The Impeachment Hearing

Subject: The Impeachment Hearing.

Watching the testimony of two participants in the attempted impeachment hearing of President Trump, US Ambassador to the Ukraine Bill Taylor and George Kent a senior State Department Official were questioned for over 4 hours by both Democrat and Republican Senators as to the veracity of their statements. A deeply polarised American public are being asked to evaluate on what constitutes actions which can prove or otherwise, whether president trump used his executive position to seek the President of Ukraines connivance to smear Joe Biden's, the Democratic Parties front runner in the race to contest the Presidency next year. Biden's son  Hunter had become mixed up with a Chinese Fund Raising Company operating in the Ukraine which is politically questionable, given the sensitivity of Chinese and US relations. 
The question of 'hearsay' and 'interpretation' were the main line of attack from the Republicans whilst the Democrats relied on the testimony  of these two senior American representative in the Ukraine.
One would normally say that a diplomat of the standing of Ambassador Taylor would  be heard and acknowledged as truthful since the diplomatic service, unlike the politicians are supposed to be without bias or rancour. What the Ambassador heard and what was said is usually thought to be the substance of truth or at least as close as a human can get to that elusive paradigm.
Enter into the fray the aggressive, legally trained Republican Senators who tore into the two witnesses like attack dogs disputing the opinion of the diplomats with their own highly prejudiced political opinions. Of course the ferocity and legalistic bent of these men played to the Trump bandwagon, their rapid fire questions, the answers seemingly irrelevant in their quest to exonerate the president, was a prime example of a courtroom trial (which this hearing clearly wasn't) where the prosecution seek to persuade the jury that the witness is untruthful. 

So on the one side the democrats respectfully heard the Ambassadors testimony placing it as a true representation of what had happened whilst the Republicans did all they could to question the events as described. The problem to my mind is it's easier to sow doubt by aggressive language, since the words and the hostile nature of the delivery leaves a far deeper impression on the mind of the listener. 
The theatrics of Republican bile versus the measured reasoning of the Democrat is not in favour these days in a society daily degrading itself with caustic and aggressive tweets (President Trump comes to mind) which seems to be the only method these days of any sort of discourse.
We seem to have returned to the Roman Amphitheatre where the spectacle of hurt and pain is valued over that of companionship and love.