However, during the trial, and this is what no one is thinking about right now, the Presidents attorneys will have the right to subpoena and question ANYONE THAT THEY WANT.”
Are you sure that is correct as a matter of procedure?
I’m not denying that is the case, just asking the question.
It seems there have been so few trials in the SEnate that the rules might not be set in stone.
I know Rehnquist wrote a book about it....which was sort of cool in that he became sort of an expert, then presided over Clinton’s trial.
But beyond that, I have no knowledge only questions :)
Have you by chance read Rehnquist’s book? Perhaps it illuminates this issue?
I wouldn’t put any eggs in that basket. Just remember Chief Justice Roberts will be the Justice presiding over the trial and they obviously have some dirt on him. I can see where he would keep the evidence introduced to a very narrow scope.
The “high crime and misdemeanor” would probably be based on the obstruction “charge” and he would limit the evidence to the list of the ten examples in the Mueller report. The Dems would be stupid to try and include any collusion claim. That could open the door to a broader scope.