And an impeachment hearing doesn't give more power to subpoena witnesses. The House's subpoena power is the same regardless the proceeding. It is thought that courts might be more willing to expedite a request to enforce a subpoena in an impeachment inquiry, but that's not necessarily the case.
Here's a little "primer" I posted a few months ago that you might find helpful.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212150822
Let's define our impeachment terminology
Impeachment = a vote by a simple majority of the House of Representatives agreeing there are sufficient grounds to determine that a federal officer's actions warrant trial and removal from office for the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors. An impeachment does not remove the official from office. Only the Senate can remove and only after a trial and vote of 2/3 of the body.
Impeachment Inquiry = a process used to determine whether a federal officer should be impeached.
Impeachment Investigation = a part of the inquiry that gathers evidence to be used as part of the determination of whether a a federal officer should be impeached.
Impeachment Hearings = proceedings in which the committee conducting the impeachment inquiry takes testimony from witnesses. The witness can be fact witnesses, legal and constitutional experts, special interest representatives (civil rights groups, etc.), and others with information or advice relevant to the inquiry. Hearings can be conducted in public or in private.
Although the terms are often (and inaccurately) used interchangeably, impeachment, impeachment inquiries, impeachment investigations, and impeachment hearings are not synonymous. Hearings can be part of an investigation, but investigations do not require hearings. Investigations and hearings can be components of the inquiry but an inquiry can be conducted without them. In other words, investigations and hearings are specific subsets of an inquiry.
Impeachment is the actual vote that a federal officer's actions warrant trial and removal from office.
There is no such thing as "starting impeachment." At this point in time, Congress is considering whether to open an impeachment
inquiry that will likely include an investigation and hearings and could lead to impeachment.
...
Impeachment inquiries can take different forms. For example, in the Clinton impeachment inquiry, the Judiciary Committee conducted no investigation, but merely accepted the Starr Report and its deliberations concerned only whether the information in the Starr Report was sufficient to justify impeachment. The Nixon impeachment inquiry was broader, however it, too, relied primarily on evidence and findings elicited in previous investigations and hearings.
At the conclusion of the inquiry, the committee prepares and votes on Articles of Impeachment. The approved Articles are then sent to the House floor for a vote. If the full House votes to approve one or more of the Articles, immediately upon and by operation of the vote, the officer is impeached.
It will then be up to the Senate to decide whether the official is removed from office.
...
For those who would like sources, I refer you to the U.S. Constitution; HR 581 (105th); H. Rept. 105-795 (105th); H.Res.803 (93rd);
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-DESCHLERS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-DESCHLERS-V3-5-5-2.htm
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-105hhrg52320/pdf/CHRG-105hhrg52320.pdf
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/30/us/donald-trump-impeachment.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
