What if Judge Tanya Chutkan were to hold a hearing
This is lawyer Elie Honig's recommendation.
Elie Honig to Kaitlan Collins on what might be feasible for Judge Tanya Chutkan to consider under the constraints of time and SCOTUS's ruling:
"Judge Chutkan -- and I think she will do this -- could say, 'We're going to have a hearing. It's not a trial. There's no jury, no verdict. But I'm going to hear the prosecution's evidence. And I'm going to decide what's official and what's not official; what DonaldTrump has immunity for and what he does not have immunity for.
"In that hearing, the prosecution may try to call explosive witnesses including potentially Mark Meadows, maybe Mike Pence. And this could be happening in the next few weeks as we get close to the election."
Kaitlan Collins: "And does Donald Trump have to be there for that? What does that look like?"
Elie Honig: "Typically a defendant only has to be physically present for trial. He will have the option of being there. I think the judge will give him the option. Sometimes judges will say, 'This is too important, you do have to be physically present. Of course, we're coming up on the stretch run of the election, so he probably will be allowed to skip it, if he's out on the trail.
"But the timing here. We're on, what, 95 days now? Imagine Mike Pence taking the stand in the middle of September, the impact that could have."
= new reply since forum marked as read
