Just ahead of the recess, one of the final points on Castor's agenda was arguing that Trump was pursuing a "legitimate and robust" investigation into ballot fraud issues in the state of Georgia.

So what happened in Georgia, exactly?

Trump lost the typically conservative state to Biden in the presidential election. He and other Republicans made claims of voter fraud without offering evidence.

Most notably, Trump was also recorded in a call pressuring Georgia's secretary of state (a fellow Republican) to "recalculate" the vote tally.

Our Reality Check team fact-checked that phone call here.

And for more on the voter fraud issues, click here.

And that's the end of the defence case, put forward by Trump's legal team.

The former president's attorneys took under four hours to argue their case - less than a quarter of the time they were allotted to argue their case.

There is now a short break in proceedings.

Yesterday, David Schoen - an attorney for former president Trump - left the Senate chamber while the trial was underway and spoke to Fox News.

When asked why, he told a CNN reporter: "It's more of the same thing. They're showing the same repetitive videos, making points that don't exist."

Today, Schoen and his colleagues are being just as repetitive.

They've played a series of video montages that they believe incriminate Democrats of calling on their supporters to fight and of inciting political violence over the past few years.

One particular video has been played as many as three times, one for each hour of the proceedings so far today.

Image source, Getty Images

Right now, Trump lawyer Bruce Castor is walking through the events of 6 January as he argues Trump continuously told his supporters to be peaceful and that violent extremists were gathering well before his rally.

We've laid out a timeline of the day - including the key moments shared as evidence during this trial - which you can check out here.

Tara McKelvey
BBC News, Washington

Nationwide, most conservatives say the impeachment of Trump is a bad idea, just as they did during the first impeachment, the one took place about a year ago and that focused on his dealings with Ukraine.

Whit Ayres, the head of a Republican research organisation, said on NPR that about 88% of Republicans do not think Trump should be impeached this time either.

Still, there has a been a shift among some conservatives.

North Carolina voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020.

But today, the number of people in the state who support impeachment is higher than it was last time.

During the last impeachment, 44% of people in the state supported the proceedings against him.

Today, most people in North Carolina back the impeachment, external.

The shift in their views reflects a desire, among some Republicans at least, to hold him accountable for his actions.

And they're back.

Now up - Bruce Castor. He begins by saying impeachment managers spent many hours over the last two days sharing details of the violent attack but they failed to connect it to Trump.

"Which is the only question that needs to be answered," he adds. "Was Donald Trump responsible for inciting the violence that came to this building?"

He also argues that Donald Trump was the "law and order" president.

"By any measure, President Trump is the most pro-police, anti-mob rule president this country has ever seen... His real supporters know this."

Then he plays the video montage of Trump v Democrats and Black Lives Matter protests - again.

That's the third time today, by a rough count.

Anthony Zurcher
BBC North America reporter

A large portion of the president’s defence on the merits has been built around the assertion the First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees free speech rights – rights they say Trump was exercising on 6 January.

If the Senate voted to convict the president for his words, they argued, it would have a chilling effect on political speech across the political spectrum and open any politician up to punishment.

"This is ordinary political rhetoric that is virtually indistinguishable from the language that has been used by people across the political spectrum for hundreds of years," Van der Veen said.

Van der Veen, a Pennsylvania-based personal injury lawyer, dismissed as "legally frivolous" a letter signed by 144 constitutional law scholars saying that the First Amendment did not apply in this case.

He added that House impeachment managers cited it in their presentation as a way to intimidate Trump’s defence team.

"How dare you?" he said, turning to where his legal opponents were sitting.

It wasn’t exactly the most robust legal argument, but the confrontational attitude will probably play well with Trump back in Florida.

What’s more, the suggestion that any politician might be next to face constitutional "cancelling" might find a friendly ear among the senators sitting in judgement.

Samantha Granville
BBC News, Capitol Hill

Image source, Getty Images

I’ve been coming to the Capitol all week and security remains incredibly high after the insurrection last month.

A seven-foot metal fence still surrounds the perimeter of the Capitol complex and razor wire is still up.

All week I’ve watched buses of National Guard men and women come and go as they rotate their 12-hour shifts, and today I’ve noticed many more with guns poised at the various checkpoints outside.

I have had to show my congressional press pass at three different checkpoints before I can even get inside the building.

Today, the threat of political violence is still so serious that the underground tunnels leading from the office buildings to the actual Capitol are filled with troops.

Several people lost their lives in connection with the rally and the riot that followed - here's who they are:

• Brian Sicknick, a 13-year veteran of the Capitol Police, died after he was beaten by rioters at age 42
• Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran was shot and killed by police as she joined a mob of Trump supporters trying to break into the House chamber
• Kevin Greeson, 55, was among a pro-Trump crowd outside the Capitol when he suffered a heart attack and fell to the ground
• Rosanne Boyland died amid the chaos on 6 January; the 34-year-old Trump supporter is believed to have been killed in a stampede of fellow rioters
• Benjamin Philips, 50, died of a stroke in unclear circumstances; the founder of a pro-Trump website had driven to DC for the former president's rally

Dozens of officers were injured and the riot also took a mental health toll on law enforcement.

In the wake of the violent siege on the Capitol, two police officers took their own lives.

Their families want those deaths recognised as “line of duty” deaths.

The 11-minute video of Democrats using the word "fight" has been one of the talking points of the day.

The aim of Trump's lawyers was to bolster their key argument that the president's opponents are hypocritical because they use language similar to his used that day in the speech that preceded the violence.

It's certainly a term overused by politicians far and wide - so we'd be happy to offer up some alternatives.

How about resist? Or persevere? Perhaps even persist?

There's always defy, oppose, argue, engage, buckle down, make a stand, push forward, tangle with or toil on too.

Trump's defence team has just concluded part of their presentation.

The Senate is now taking a brief recess.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution protects the right to free speech.

Trump's lawyers have leaned heavily on that constitutional principle, arguing he was simply exercising that right in the remarks he made before the Capitol attack.

Michael Van der Veen - who is diving into the legal aspects of the Trump team's defence - is quoting from historical documents, including the Constitution itself.

From one document, he quotes James Wilson - one of the country's founding fathers - who wrote: "Lawful and constitutional conduct may not be used as an impeachable offense."

Referencing a letter from 144 law professors who argued applying the First Amendment to this impeachment trial "legally frivolous", Van der Veen trashes them as "partisans" who are "plainly wrong".

"You must reject this invitation to ignore the First Amendment," he tells the senators.

"It is anti-American and would set dangerous precedent forever."

Anthony Zurcher
BBC North America reporter

Donald Trump’s legal team has begun their presentation, and their defence of the former president is taking shape.

Not only is the entire trial unconstitutional and the impeachment process of the House of Representatives rushed and improper, Trump’s lawyers said, but Trump’s words on 6 January and before also did not amount to inciting an insurrection.

The Capitol rioters were planning their assault in advance, said Michael van der Veen, adding that the "small group" who hijacked the peaceful rally included lefitsts among the Trump supporters.

Trump’s lawyers accused the Democratic impeachment managers of relying on media reports, instead of hard evidence, and selectively editing clips of the president to make it seem like he encouraged the violence while leaving out portions where he spoke of normal political processes and issued calls for peace.

You won’t see full videos like these in the mainstream media, David Schoen said.

Schoen charged the Democrats with hypocrisy. He played video of House impeachment manager Jamie Raskin, newly elected to Congress, formally challenging Donald Trump’s 2016 election in the House of Representatives.

And he played his own edited clips of Democrats, interspersed with scenes of violent Black Lives Matters protests, to argue that the left had employed similar rhetoric, or worse, when they agreed with violent mobs.

Throughout the entire process, Trump’s lawyers have insisted that it is Trump who has been on the side of law and order and his political opponents who are a threat to peace, as if to suggest that it is Democrats who should be on trial, not the former president.

Image source, Reuters

Michael Van der Veen is back up and attacks Democratic prosecutors' case as "intellectual dishonesty" and "political hatred".

"Hatred is a dangerous thing," he says. "Hatred should have no place in this chamber in these proceedings."

He argues that "they cite zero case law" and rely on a "completely made up legal standard of incitement".

Turning to the prosecutors, he says their case was "devoid of any constitutional analysis, far less than I would expect from a first-year law student".

He says President Trump's speech before the Capitol attack "deserves full protection under the First Amendment" but that they only addressed it for "a mere 10 minutes at the end of their case as a throwaway".

The Constitution's First Amendment does protect free speech, but a number of constitutional laywers have suggested this does not apply in an impeachment case, as the Senate is determining whether to convict Trump based on the president violating his oath of office, rather than if he acted illegally.

Read the full fact-check of Trump's defence here.

Image source, Reuters

Schoen now quotes House impeachment managers saying that "this is not about the words Mr Trump used in isolation, rather it is about the 'big lie', the claim that the election was stolen" - before saying that this is hypocritical.

"House managers told you that it was the 'big lie' that incited the riot, and that the 'big lie' was President Trump's claim that the election was not a fair election, or that the election was stolen," he says.

"Claiming an election was stolen, you were told, are words that are inciteful to a candidate's followers and cause people to respond violently. Claiming an election was stolen or not legitimate is something a candidate should never do because such a claim and such words can incite violent insurrection, you were told.

"But Democratic party candidates are perfectly entitled to claim the election was stolen."

He then plays a montage of Democrats accusing the Trump campaign of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election.

Twitter has lit up watching the Trump team's 11-minute-long montage of Democrats - from members of Congress to presidential candidates - saying their supporters have to "fight".

MSNBC anchor Hallie Jackson pointed out exactly how many times the word appeared in that compilation, while CNN correspondent Jim Acosta offered some empathy to whoever edited it.

Daniel Goldman, who was a Democratic counsel in the first Trump impeachment, said it was hypocritical to show such clips without context after making the argument that Democrats did that to Trump.

Walter Shapiro, a writer at the left-leaning New Republic magazine, agreed it was a compelling montage - but not when it comes to the impeachment arguments.

Tara McKelvey
BBC News, Washington

Image source, Getty Images

Trump is on trial for inciting the Capitol assault in part because of a speech he gave on that day.

"We fight like hell," he said. "And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore."

About a dozen people stood on stage before he spoke, including his sons, members of Congress and a legal scholar.

Here are some of the striking comments they made:

Donald Trump Jr, the former president’s eldest son, said:"We are all watching," he said, explaining that he and other Trump supporters were waiting to see how members of Congress would vote on the election results. He warned the members of Congress that they did not vote to overturn the results, then: "We’re coming for you, and we’re going to have a good time doing it."

Representative Mo Brooks, a Republican from Alabama, said:"We American patriots are going to come right at them."Katrina Pierson, Trump’s former campaign advisor, said:"Americans will stand up for themselves and protect their rights, and they will demand that the politicians that we elect will uphold those rights, or we will go after them."

Rudolph Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer, said: "Let’s have trial by combat."

The individuals who spoke at the rally have defended their remarks, saying they were misconstrued, and only Trump has been put on trial.

Image source, EPA

Schoen is now playing a lengthy montage lasting more than 11 minutes of Democrats using apparently violent language.

Among the clips are several of President Biden saying he would "take Trump behind the gym and beat the hell out of him", and of Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying she wanted to "punch him".

Some comments shown were made in relation to the Black Lives Matter protests last summer, however, and the calls for racial justice in the wake of the killing of George Floyd by police.

Many Democrats at the time expressed support for peaceful protests.

Another montage is made up of very short clips - almost all without context - of Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and other Democrats saying the word "fight".

"It's OK, it's a word people use," Schoen adds. "But please stop the hypocrisy."

Image source, Reuters

Trump attorney Schoen continues to share evidence to support his argument that House impeachment managers edited down the former president's words many times.

He goes all the way back to 2017 when Trump spoke to reporters after the Charlottesville riot, where white supremacists clashed with counter-protesters and one woman was killed.

Democrats have long criticised Trump for saying "there were very fine people on both sides" and not doing enough to disavow the violent white supremacists at the rally.

Schoen plays a longer clip of his response to the riot, which he argues absolves the president of that criticism. It shows Trump saying that some people were there just to "protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park".

"This might be the first time the news network played those remarks in their full context," Schoen says.

"How many times have you heard that President Trump has never denounced white supremacists? Now you in America know the truth."

Here's our analysis of Trump's Charlottesville remarks.