IMPEACHMENT
Trump impeachment lawyer says he'll use video of
Dems' own remarks at trial
“If my eyes look a little red to the viewers, it's
because I've been looking at a lot of video," Bruce Castor said.
By BEN
LEONARD
02/06/2021
11:28 AM EST
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/06/trump-impeachment-arguments-466500
Donald
Trump’s lead impeachment attorney on Friday suggested he’ll take aim at
Democrats’ own words in his arguments during the former president's Senate
impeachment trial next week.
Fox News
host Laura Ingraham asked Trump attorney Bruce Castor if he'll be using
“dueling video” with Democrats expected to make their case that Trump incited
the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection by using video clips of rioters and Trump’s
rally remarks on the Ellipse.
“Will you
then respond with Maxine Waters, a number of other Democrat officials not
speaking out about the Antifa and other extremist rallies over the last
summer?” Ingraham asked.
“I think
you can count on that,” Castor said. “If my eyes look a little red to the
viewers, it's because I've been looking at a lot of video.”
Earlier in
the segment with Ingraham, Castor alleged “there’s a lot of tape of cities
burning and courthouses being attacked and federal agents being assaulted by
rioters in the streets, cheered on by Democrats throughout the country,”
seemingly referring to ongoing unrest in Portland, Ore.
Trump
repeatedly pushed hard against the nationwide racial justice protests last
year, railing in particular against the Black Lives Matter movement.
Portland
saw more than 100 days of protest around a federal courthouse in the wake of
the police killing of George Floyd in May. Trump misleadingly blamed violence
in the city on the far left while downplaying far-right groups' role.
Castor, who
will defend Trump alongside attorney David Schoen, continued: “Many of them in
Washington are using really the most inflammatory rhetoric possible to use. And
certainly there would be no suggestion that they did anything to incite any of
the actions."
“But here,
when you have the president of the United States give a speech and says that
you should peacefully make your thinking known to the people in Congress, he's
all of a sudden a villain. You better be careful what you wish for,” he
continued.
House
impeachment managers have argued that Trump's speech at the Capitol Jan. 6
"foreseeably resulted in" the riots, specifically pointing to Trump
saying that "if you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a
country anymore."
Rep. Waters
(D-Calif.) in 2018 called on supporters at a rally to confront Trump officials
in public to protest the Trump administration's child separation policy, which
many Republicans have pointed to in defense of Trump.
Any move to
use Democrats' words against them might not take center stage, though. Castor
told Ingraham that the “primary issue” will be the argument that the Senate
can’t impeach Trump because he is no longer in office. Most Senate Republicans
voted last week in favor of a motion saying that the Senate trial was
unconstitutional because Trump is no longer president.
“By the
House impeachment resolution logic, they can go back and impeach Abraham
Lincoln,” Castor told Ingraham. "They could impeach Donald Trump if he was
dead because he's not in office."
Republican
senators have urged Trump not to focus on false claims about the election in
his defense. But in a brief, Trump's legal team denied that Trump attempted to
subvert the election results and said Trump had a First Amendment right to give
his opinion about them. Castor said on Fox earlier on Friday that there have
been many “misstatements” about the brief’s claims, which argue that Trump's
claims that he won "in a landslide" weren't false.
“I don't
have to prove that he was accurate,” Castor said. “All I have to say is you
prove that they were false.”
Castor and
Schoen were not originally on Trump’s defense team, as Trump’s first team left
after disagreeing over whether to wade into Trump’s election claims. A
spokesperson for Trump has previously said he “will not testify in an
unconstitutional proceeding.”


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário