What witnesses hear and see ARE admissible in every court. Most of the testimony presented at the hearings was information personally observed or heard in person. A few of them, such as Taylor's comment that "An aide came to me to tell me that he heard the President on a phone call with Sondland," etc. was indeed hearsay. The remedy for hearsay is to call to the stand the person who actually listened to the call. SO, David Holmes, the aide who DID hear the call firsthand, was called, and HE testified. Lt. Col. Vindman testified to what he hear firsthand as he listened to the call live with Presidents Trump and Zelensky. Etc., etc.
AND let's be clear... if the Republicans and YOU are concerned about this... BRING IN THE FIRST HAND WITNESSES TO TESTIFY ON YOUR BEHALF! LET'S HEAR FROM GIULIANI, BOLTON, MULVANEY, AND THE OTHERS WHO ARE BEING BLOCKED FROM TESTIFYING BY THE PRESIDENT. OF COURSE, TRUMP HIMSELF COULD SHOW UP AND TESTIFY. (But he would cut off a testicle before he sat before the committee for open questioning.)
Of course, Wake, what YOU are failing to realize here is this: the impeachment hearings are NOT courts, and the testimony of the witnesses are not subject to the same rules of evidence as a courtroom. They are "witness statements." The actual TRIAL phase of the President would occur in the Senate, NOT in the House.
I'm sure you were equally as irritated as I was when questioners trotted out long personal opinion statements, asserted "facts" not in evidence, and then ended up asking the witness for an OPINION. Any lawyer with a brain would have objected in court: "Objection! Calls for a conclusion by the witness!" "Objection! Counsel is testifying; is there a question in there somewhere?" "Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence!" "Objection! No foundation for this line of questions." "Objection! Irrelevant and immaterial." "Objection! Counsel is presenting a closing argument, not asking questions." I found the process unwieldy because of so many irritating departures from the more streamlined approach I would have preferred.
However, that's the allowable process in the House Impeachment Hearings. If you will recall, Linda Tripp's testimony was 100% hearsay, yet it was embraced by Republicans ... and was allowable due to the "rules of the road" of the impeachment hearings.
If you're tempted to spew such uninformed garbage in the future, Wake, my suggestion is that you do your homework before typing. As the old saying goes, "It is better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt."
Have a good weekend...