[Political Junkie Too]

No, Schiff said specifically that he was willing to let Roberts rule on the admissibility of witness in this trial to fast track the claims of executive privilege and immunity, and dared the President's team to do the same.

Schiff declared that Roberts HAD that power, right after Philbin said that Trump's due process was that he would pursue appropriate district court review.

Schiff wanted Roberts to act as the sole arbiter of the Judicial branch, in real time, right there.

-PJ

[basalt]

poor hakeem..tryin to use all these big words.....

[RummyChick]

That concerns a PARTICULAR WITNESS.

NOT about calling witnesses in general.

He wanted to empower Roberts to make the typical rulings of a Judge WITH NO JUDICIAL REVIEW..meaning appeals court(the senate)...etc.

He wants to take away the power of the Senate ONCE THEY VOTE TO CALL WITNESSES

[gswilder]

Schiff is wrong (again). Roberts does not have that authority to rule on witnesses.

New story just tonight that Roberts wanted to ban all questions about the whistleblower. McConnell told him the senate would hold a public vote and he would be rebuked. So he backed down and agreed as long and Eric Ciramella’s name was not used. That is what happened with Rand Pauls question. Rand Paul has already publicly stated the whistleblowers name a few weeks ago