nd question, from @SenAlexander et al. to House: compare bipartisanship in recent proceedings. Any bipartisanship in House?@RepZoeLofgren: Talks about Republicans crossing over against Nixon. I believed Republicans would against Trump. Now's your chance!#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

143rd question, from @chuckschumer to House: reassure us witnesses/documents can be done quickly?@RepAdamSchiff: Sure. More docs already collected. Proposes 1-week deposition for witnesses.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

144th question, from @senatemajldr to WH: respond on bipartisanship and anything House said previously. Philbin: Notes lack of bipartisanship in Trump case, contrast to previous impeachments. Addresses distortions of his previous remarks on foreign information#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

145th question, from @ChuckGrassley to WH: Does partisan nature of House vote reflect dubious nature of charges? Philbin: Yes, echoing back to our founding. Most divisive sort of impeachment that could be brought.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

146th question, from @ChrisVanHollen to both: can Chief Justice make rulings on relevance of documents and witnesses? Sekulow: Constitutionally wrong.@RepAdamSchiff: Constitution allows! And if innocent, call our witnesses! Theirs are just for intimidation#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

147th question, from @SenThomTillis et al. to House: did Kerry/Biden agree with Heinz that Hunter working for Burisma unacceptable?@RepAdamSchiff: Baseless smear! #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

148th question, from @Wyden et al. to House: Trump has private businesses abroad. Does he put personal interests first? [Attempt to shoehorn the Emoluments Clause into impeachment]@RepJeffries: Repeats lie about Trump not caring about corruption before 2019.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

149th question, from @SenatorCollins, et al. to House: Why did House withdraw Kupperman subpoena?@RepAdamSchiff: Witness does not have standing to challenge, should have gone with McGahn. Would have taken too long.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

150th question, from @maziehirono to House: talk about what happens to whistleblowers who suffered retaliation? [Claims Trump bullied witnesses]@RepAdamSchiff: Can’t name examples, but must protect whistleblowers.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

151st question, from @RoyBlunt et al., to WH: What is POTUS responsibility to safeguard taxpayer dollars in foreign aid from corruption? Cipollone: Important presidential responsibility, for foreign aid or anywhere.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

152nd question, from @SenAngusKing: OK for POTUS to inform Israeli PM he would withhold aid unless came to U.S. to accuse opponent of antisemitism during election? Philbin: Nothing to do with this case. Most extreme hypothetical, misinterpreting Dershowitz.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

153rd question, from @LisaMurkowksi to WH: Bolton book report suggests we should call him as witness? [leaning in that direction] Philbin: House chose not to call Bolton. You would set precedent for abuse of process in House, burden in Senate.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

154th question, from @BrianSchatz for both: can WH really not say @SenAngusKing hypothetical would be wrong?@RepAdamSchiff: Wrong, and natural extension of Dershowitz argument. Philbin: Wrong, but not applicable this case. #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

155th question, from @SenJohnKennedy to WH: Has House investigated Shokin statement that Biden forced him out over Burisma? Philbin: No, to the best of my knowledge. Never been “debunked,” as Dems say. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Philbin adds that the reason Bidens/Burisma came up in July 2019 was 1) Giuliani investigated in Ukraine in 2018 as part of defense vs. Mueller 2) Media reports in July 2019. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

166th question, from @SenGaryPeters for both: how would verdict alter balance of power between branches? Cipollone: Would improve it. Schiff request for witnesses would put constitutional issues at risk.@RepAdamSchiff: Acquittal eviscerates oversight power.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

At this point, I skipped 10 numbers. The next should have been 156.

166th question, from @SenGaryPeters for both: how would verdict alter balance of power between branches? Cipollone: Would improve it. Schiff request for witnesses would put constitutional issues at risk.@RepAdamSchiff: Acquittal eviscerates oversight power.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

167th question, from @MarcoRubio to both: is your case that president guilty for defying advisers on Article 1, guilty for following advisers on Article 2?@RepAdamSchiff: No…goes on to claim Trump tried to commit obstruction in Mueller investigation. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Cipollone: If president was forced to give House everything, that would damage separatino of powers. Articles of Impeachment: no crime, no violation of law, purely partisan. Mocks Schiff for offer of one week to grapple with novel constitutional issues (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

You can feel the love between Schiff and Cipollone … LOL #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

168th question, from @Sen_JoeManchin et al. to WH: why not slow down, wait for McGahn case? Philbin: Not same as obstruction issue here. McGahn involves WH counsel. it will go to SC. Need swift trial; Hamilton warning. That's why House has to come ready (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

.@RepAdamSchiff: quotes the district court [so what?] in McGahn decision. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

169th question, from @SenatorTimScott to WH: Benghazi report said Obama did not cooperate w/2-year investigation; House impeached Trump after 3 mos. Double standard? Sekulow: Calls out Schiff on "district court." Then: Benghazi like Fast & Furious (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

LOL – Sekulow: You want negotiation? Here's my proposal. Let's just go to closing arguments and a final vote. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

170th question, from @SenSherrodBrown et al. to House: if acquitted, won't Trump continue to side with PUTIN? [Drink!]@RepJasonCrow: Call Bolton! [Drink]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Misleading statement (surprise!) just now from @RepJasonCrow: "Nobody on this team has ever said that it can only be Russia." The House Judiciary Committee report repeatedly accused Trump of believing "Ukraine–RATHER THAN RUSSIA–interfered" in 2016.https://t.co/FHBjsdzZR0 https://t.co/KbwjbEjNyf — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

171st question, from @SenJohnHoeven to WH: doesn't House claim of "overwhelming" case contradict request for more witnesses? Philbin: Yes. Responds to @RepAdamSchiff claiming if you mention Ukraine, you're a pawn of Putin. [Reads Fiona Hill on Ukraine.] (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Philbin then calls out Schiff for mischaracterizing DOJ position in court, reads statement from DOJ. [As suspected, Schiff misquoting.] Stresses again: position of Trump admin, like Obama, is to resist court jurisdiction for subpoenas in *oversight*. (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Schiff is exposing his own legal ignorance (or dishonesty) by continuing to make claims comparing the different postures of White House counsel in different situations with different issues at stake. As if the Senate didn't just hear Philbin & the DOJ statement#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

173rd question, from @SenJoniErnst et al., to WH: Have you been given ICIG testimony? Philbin: No. We don't need more documents/witnesses, but if we do, ICIG relevant.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

174th question, from @SenDougJones et al, to House: should House have negotiated with WH after H. Res 660, and what duty does Senate owe to public to make facts known in THIS trial?@RepAdamSchiff: There was no point to negotiation because of their refusal.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Just to put @RepAdamSchiff's "one week for witness depositions" proposal in perspective. Events next week: – Sunday: Super Bowl

– Monday: Iowa caucus

– Tuesday: SOTU

– Friday: NH Debate etc. Maybe he'll convince some Democrats to vote against witnesses, LOL #ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

175th question, from @MarshaBlackburn

What was date of 1st contact with House Intel and whistleblower? How many times have they communicated since? Philbin: We don't know. They won't tell us. We don't need witnesses, but if any, all of this is relevant. (1/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

176th question, from @SenJackyRosen to House: didn’t he say Trump say stalemate over aid until investigations announced? Isn't that a quid pro quo?@RepAdamSchiff: "The short answer is yes, that's exactly what a quid pro quo is.” Appears to MISSTATE TESTIMONY#impeachmentTrial pic.twitter.com/5Jo61FbPLg — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Note what @RepAdamSchiff seems to do here: he dodges answering the question about the accuracy of the quote, and instead answers the question as if they are asking only about the definition of a quid pro quo.#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/kgYUeNhJ2m — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

177th question, from @JerryMoran, et al., to WH: Aren't there less drastic methods than impeachment to address conflict between branches? Philbin: Yes. Outlines several, notes House did not even try incremental steps.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

178th question, from @SenMarkey, to House: mentions Russian hacking, asks what recourse for impeachment under "Dershowitz standard"? [MISSTATES STANDARD as requiring statutory offense]@RepAdamSchiff: [Hypothetical in which Trump asks Russia to hack Burisma]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

The entirety of Democrats' case depends on MISQUOTES. – Ukraine call misquoted, both by whistleblower and @RepAdamSchiff – House Judiciary Committee misquotes @realDonaldTrump on Article II power – House managers misquote @AlanDersh argument in Senate trial#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

179th question, from @LindseyGrahamSC

et al., to WH: Assume Bolton testifies in light favorable to Dems. Isn't it true there's no impeachable offense, so his testimony adds nothing? Philbin: First (corrects Schiff) no quid pro quo. Second, yes, not impeachable#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

180th question, from @SenatorDurbin, to House: respond to WH's last answer.@RepAdamSchiff: [sounds like closing argument] We all know what happened [right to the end, Schiff keeps claiming there is no disagreement on facts]. [Misquotes Dershowitz standard.]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Sekulow calls out @RepAdamSchiff for phony "ask Russians to hack Burisma" hypothetical, likens it to fake version of Ukraine call transcript. Tells Senate that Dems are asking it to vote to waive president's executive privilege. Follow the "Biden rule" (2/2)#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

182nd question, from @SenatorBennet to House: Senate, not WH, determines witnesses? and haven't past Senate trials had witnesses?@RepJeffries: Yes. "All we are asking the Senate to do is to hold a full [sic] & fair [sic] trial." Tries answering Benghazi point#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

183rd question, from @SenatorRomney to both: do you have direct evidence of Trump telling anyone to withhold aid to Ukraine in exchange for investigations into Bidens?@RepAdamSchiff: Sondland [misquote], Mulvaney [disavowed] Purpura: NO. As I said Saturday.#ImpeachmentTrial https://t.co/H3Sf8Qb6rr — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

184th question, from @SenJeffMerkley to House: Doesn't the Dershowitz standard give us imperial president? [Misquotes Dershowitz]@RepAdamSchiff: [Misquotes Sondland account of Trump statement about Zelensky] [Misquotes @realDonaldTrump on Article II powers]#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

185th question, from @SenatorBraun to WH: isn't what Biden did impeachable under the Dershowitz standard, unlike what Trump did? Philbin: CORRECTLY explains Dershowitz, then says Biden could be seen as seeking $$ for family, so YES.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

186th question, from @amyklobuchar to House: anything else to add?@JerryNadler “What we’ve just heard from the president’s counsel is the usual nonsense.” Trial should have witnesses, “as any 10-year-old knows.” Repeats case proved beyond any doubt.#ImpeachmentTrial — Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) January 31, 2020

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.