Lawyer Van Der Veen Rips Media for Skewed Coverage

Polling shows that the most American’s trust of the media is at an all-time low. This interchange between Van Der Veen and CBS anchor Lana Zak is a tutorial in how the media shapes skewed perceptions and blurs truth. Note the following:

Lana Zak

  • Zak refers to President Trump as “Mr. Trump” breaking from the tradition of calling previous president “President” or “former President.” Why is she treating Trump differently?
  • She asks a misleading question–says Van Der Veen insisted President Trump was not involved in an insurrection but then used the word ‘insurrection’ in his closing argument, suggesting he did refer to it as an insurrection (in his closing argument he cited the document–he did not suggest he thought there was an insurrection.)
  • She plays down the severity of “doctored evidence” completely ignoring the fact any kind of altered evidence used to frame someone is against everything for which the American justice system stands.

Van Der Veen

  • He states that what happened Jan 6 at the Capitol was horrific but what happened in the trial last week was not too  different
  • He states that the House Manager doctored evidence
  • He calls out her slanted question that sets up the narrative that it’s okay for the House Managers to cheat
  • He eviscerates her near-defense of the doctored evidence and calls out the complicity of the media
  • He calls out the bias of the media for wanting to tell their narrative and not telling it just how it is
  • He expresses frustration over the division in the country and the media’s contribution to the division

Listen to the exchange below and watch how Zak skews facts to portray a certain narrative. Then ask yourself, “Where else are they doing this?”