Tenin 16 hours available, for Donald Trump’s defense, only used by the media and the latter to present his arguments in favor of the president, which is seen as a political juvenile in the Senate that determines its responsibility for violence in the Capitol of January 6 that day 5 deaths.
The three defense attorneys attack the arguments that the two prevailing lawsuits were presented by the prosecutor’s side of the House of Representatives, assuring that Trump was not responsible for the violence and that, moreover, he sent it to him. Followers are protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The basis of his radical argument is that he did not have a “debit process” until the time to accuse Trump (an unreasonable one because the Senate session was held by the same parameters of a legal court) at moments elevate his votes to a way that no series well vista in a tribunal.
The ex-post officers’ gala gala of an aggressive rhetorical style, many of the style of his client and read to be challenged in the direction of directing the senators, about all during the question and answer phase.
Lucha, in a figurative sense
To refute the argument of the freedom of expression, David Schoen, first and Michael van der Veen, however, presented a video edited (and decontextualized) in which a puppet of democratized readers abogaban by the “lucha” in different moments of his careers .
“The word fluff has always been used in politics”, says Van der Veen, referring to the video in which it is shown in moments that it is expressly “luchar como en el infierno” ( fight like hell, in English), a phrase used by Trump shortly before the sympathy turbo would violently undermine the legislature.
“The president has not been instructed to pursue a physical form,” he said, calling for the defense process to be defended, and media outlets claiming that the presidents were fraudulent, Trump’s defense concluded.
The director of the Camera Baja, Stacey Plaskett, criticized the use of videos in which she said that black women had to talk about “playing” for a reason, on occasions in the market of protests against the police brutality of Verano pasado .
“The defenders of the defense have many videos, clip clips of black women talking about sex for a reason, as a matter of policy. It can not happen because many of these people are women, black women like you, who are pregnant and cansadas de estar enfermas y cansadas “, dijo Plaskett.
The war of videos
With great indignation, Schoen and Van der Veen accuse the Democratic representatives of “manipulating” the evidence against Trump and claiming that they presented the evidence presented to the audience.
It is embarrassing, the videos that show them the adolescent continuation of the same case as the accusation against them, and lucieron as a succession of decontextualized records and are temporary references in which Democratic leaders incite violent acts.
The videos are similar to the ones used in an electoral campaign, which appears to indicate that, although Democrats are ahead of them, Trump’s advocates are not talking about how many senators are present like the public at large. Capitol.
In another section, Schoen presented a video with short stories of the Democratic accusers on what he refers to media reports on planned topics that “supuestamente” has discussed in relation to some of the points planted in his arguments.
“Supuestamente, es equivalente a decir: ‘No tengo evidencia'”, afirmó Schoen, quien agregó que “tenemos razones para create that the representatives manipularon evidencia” o “create a false presentation” of some of the president’s.
The defense refers to the supreme manipulation of one of the president’s and will show photos that show off the leader of the team, Jamie Raskin, in front of a computer on which the parish is studying.
But this is the point of view of the confusion, because, even though it was a fake change in Trump’s case, the lawyer said that it was not finally used in the administrators’ exhibition, because it could not be part of the case against the expresidente.
On the heels of the defense briefings, Bruce Castor concluded by saying that the objective of the political trial was to prevent President Trump from going public.
“His goal is to eliminate a political opponent, to increase his opinion on the will of the voters (…) This judgment is much more than that Trump (busca) criminalizes points of view of politics, that it is actually making this judgment”, conclusion Castor.
