MEAWW.COM / NEWS / HUMAN INTEREST

Donald Trump's defence team set to use videos of Democrats 'inciting' violence in 2020 during impeachment trial

'If my eyes look a little red to the viewers, it's because I've been looking at a lot of videos,' attorney Bruce Castor said

Former President Donald Trump’s lead attorney, who will be defending him at the impeachment trial next week, has said that he will use the video of Democrats inciting violence in the US during the argument. The clips as claimed by attorney Bruce Castor will counter the videos that Democrats will probably show as evidence during the trial against Trump.

Those videos reportedly contained the footage of the January 6 riots at the Capitol building and the 74-year-old’s aggressive speech at a rally shortly before the attack. Democrats have accused Trump of encouraging violence in early January that took the lives of five people, including a police officer.

RELATED ARTICLES

Who are David Schoen and Bruce Castor? Epstein's pal and Montgomery ex-DA to lead Trump's impeachment defense

Donald Trump returns to social media with Gab post after a month of exile, pro-Trumpers say 'we're outta Twitter'

As reported by Politico, Castor was interviewed by Fox News host Laura Ingraham ahead of the trial. When Ingraham asked him, “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?”

Trump’s lawyer responded, “I think you can count on that. If my eyes look a little red to the viewers, it's because I've been looking at a lot of videos.” In the same interview, Castor claimed that “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.” He appeared to be hinting towards ongoing demonstrations in Portland, Oregon.

The attorney, who will work with attorney David Schoen, to defend Trump also stated, “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.”

House impeachment managers have said that Trump’s fiery speech was responsible for deadly protests at the Capitol in Washington DC, especially some of his words, like “if you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore."

But Castor has his own arguments and according to that, Trump can’t be impeached because he is no longer the President of America. “By the House impeachment resolution logic, they can go back and impeach Abraham Lincoln. They could impeach Donald Trump if he was dead because he's not in office,”  he told Ingraham.

Castor along with Schoen was chosen to lead Trump’s impeachment trial defense team after five members of his impeachment legal team parted ways. As per reports, Trump wanted his attorneys to focus their defense on his baseless claims that the voting machines were rigged, rather than on a more narrow discussion about the events of January 6.

After Castor’s interview with Fox News, Twitter was buzzing with people expressing their thoughts. A user tweeted, “Bruce Castor, is a well paid idiot! How dare you compare the death of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others to the Capitol riot on January 6? They were murdered, and Trump inflamed lies because he lost the election. You are a COWARD and Trump’s DUMMY! BLM.”

Another user posted, “Bruce Castor is a washed-up politician and lawyer.  He has been out of the spotlight for more than a decade.  He is representing Trump as a way to return to the media spotlight and a return to politics.”

While the third added, “Bruce Castor’s legal strategy for Trump, using video from unrelated protests to make a 1st Amend free-speech argument is a specious & false equivalency when applied to a then sitting POTUS inciting a crowd & advocating a gov’t coup by threats/use of force on 1/6 & prior rallies.”