MEAWW.COM / NEWS / HUMAN INTEREST

Who is Lana Zak? Trump lawyer Michael van der Veen takes off mic in anger after 'slanted' questions by anchor

During the interview, it seemed that van der Veen was convinced that the CBSN host's questions were 'slanted' and not interested in the truth

BY ANOUSH GOMES

PUBLISHED FEB 14, 2021

Lana Zak and Michael van der Veen (Getty/CBSN)

After Senate voted to acquit ex-president Donald Trump after a historical impeachment trial on Saturday, his defense attorney Michael van der Veen apparently got angry while discussing the same on CBSN with Lana Zak. During the interview, it seems that van der Veen was convinced that the host's questions were 'slanted' and not interested in the truth. There was significant back and forth between Zak and the lawyer who accused the host of asking questions that were "already set up with a fact pattern." The end of the interview saw van der Veen take off his mic on camera, as audiences heard the thud that followed when the mic most likely was pushed off.

Why did Michael van der Veen get upset?

The discussion started smoothly as Zak asked van Der Veen if he was expecting more charges against Trump after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell iterated post acquittal that Trump was still liable for things he had done while in office.

Calling it a "political rhetoric," van der Veen said he was not surprised to hear "a politician say anything at all." Things got a bit uncomfortable when Zak brought up the fact that van der Veen had initially denied Trump had a role in the Capitol riots - arguing there was no insurrection at all. However, during his closing arguments, he used the word "insurrection". He told Zak she didn't understand the case and she asked him clarify.

In this screenshot taken from a congress.gov webcast, Michael van der Veen, lawyer for former President Donald Trump, speaks on the fifth day of former President Donald Trump's second impeachment trial at the U.S. Capitol on February 13, 2021 in Washington, DC. House impeachment managers argued that Trump was “singularly responsible” for the January 6th attack at the U.S. Capitol and he should be convicted and barred from ever holding public office again. (Photo by congress.gov via Getty Images)

Van der Veen said he used the word in his closing arguments as he was quoting the charging documents. "What happened at the Capitol on January 6 is absolutely horrific. But what happened at the Capitol during this trial was not too far away from that," he added.

He accused the prosecutors of "doctoring evidence" and not investigating the case, saying the American people should "not be putting with this." "They need to look at who these House managers were and look to see whether these are the folks they want representing them. It was shocking to me. Wouldn't have believed it."

Things took a turn for the worse when when Zak asked him to clarify about "doctored evidence" by prosecutors. Zak said, "What you're talking about now is a checkmark that's a verification on Twitter that did not exist on that particular tweet, 2020 that should have actually read 2021, and the selective editing, you say, of the tapes. Is that the doctored evidence of what you're speaking?"

An agitated van der Veen asked Zak, "Wait, that's not enough for you?" The back and forth begins as Zak insists that all she was trying to do was make it clear to the viewers what "doctored evidence" van der Veen was speaking of. Van der Veen said, "It is not okay to doctor a little bit of evidence," adding that the media should "start telling the right story in this country" and that it was "trying to divide the country."

He also accused Zak of being "bloodthirsty for ratings." "I can't believe you would ask me a question indicating that it's all right just to doctor a little bit of evidence. There's more stuff that we uncovered that they doctored, to be frank with you. And perhaps that will come out one day," he said.

The rest of the interview saw van der Veen accusing CSBN's media coverage as "slanted" with no "journalistic integrity." He said he was tired of "biased media" on both the left and the right, and soon neither he nor Zak were able to get full sentences in. The heated discussion saw van der Veen telling Zak, "You don't want to hear the truth." When Zak asked if he would like to continue the conversation, Veen said "I don't need to", adding that her questions were "slanted." Van der Veen takes off his mic before Zak says, "I see you taking off your microphone now. That was President Trump's defense attorney, Michael van der Veen."

You can watch the entire interview below and can read the entire video transcript here.