Donald Trump‘s spokesman has denied that one among his attorneys described the previous president as a ‘f****** criminal,’ after The Philadelphia Inquirer on Tuesday recalled a dialog between Michael van der Veen and a consumer.
Van der Veen, 57, was one among three attorneys drafted in every week in the past to symbolize Trump in his trial, alongside Bruce Castor and David Schoen.
On Tuesday van der Veen’s native paper spoke to a former consumer, Justin Hiemstra, who recalled van der Veen calling the then-president ‘a f****** criminal’.
Hiemstra pleaded responsible to making an attempt to hack into the IRS to entry Trump’s tax returns, in what van der Veen stated was a schoolboy prank.
‘I am unsure if [those comments] had been made to make me really feel extra snug, or in the event that they had been his precise opinions,’ Hiemstra advised The Philadelphia Inquirer.
‘He positively got here off as pretty anti-Trump within the context that I knew him.’
On Wednesday Trump’s spokesman Jason Miller despatched a letter from van der Veen denying Hiemstra’s account.
‘The feedback about President Donald J. Trump being attributed to me by a former consumer… are false,’ stated the letter, signed by van der Veen.
Michael van der Veen, one among Trump’s three impeachment attorneys, seen on Wednesday
Michael van der Veen is one among three attorneys defending Trump, alongside Castor and Schoen
Trump, pictured in September, employed Castor, Schoen and van der Veen solely every week in the past
The impeachment trial of Donald Trump on costs of rebellion started on Tuesday
Van der Veen, based mostly in Philadelphia, is finest recognized for his private harm, professional bono and legal protection litigation. Castor, the previous Montgomery County district lawyer who famously declined to prosecute Invoice Cosby, joined his agency in December.
The Washington Post reported that, throughout Trump’s first two years as president, van der Veen donated to distinguished Pennsylvania Democrats, together with Senator Robert P. Casey Jr., one of many former president’s most vocal critics within the chamber.
A 12 months after the Hiemstra case, van der Veen represented Melvin Johnakin, an impartial candidate for the U.S. Home of Representatives, when Johnakin sued Trump and Postmaster Normal Louis DeJoy over mail-in voting.
In the suit, filed in August, van der Veen sued ‘to protect and defend the important proper to vote and stop large-scale disenfranchisement’.
He accused Trump and DeJoy of plotting to sluggish mail supply, specifically to disenfranchise city voters residing in minority-populated, largely Democrat districts.
‘These actions additionally come up in an setting topic to repeated claims by President Donald J. Trump that voting by mail is ripe with fraud, regardless of having no proof in assist of those claims, and lawsuits filed by the Trump marketing campaign to cease mail-in voting in states equivalent to Nevada and Pennsylvania,’ van der Veen wrote.
Justin Hiemstra described van der Veen as being ‘pretty anti-Trump’ when he knew him
The lawsuit was settled as a part of an settlement stopping the postal service from implementing most of the proposed adjustments that would have affected mail supply.
Van der Veen stated politics had nothing to do along with his determination now to symbolize Trump at his impeachment trial, and insisted his earlier instances had no bearing on the trial.
‘My agency treats all of its purchasers the identical,’ he advised The Philadelphia Inquirer.
‘Whether or not they’re in a trial on a nationwide stage, or whether or not they’re within the Courtroom of Frequent Pleas. All of them get our greatest illustration.’