So exactly what are they protesting then?

So, if they're "on the committee" (do you even know which committee?) why are they locked out?

They are constitutional.

Members of the house judiciary committee are not being allowed into the house intelligence committee secret testimony hearings.

England made star chamber style hearings illegal, and this was not the kind of government that the framers envisioned.

They are not secret hearings, but they are closed hearings. Republicans are present and able to ask questions.

Contrast this with the Clinton impeachment hearings - where it was open to all representatives, and Clinton had his own lawyers present to cross examine witnesses.

Yes, these are secret - because the testimony is not known to anyone who isn't allowed in the hearing, nobody is "allowed" to discuss the testimony...but somehow the things they think hurt POTUS magically leak out....every day....like clockwork.

Who are the witnesses, what is their relationship to POTUS, is their information first hand or hearsay, do they have political motivations.... All of these things are probed in cross examination, which is why Schiff doesn't want it public.

In previous impeachment hearings, all members were allowed to be present - because the 22 members of the house intelligence committee represent only 5% of the people of the US. Representatives of 95% of WE THE PEOPLE are locked out of the hearings - and may be expected to vote with no access to that information.

This is also, normally, handled by the house judiciary committee - which seems to have a better grasp on legality than the house intelligence committee.

Everything about this is wrong.

This is the investigative stage. Kenneth Starr was assigned to be the Independent Council and also investigated before public hearings. There is no independent council here, so Congress must investigate. Once this stage is over, there will be public impeachment hearings just like there were for Clinton.

In previous impeachments, there was a house resolution to authorize the investigation, and NOTHING was done in secret/private. With Bill Clinton, everything was done to make the process fair - but in this farce, everything is being done to stack the deck.

In Clinton's case the special prosecutor worked for almost 4 years before the impeachment inquiry was public.

Clinton was being investigated for the Whitewater real estate controversy, which resulted in 15 people being convicted of 40 crimes. Then good ol' Bill decided to commit perjury and hiding documents (obstruction of justice, of which there was actual evidence).

This is an investigation in search of a crime, not investigation based on evidence of a crime. There's a big difference.

oh come on, he lied about sex which seems exactly like searching for a crime not based on the investigation into real-estate.

if you take Clinton's obstruction of justice seriously (I do), then you should also take the 10 potential cases of obstruction of justice that Mueller listed in his report seriously. Since Mueller was not an independent council like Kenneth Starr he left it up to Congress to decide what to do.

And in the case of Trump, he handed us the evidence in the form of the transcript to the call. Unlike in the case of Clinton, if he is impeached it will be for the crime he is being investigated for and not for something different.

You left out "to a federal judge while under oath". There is an actual name for that crime, and doing it pisses judges off.