The Lawfare podcast condenses testimony down to the pertinent lines of questioning (takes out the repetitive stuff and the grandstanding). It's a great way to hear a reasonably long form summery of the testimony.
So true. I've posted a few lawfareblog.com links since the impeachment push began. It can get pretty dense, but not prohibitively technical, imho. Wittes in particular is a favorite. For a lot of lawfare's more legally gray/controversial topics, there will be rebuttal pieces, and sometimes it goes back-and-forth a couple times, with four or more pieces giving both sides of an argument. The parent organization, The Brookings Institute, is generally considered nonpartisan. Since early October, there have been zero pieces (that I'm aware of) providing law-based arguments that bolsters Trump in any way. Or really, any piece defending Trump whatsoever. Increasingly, all existing defenses involve omission of facts, at best, but usually outright lying and willful, proud ignorance.