So, caught this on anther site and found it quite interesting (along with not having seen it here yet, so if it has, kindly point it out please? thanks)). From what I gather, it revolves around his role in the Senate impeachment hearings and what he could do if he chooses to do the right thing The full article is at talkingpointsmemo.com/… as a Read This posting. A small blurb from it:
If the House were to go to the District Court, any ruling would eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court. The earliest any decision would come is next spring or early summer.
<snip>
The rules provide that the House managers can issue subpoenas to anyone, presumably including Bolton and Mulvaney. A senator could object that the testimony is irrelevant or covered by privilege. Rule VII provides that a ruling on such questions will usually be made by the Presiding Officer – the Chief Justice, unless he refers the decision to the full Senate. The Chief Justice would likely decide, in the first instance, claims of executive privilege or attorney-client privilege. He would also likely decide questions such as the crime/fraud exception and the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule, as well as questions of waiver of any privilege. Finally, he would rule on subpoenas for the production of documents.
Trying to see the opposites of the whole thing, but am distracted with needles and cats at the moment. Any great legal minds here to shed a little light here? Thanks!