@tommyboy and others with his POV in the media are offering process arguments: the President should be able to question his accusers, there was no vote for an impeachment inquiry, the phone call never should have been listened to in the first place, etc.
None of these arguments, from what I am able to understand as a layman, have any legal legitimacy, though as I have stated in the past the failure of a vote may have an effect on public opinion. But more importantly, none of them touch on the main issue of the phone conversation and whether or not Trump committed an impeachable offense. In fact these arguments seem to be an evasion of that issue because very few Trump defenders want tackle it. The two most common defenses have been Trump did nothing wrong, (I think of this as the “Don’t Noonan Defense”) or Trump did something wrong but it doesn’t rise to the level of an impeachable offense (I think of this as the “Susan Collins Defense”; she hasn’t said this but eventually she will.) In neither case is any explanation offered for making such a determination.
A third defense was offered this morning by the completely disreputable Alan Dershowitz:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/hamilton-wouldnt-impeach-trump/ar-AAIxBpg
I’ll let you read it for yourself but the gist is that it doesn’t matter what Trump did on that phone call because he can do whatever he wants. Dershowitz makes the spurious claim that every President subverts foreign policy to his personal interest; he offers no examples.
No wonder they attack the process; it’s all they really have.