In defense of the president, Trump’s attorney Van der Veen falsely claimed that ‘the first two messages the president sent via Twitter as soon as the attack on the Capitol began’ should be happy and no violence, because we are the party of law and order. ”
This is false: the president’s first tweet during the riot outside the Capitol was a montage of the morning’s demonstration.
His second, and first after the Capitol was actually violated, was a post that accused Pence angrily of continuing the certification.
It was more than half an hour after crowds stormed the Capitol when Trump actually wrote “stay peaceful”; an hour into the riot, Trump writes “no violence!”
Trump defense plays a heavily edited clip of Democrats saying ‘fight’
When the defense entered the flesh of his argument on Friday, the former president’s lawyers began playing a selectively edited video of the Democrats calling on supporters to ‘fight’ their goals after accusing House officials of blaming Trump’s words. selectively modified.
The clip, which lasted minutes, features prominent Democrats talking about the need to fight for different policy goals or against other efforts.
Advocates highlighted the remarks as a defense of the president’s strong investigative words before the rally in the Capitol, in which he told supporters to ‘fight like hell’.
Schoen begins his defense with some dubious allegations
The former president’s defense team began their presentation by accusing the Housekeepers of ripping the president out and misrepresenting his words, claiming that there was an “important reason to doubt the evidence the Housekeepers presented to us. has.”
Attorney David Schoen accused the House executives of manipulating evidence and selectively editing footage, although the president’s defense team continued to discuss a number of selectively edited excerpts from past comments by Democrats.
Schoen also accused the executives of making a false representation of the president’s tweets and lamented that the president’s team did not have a chance to review the evidence ahead of time, saying it amounted to a lack of proper process provided by the defense.
In one example, he said that the Democrats had misrepresented a tweet promoted by the president, in which Schoen claimed that the user, an organizer of the January 6 protest before the riot in Capitol, referred to the ” Golgotha ”- a representation of the crucifixion of Jesus – and was not a misspelling of ‘equestrianism’, it was how the rulers interpreted the tweet.
“The Golgotha is coming, Mr. President,” Kylie Jane Kremer wrote.
Schoen tries to argue that Dems has omitted key lines from the ‘very fine people on both sides’ grip
Trump attorney David Schoen tried to make the case that the Democrats selectively edited previous remarks the former president made in their presentation.
Schoen argued that the clip the Democrats played from Trump’s infamous “very fine people on both sides” remark in Charlottesville left out the key lines.
“The Charlottesville lie – very good people on both sides – except that it’s not all he said, and they knew it then, and they know it now,” he said.
He then played a longer track from Trump when he made the remark during a post-Charlottesville press conference.
“You also had people who were very good people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures as you – you had people in the group who were there to protest. taking down, for them, a very important statue, and renaming a park from Robert E Lee to another name, ‘Trump said at the time.
Trump further said that the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists ‘should be condemned’, but then said that the people protesting against the groups are just as violent.
“You had some good people, but you also had troublemakers, and you see them coming along with that, with the black outfits and with the helmets and the baseball bats,” Trump said.
Fact check: Did Antifa penetrate the protests?
Trump lawyer van der Veen also suggested that Antifa was involved in a protest to infiltrate Trump supporters.
“One of the first people arrested was a member of Antifa,” Van der Veen said, noting that he was “unfortunately” released early.
In the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Trump allies quickly began to claim that anti-fascist activists had infiltrated the rallied Trump supporters. But there is no evidence of any widespread involvement with Antifa, and none of the criminal charges filed so far accuse anyone of being involved with Antifa.
It appears to be a reference to a Utah man, John Sullivan, who was arrested on January 13. But there is nothing to indicate that he is a follower of Antifa and that he is being denounced by some liberal groups as a non-ideological quarrel. -rouser.
Fact check: Van der Veen describes the cleaning of Lafayette Square incorrectly
Fact check: What Trump’s lawyer said, he said and what he actually said
Trump lawyer Michael van der Veen claimed on Friday that the president is not trying to derail the certification of the 2020 election results on January 6.
“The premise of his remarks was that the democratic process would and must take place according to the letter of the law, including the Constitution and the Electoral Act,” Van der Veen said.
But here’s what Trump actually said in his January 6 speech:
“All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by encouraging radical left-wing Democrats. That is what they are doing and being stolen by the fake news media,” Trump said.
He continues: “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore, and that’s what it’s about. And to use a favorite term that everyone really came up with, we’ll stop stealing. ‘
Trump later told attendees he would perform with them at the Capitol, where he said it was “up to Congress to confront this serious attack on our democracy.”
Van der Veen claims that Trump is merely advocating for future voting restrictions.
Here’s what Trump said at the end of his speech: ‘Apart from challenging the certification of the election, I call on Congress and the state legislators to carry out rapid and far-reaching electoral reforms, and you must do better before we do not leave any country. ‘
Analysis: What Hillary Clinton Did Not Do
Trump lawyer Michael van der Veen argued that Trump was only doing what Democrats did when Hillary Clinton lost: contesting the results, seeking records and pressure to reject voter certification.
What Hillary Clinton did not do is gather her supporters in Washington, ask them to go to the Capitol, tell them to ‘stop the theft’ and praise them after they stormed the Capitol and chose to kill or otherwise cause damage to elected officials. The reason she did not offer that encouragement is twofold. First, at every turn, she began her concession speech the day after the 2016 election – Trump never gave one – making a point of accepting the rule of law. Second, her supporters did not storm the Capitol or threaten elected officials during a riot at the Capitol.
“I still believe in America and always will. And if you do, we must accept this result and then look to the future. “Donald Trump is going to be our president,” she said on November 9, 2016. Our constitutional democracy entrenches the peaceful transfer of power and we not only respect it – we cherish it. ‘
The point of the executives’ arguments this week was to demonstrate the difference between legal-political discourse and a president urging his supporters to attack Congress and its vice-president.
Attorney Michael van der Veen alleges Trump did not incite violence on January 6
Trump’s defense attorney Michael van der Veen began his team’s opening arguments, declaring that Trump’s speech on Jan. 6 about the White House Ellips was not an incitement to violence.
“No thinking person can seriously believe that the president’s speech on the January 6 ellipse was in any way an incitement to violence or insurgency. This proposal is, on the face of it, extremely absurd,” he told senators.
Van der Veen said Trump had rather encouraged his supporters during his rally “to exercise their rights peacefully and patriotically.” He said the president had outlined a series of legislative steps to be taken, such as approving voter legislation, banning the harvest of ballot papers and requiring proof of citizenship and “becoming strong in the next by-elections.”
“These are not the words of someone who incites a violent uprising,” the lawyer said. “His whole challenge for the outcome of the election was directly focused on how the right civil process could address any problems with the established legal and constitutional system.”
House officials argued that Trump had clearly incited the attack on the Capitol when he told his supporters that they should ‘fight back’.
The trial resumes again
The Senate indictment began just after noon on Friday, with the former president’s legal team presenting his defense.
Michael van der Veen starts with the arguments for the defense. They have up to 16 hours to speak, but the defense team said they would only speak for three to four hours.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y., said there would be short breaks about every two hours and a longer dinner break at about 5 p.m.
