The House conducts its own investigation, and decides whether it wants to prosecute and impeachment. If it decides to do so, it engages the senate as the tribunal. Rules for conduct of the trial are by the senate, but presentation of the case to the senate is by the house. The senate decides which, if any witnesses it wants to learn from directly. All that depends on the issues specific to the case in hand.
CJ SCOTUS is there to make sure the senate follows its own trial rules. CJ Scotus determinations can be overridden by the senate.
This loosey-goosey legislative branch only approach is tolerable because the stakes are not criminal. The public decides if Congress conduct is good enough.
Thanks for the reply. Dad goes on to say:
“As for House of Representatives demand for further testimony
for the trial, that demand is clearly appropriate, since the
currently established evidence is being clearly challenged
as incomplete and inadequate to support impeachment.
However, since the house has now completed it’s vote to
impeach President Trump and published it loudly and
deliberately and publicly to the world, and has NOT provided
ANY opportunity for Trump to present any of his defense
witnesses, nor has it indicated it will EVER provide such
opportunity in the house Judicial Committee investigations,
it is now clear that ALL additional investigation is
appropriate and overdue, including especially Trump’s
defense witnesses.
To be precise, ALL of those witnesses,
both for the house and for Trump, must be examined in the
actual impeachment trial, conducted by the Supreme Court.”
In response to one of your points, he had this comment:
“I would say that any defense lawyer is entitled to present
pertinent law enforcement evidence in a trial, including
evidence currently being published by the Inspector General
and other Justice Department sources.”
Dad had a couple more points to make to your reply:
“You say “ The senate decides which, if any witnesses it
wants to learn from directly”. I must disagree. Fundamental
due process rights must include the ability for Trump to
present his own defense, including credible witnesses for
his defense.
More importantly, I would suggest to Trump that there are
significant indications the not all Republican members of
the Senate are highly motivated to defend him , and even a
few may have powerful motivation to NOT defend him.
(Deep State Swamp Members)”
Thanks again!
~Easy