Could Clinton or his top advisors succesfully assert executive privilege to limit their testimony?

No. The White House invoked executive privilege in an effort to keep aides from testifying fully in Starr's investigation, but Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson concluded in May that Starr's need to collect evidence outweighs President Clinton's interest in preserving the confidentiality of White House discussions. Johnson also denied White House claims to attorney-client privilege and a "protective function" privilege that would allow Secret Service agents to refuse to testify.

The White House is appealing those decisions. But the president's lawyers abandoned the executive privilege claim. Legal experts said they would have faced an uphill struggle and there was the also spectre of Watergate to consider.

In a 1974 ruling (United States v. Nixon), the Supreme Court specifically acknowledged the existence of an executive privilege. It held that the Constitution though it does not explicitly say so provides protection for private communications between the president and ... more.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.