Before Trump’s Senate was acquitted on Saturday on charges of inciting the January 6 uprising at the Capitol, Trump lawyer Michael van der Veen delivered a closing argument full of false and misleading allegations.
This followed a Friday session in which van der Veen made other false and misleading allegations. This followed a Monday’s written submission in which van der Veen and his colleagues made even more false and misleading allegations.
Here’s a fact check of some of the things Van der Veen said on Saturday, plus a fact check of a false allegation made by a Democratic indictment manager during Saturday’s closing remarks.
Van der Veen claims that the uprising at the Capitol was ‘pre-planned and pre-planned by left and right groups’.
Facts first: This is false: there is no evidence that left-wing groups were involved in planning or participating in the uprising. Members of right wing groupsconversely, was charged with both planning and participation. Although Trump’s legal team has repeatedly tried muddy waters, the evidence shows that it was Trump supporters who were overwhelmingly responsible for the attack.
It is alleged that numerous participants in court documents to the FBI said that their actions were motivated by their support for Trump – and some even said that they felt that they were directly instructed by Trump to take action. Although some alleged participants have a quirky political history and ideologies that are difficult to establish, there is no basis for the suggestion that organized leftist entities were involved in the uprising.
It is also important to note that some of the criminal behavior was allegedly planned in advance that day, but others were not. Only a handful of the more than 200 criminal cases filed so far indicate that rioters showed up that day with the intent of violating the Capitol.
Trump and incitement
Van der Veen said that the accusations of the House did not show a single example of Mr. Trump inciting someone to commit violence.
He then added: “At no point have you heard anything that could ever be considered Mr. Trump encouraging or sanctioning an uprising. Senators, you have not heard the ties because they exist.”
Facts first: It is obviously not true that Trump made no comment that could even be considered ‘possible’ as the encouragement or sanction of an uprising. Various suspected insurgents or their lawyers assert to the FBI or in court that Trump’s words inspired them to take action that day.
It is possible that some of the people facing charges are simply trying to shift the blame on Trump. But it is very clear that Trump’s words are understood by some listeners as a presidential endorsement of an uprising.
Trump’s words before January 6
Van der Veen said: “Mr. Trump did not spend the weeks before January 6 violently. He spent those weeks following his election challenge through the court system and other legal procedures, exactly as prescribed by the Constitution and Congress.”
Facts first: This is a very incomplete version of Trump’s behavior after the election. Rather than just suing and awaiting court decisions, Trump has a relentless public campaign to convince his fans of the lie that they were cheated out of victory. He also encouraged supporters to come to Washington for a January 6 protest promise would be ‘wild’.
Praying, Harris and Convictions of Violence
Van der Veen reflected false attacks that Trump himself had made in the past, claiming that President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris repeatedly refused to condemn acts of violence during the riots last year.
Facts first: This is false. Both Biden and Harris have condemned riots and violence on several occasions last year. They expressed support for peaceful protest.
In August, Biden said: “I want to be very clear about all these things: riot is not protesting. Looting is not protesting. Making fire is not protesting. None of this is protesting. It is lawlessness, simple and straightforward. And those “It must not be prosecuted. Violence will not change, it will only bring destruction. It is wrong in every way.”
Harris, in her own August statement, distinguished between peaceful and violent protest, saying, “We must always defend peaceful protest and peaceful protesters. We must not confuse them with looting and committing violence.” She added: “We will not allow this vigilance and extremists to derail the path to justice.”
In October, Biden and Harris issued a joint statement following the fatal police shooting of Walter Wallace Jr., a black man in Philadelphia who was carrying a knife during what he said was a mental health crisis. Biden and Harris said that “no degree of anger over the real injustices in our society excuses violence” and that “looting is not a protest, it is a crime.”
The timing of the trial
Van der Veen claims that it is the Democrats’ fault that there are constitutional questions about holding an indictment for a president who is no longer in office. He said: “They sat on the article. They could have tried the president while he was still in office if they really believed he was a threatening threat. They did not.”
Facts first: It is inaccurate that Van der Veen blames the Democrats alone for the Senate’s decision to hold the trial after Trump left office. Democrats did propose to try Trump while he was still in office; it was Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, then the majority leader, who rejected the idea and rejected the Democrats. proposal to bring the Senate back on an emergency basis for a trial before Biden’s inauguration.
On January 13, the day the House voted to accuse Trump, McConnell said there was no chance a “fair or serious” Senate hearing could be held before the inauguration.
Trump’s past comments on violence
One of the House of Representatives’ indictments, Representative Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania, spoke during closing remarks about Trump’s rhetoric before the uprising.
“Donald Trump knew the people he incited. Before January 6, he saw the violence they were capable of. He had a pattern of praising and encouraging supporters of violence, and never condemning it,” he said. said Dean.
Facts first: It is true that Trump had a pattern that encouraged or applauded supporters of violence; we listed nine examples in a fact check Friday. But it is not true that Trump ‘never’ condemned violence or support for violence. Trump has issued repeated condemnations.
Trump was a big voice last year in his accusation of violence related to anti-racial protests and violence allegedly associated with the Antifa movement. In both cases, he was transparent in his efforts to use these incidents as a blow to his Democratic opponents.
But he also condemned violence of other kinds on several occasions. These include an anti-Semitic massacre at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018, the sending of bombs in 2018 to Trump’s political opponents and CNN, mass shootings in Texas and Ohio in 2019, and an anti-Semitic knife attack in 2019 in New York.
“No nation can succeed that tolerates violence or the threat of violence as a method of political intimidation, coercion or control. We all know that. Such behavior must be fiercely opposed and severely prosecuted,” he said in one speech of October 2018 in which he discusses the post bombs.
