adoption of a rules and procedures, to say how this trial is going to go. right now the senate, very big how it all happens. there will be witnesses? how many witnesses will there be? opening arguments, how long will they go? in clinton the senate adopted a set of rules provided for long opening arguments and only after those arguments did the senate then turn to the question of whether additional witness testimony was necessary, and in the clinton case, the senate decided that, no, there wasn t going to be a need for live witness testimony, but they did provide for the taking of three depositions. so there are a lot of open questions about how this trial is actually grog to happen. that s what s being negotiated now. we ll wait and see what they decide. ross garver, thank for all of your impeachment expertise. despite president trump s threats, meanwhile, that the economy would tank with his impeachment. americans say it s actually been
speaker of the house said the president s impeached. y i don t think the argument while creative goes anywhere. having said that, the senate rules do say that the actual start of the trial is triggered by the drelivery of the article of impeachment. some argument there. to be clear, the senate is now fully in control of when this trial starts. okay. let me make sure so we re on the sage pa same page. sources tell us senate democrats are preparing for a trial as soon as the week of january 6th, but until the house actually hands over the articles, ross, the senate would still be at a standstill. correct? under the current rules. remember, the u.s. supreme court said in very clear language in a case calmed nixon versus the united states. case of the federal judge s impeachment, said that the senate is totally in control of its trial rules. so right now the senate trial
handoff. harvard law professor noah feldman testified for the democrats during the impeachment inquiry saying if the house doesn t send the articles over to the senate that means the president has not technically been impeached. he wrote, if the house is does not communicate its impeachment to the senate it hasn t actually impeached the president. if the arms aren t transmitted trump say he wasn t truly impeached at all. straight to our legal analyst, study the impeachment law at tulane law school. ross, do you agree? he wouldn t technically be impeached? this professor is very creative. a smart guy and creative but somehow speaker of the house and cnn and the new york times and the washington post and virtually everybody on the planet missed this. the constitution says the house has sole power to impeach. pass articles of impeachment.
of their scheze depending on the metaphor you want to use. i think that s what s going on. what we haven t seen is that explanation from the white house for what was really going on here. ross. to that point and until we have all those transcripts and the public hearings are under way or finished, do you think house democrats, you have been through four impeachment proceedings, representing four governors going through impeachment. do you think house democrats need to be careful about how much they rely on sondland s testimony given the fact that he had to go back and revise it and sort of re-remember a really crucial meeting? well, so, things are happening on a few different levels. one are the facts that we all and jim are talking about. sort of what s coming out. the second is sort of the ultimate question of impeachment and for that sort of the way that the house democrats are presenting things are going to that s going to matter a lot. and so yes, i think you know sort of re
take sondland, okay. this is not what he will say. this is what he said. we have his transcripts in the initial testimony and the three pages of revised testimony. i guess he remembered something important from september 1st. so which of those are we to believe, ross. yes, so, poppy, you know, i agree with much of what jim is just saying about the process. on the substance, though, yeah, you know, sondland is now saying that there were conditions on military aid that he acknowledged and expressed and that s the story and honestly that is actually now consistent with what we have heard from other people, including the white house staff, chief of staff nick mulvaney. so i think you know right now we know that there were conditions on various things with respect to ukraine. i think you know the question i have now is where the conditions what are the conditions specifically and why?