The Trump Arrest Coming: Allies Pushing New Riot Defense Don’t Get How Phones Work

Internet-connected phones have existed for nearly two decades, but that hasn't stopped Trump allies from saying that only those who heard him speak in person would know to riot

Do you know these idiots?

Daily Beast: As the Senate prepares for Donald Trump’s impeachment trial over the Capitol riot, the ex-president’s allies in the right-wing media remain hard at work creating a range of defenses that absolve him from the violence triggered by months of lies and deception.

In the logic of an argument that’s been embraced by pro-Trump cable networks, it was impossible for the first wave of rioters to hear Trump’s speech on the White House Ellipse in person because they started attacking before he was finished speaking. Therefore, Trump couldn’t have incited them to attack the Capitol.

Unless, that is, everyone carries cellphones that can livestream speeches as they happen.

“The people who were storming the Capitol could not have been the people in front of the president when he was speaking,” Newsmax host Greg Kelly said in an interview with Steve Bannon associate Raheem Kassam on Jan. 12, in a typical statement of the argument.

“Nobody could have both heard the president and breached the perimeter of the Capitol in the time we’re told that it took place,” Kassam said, adding that rioters would need “either a time machine or a teleportation device” to see both Trump’s speech and start the riot.

This claim that Trump could only incite rioters who saw him speak in person has plenty of flaws, including statements from alleged rioters themselves and the fact that Trump promoted the Jan. 6 rally weeks in advance, promising at one point that it would be “wild.”

But the increasingly popular Trump defense has an even bigger problem: the existence of internet-connected cellphones, which can play speeches live even when they’re being given in another location.

read more…pay wall….

Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. ” Your honor, It is impossible my client had anything to do with this murder for hire scheme, because he was at his mothers house mowing her lawn, when the assailant pulled the trigger at the location 10 miles away.”

  2. Should have a naming contest for that moronic defense, my entry, the ‘Sean Hannity Defense’. I love how people say the talking point as if they just said something original (a trademark of Hannity’s). Yes, mobile devices substitute for walking.

    Here is another counter-argument. How can you discount all of the agitation that brought the rioters there in the first place? The entire point of the demonstration, including the charming gallows was to intimidate Congress into disqualifying state votes. It doesn’t matter if Trump’s speech was the last spark or if it was one of the other bomb throwers that spoke before him. It was all Trump’s doing.

  3. “…Trump defense has an even bigger problem: the existence of internet-connected cellphones…”

    Well, not necessarily, maybe those protesters were still using old Motorola V66…

Comments are closed.