Impeachment trial: Stunning phone call Trump held with McCarthy during Capitol riot revealed
Follow for all the latest news from Congress, the White House and Mar-a-Lago
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Senate adjourned after Donald Trump's legal team closed its arguments in their defence against impeachment, with a key GOP senator that had indicated a willingness to cross the aisle saying it was "much stronger" than its opening statements.
Alaska's Lisa Murkowski reportedly said the revamped line-up was "very organized in what they've presented and how they've done it.”
During day four of the impeachment trial, Trump's team presented multiple videos that supercut instances of Democrats using the same language they have charged the ex-president of using to incite the riots at the US Capitol.
The videos were the main thrust of Trump's free speech defence, with lawyers arguing the First Amendment must apply to all political speech or it applies to no political speech - including that of Democrats.
They also submitted that the House impeachment managers had manipulated evidence and selectively edited Trump's key speech from 6 January to remove explicit calls for supporters to make their voices heard "peacefully and patriotically".
Day four began amid reports of growing tensions between Trump and his team, with the former president said to want Bruce Castor to have minimal involvement following his disastrous appearance on Tuesday during opening arguments.
Mr Castor kicked off the second session more than two hours into the defence.
It comes as Joe Biden says he is "anxious" to see what his Republicans friends to and whether they will "stand up", despite previously saying he wasn't going to watch proceedings or get involved in deliberations.
The trial will continue on Saturday, 13 February at 10am EST.
‘Patently absurd’ says Trump defence
“No thinking person could seriously believe that the president’s January 6 speech on the Ellipse was in any way an incitement to violence or insurrection,” says Michael Van der Veen
“The suggestion is patently absurd on its face, nothing in the text could ever be construed as encouraging, condoning or enticing unlawful activity of any kind.”
‘Peacefully and patriotically’; lawyers quote Trump’s 6 January in speech in defence
“Far from promoting insurrection against the United States, the presdient’s remarks explicitly encourage those in attendance to exercise their rights, “peacefully and patriotically”,” Michael Van der Veen say quoting from Trump’s speech on 6 January.
“Peaceful and patriotic protest is the very antithesis of a violent assault on the nation’s capital. The House impeachment article slanderously alleges that the president intended that the crowd at The Ellipse to, quote, ‘interfere with the join session solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election”.
Van der Veen says this is “manifestly disproven by the plain text” of the speech.
“The entire premise of his remarks were that the Democratic process would and should play out according to the letter of the law,” he says.
Read the full speech transcript.
Trump speech transcript from 6 January: The words that got the president impeached
Speech a central piece of evidence in both support and defence of the charge of incitement
Defence plays Jamie Raskin and Democrats objecting to Trump election
Joe Biden had to “gavel them down”, says Michael Van der Veen before playing Raskins objections fom 2017:
Jamie Raskin: “I have an objection because 10 of the 29 electoral votes cast by Florida were cast by electors not lawfully certified.”
“Maxine Waters: “I wish to ask is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter of objection.”
Trump’s legal team uses Democrats own words against them in defence of incitement charge
Lawyers played a supercut of Democrats using the language they’ve accused the president of inciting insurrection.
Joe Biden: “The vast majority of the protests have been peaceful.”
Joe Biden: “If we were in high school I’d take him outside the gym and beat the hell out of him.”
Nancy Pelosi: “I just don’t know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country and maybe there will be.”
Ayanna Presley: “There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there is unrest in our lives.”
Maxine Waters: “And you tell them that they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”
Corey Booker: “I feel like punching him.”
Chuck Schumer: “You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price.”
Chris Cuomo: “Show me where it say protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.”
‘Sham impeachment’ threatens freedom of speech for every level of government, says defence
“Consider the language that the House impeachment article alleges to constitute incitement, ‘if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore’,” says Michael Van der Veen
“This is ordinary political rhetoric that is virtually indistinguishable from the language that has been used by people across the political spectrum for hundreds of years.”
Nancy Pelosi next in the firing line for Trump’s hypocrisy defence
“Speaker Pelosi herself said that the 2016 election was hijacked and that congress was a duty to protect our Democracy,” says Michael Van der Veen.
“She also called the president an imposter and a traitor, and recently referred to her colleagues in the House as the enemy within.”
‘People will do what they do’, Nancy Pelosi called out for rhetoric by Trump defence
“When violent left-wing anarchists conducted a sustained assault on a federal courthouse in Portland Oregon, speaker Pelosi did not call it an insurrection, instead she called the federal law enforcement officers protecting the building ‘stormtroopers’, says Michael Van der Veen.
“When violent mobs destroyed public property she said: ‘People will do what they do.”
Kamala Harris urged supporters to bail out violent rioters, says Trump defence
Michael Van der Veen says the current vice president of the United States, Kamala Harris, urged supporters to donate to a fund that bailed out violent rioters and arsonists out of jail as hundreds of police subject to violent assault by “angry mobs”.
“One of those was released and went out and committed another crime, assault, he beat the bejesus out of somebody,” he said.
“She said of the violent demonstrations: ‘Everyone beware, they’re not going to stop before election day in November and they’re not going to stop after election day, they’re not going to let up, and they should not.”
‘Constitutional cancel culture’, says Trump’s defence team
“Democrats have clearly demonstrated that their opposition to mobs and their view of using the National Guard depends upon the mob’s political views,” says Michael Van der Veen.
He continued: “Not about Democrats opposing political violence, it is about Democrats trying to disqualify their political opposition. It is constitutional cancel culture. History will record this shameful effort as a deliberate attempt by the Democrat party to smear, censor and cancel, not just president Trump, but the 75 million Americans who voted for him.”
‘I Googled this for you’ Defence team mocks Democrat evidence
Trump’s lawyer David Schoen played back clips of House managers using news reports as evidence in its charge of incitement to violence.
“Reportedly is not the standard in any American setting in which any semblance of due process is afforded an accused, ‘reportedly’ isn’t even, ‘here is some circumstantial evidence’,” he says.
“It is exactly as reliable as ‘I Googled this for you’.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments