In a gripping legal development, former President Donald Trump's trial attorney found himself grappling with his own previous arguments during his client's past impeachments. The attorneys had previously contended that a president could only be prosecuted after being convicted by the Senate, suggesting that impeachment was the appropriate avenue for addressing any alleged wrongdoing. However, these arguments seem to have come back to haunt them during the current trial.
One notable aspect of the proceedings was the focus on narrowing down the core issues at hand. Several outstanding questions had loomed over the trial, including whether presidents are immune from criminal prosecution, the application of double jeopardy, and the jurisdiction of the appellate court to hear the case before a conviction. Additionally, there was a debate surrounding whether impeachment and conviction were prerequisites for prosecution.
