You're assuming there's going to be any semblance to a real court of law. They're already going to move forward with the trial, which is unconstitutional. They're not going to have the Chief Justice preside over the case, as the Constitution dictates; instead they're having a Democrat Senator preside over it. This isn't a real trial. It's a lynching. It doesn't matter what he presents; it's totally meaningless in that arena.
Depending on the evidence he has, quite a few people would be prohibited from casting a vote or even invalidating the passing of the house vote.
You're assuming there's going to be any semblance to a real court of law. They're already going to move forward with the trial, which is unconstitutional. They're not going to have the Chief Justice preside over the case, as the Constitution dictates; instead they're having a Democrat Senator preside over it. This isn't a real trial. It's a lynching. It doesn't matter what he presents; it's totally meaningless in that arena.