CNN Opinion asks commentators to weigh in on the fourth day of former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial.
Trump’s lawyer equating anti-racism protests and their defenders to what happened on Jan. 6. But the protests were not aimed at overthrowing America’s democratic system of govt, in the midst of certifying an election, and were not ignited by a candidate seeking power…many diffs
— Frida Ghitis (@FridaGhitis) 이월 12, 2021
It’s not just one speech.
Trump lied about the 2020 election results for two months, invited an angry mob to Washington on the same day when Congress was certifying the results, and then sent the violent mob to the U.S. Capitol to “fight like hell.”
— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) 이월 12, 2021
Trump’s defense begins with an attack video (complete with soundtrack), juxtaposing Dems giving political speeches about “fighting” and Trump praising law enforcement. But perhaps a good test of incitement is whether a speech actually incites violence.
— Paul Begala (@PaulBegala) 이월 12, 2021
That video–showing Democrats using violent rhetoric–is why an article of impeachment drafted with Republicans would have been much more narrowly focused on Trump’s actions *during* the insurrection. The incitement argument was built to repel GOP senators.
— Sarah Isgur (@whignewtons) 이월 12, 2021
“You can’t incite what was already going to happen!”
1) Yes you can
2) Especially if YOU are the reason it was already going to happen
— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) 이월 12, 2021
As expected, Trump defense team argues:
1. If opposing certification is impeachable then Dems who opposed Trump’s ’16 certification are equally culpable.
2. Trump has had 100s of rallies w/ similar rhetoric w/o a resulting insurrection. This was a hijacking. #ImpeachmentTrial— Laura Coates (@thelauracoates) 이월 12, 2021
Trump’s lawyers arguing that Trump is the rule of law President is so absurd that it’s hard not to laugh. It’s not funny, just pathetic.
— Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) 이월 12, 2021
와, they are proving what a great job VP Joe Biden did shutting down unmeritorious objections to Donald Trump’s 2016 승리. That’s how it is supposed to work!!!
— Amanda Carpenter (@amandacarpenter) 이월 12, 2021
I will gladly concede that some Democrats broke norms that *helped* lead us to where we are today. But there is NO COMPARISON between what past politicians (of either party) did and what Trump did.
— Matt Lewis (@mattklewis) 이월 12, 2021
Team Trump underway. I think Van der Veen saw a different speech. Nothing in the speech could be seen to incite? He’s going WAY too far. Would have lost a real jury already.
— Jennifer Rodgers (@JenGRodgers) 이월 12, 2021
Saying it is “patently absurd” to conclude that Trump’s speech incited a riot is a classic lawyer overreach. It’s not true, and not necessary to extend that far.
— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) 이월 12, 2021
Like in football when you’re up by a touchdown, you don’t throw long passes that can get intercepted. The Trump defense team knows they have the votes to acquit and that they can only lose votes if they give another absurdly terrible performance. I’d expect this to be short.
— Sarah Isgur (@whignewtons) 이월 12, 2021
