Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., asked if the article of impeachment was centered on the accusation that Trump incited the crowd, were the House managers contradicting themselves by outlining the premeditated nature and planning of this event.

Trump's defense lawyer, Michael van der Veen, immediately agreed with the question, saying "yes." He went on to use the remainder of his time to go back and talk about a previous question.

The House managers responded by reiterating that Trump's months-long campaign of disinformation helped lead to the insurrection.

"This attack was not about one speech," Del. Stacey Plaskett, D-Virgin Islands, said. "Most of you men would not have your wives with one attempt at talking to her. It took numerous tries. You had to build it up. That is what the president did as well. He put together a group that would do what he wanted."

The Senate has adjourned until Saturday at 10 a.m.

The Senate has completed the question-and-answer period of the impeachment trial

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., asked both House managers and Trump's legal team if a future Congress could impeach a former secretary of state.

"Voting to convict the former president would create a new precedent that a formal official can be convicted and disqualified by the Senate," Rubio's question said.

"Therefore, is it not true that, under this new precedent, a future House facing partisan pressure to “lock her up” could impeach a former secretary of state and a future Senate be forced to put her on trial and potentially disqualify from any future office?"

Lead House manager, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said that the hypothetical question had "no bearing" on the trial.

"In this case, we have a president who committed his crimes against the republic while he was in office. He was impeached by the House of Representatives while he was in office," Raskin said. "So, you know, the hypothetical suggested by the gentleman from Florida has no bearing on this case because I don't think you’re talking about an official who was impeached while they were in office for conduct that they ... committed while they were in office."

Trump lawyer, Michael van der Veen said that the question represented a "slippery slope," saying that impeachment of former officials could become much more common.

"If you see it their way, yes. If you do this the way they want it done, that could happen to, the example there, a former secretary of state. But it could happen to a lot of people. And that’s not the way this is supposed to work," van der Veen said. "And not only could it happen to a lot of people, it’d become much more regular too."

After the Senate decided it will not call any witnesses, lead House manager Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., was the first to speak during closing arguments. He reiterated the prosecution's case, calling for the conviction of Trump.

"It was suggested by defense counsel that Donald Trump's conduct during the attack, as described in Congresswoman Beutler's statement, is somehow not part of the Constitutional offense for which former President Trump has been charged," Raskin began. "I want to reject that falsehood and that fallacy immediately. After he knew that violence was underway at the Capitol, President Trump took actions that further incited the insurgents to be more inflamed and to take even more extreme, selective, and focused action against Vice President Mike Pence."

Raskin went on to use his time to describe Trump's months-long campaign to discredit the 2020 election results by spreading misinformation, which he argued laid the groundwork for deadly events of Jan. 6. He went on to claim that the former president assembled the mob, incited it and then sent it off to the Capitol during his speech. At every point, Trump sided with the insurrectionists rather than the Congress, Raskin said.

Once when the violence began, Raskin declared that Trump ignored the violence and further incited it by aiming the attacks on his own vice president.

"There has never been a greater betrayal by the president of the United States of his office, and of his oath to the Constitution."

Raskin then took a moment to suggest the GOP used "cancel culture" against one of its leaders, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who voted to impeach Trump in the House.

"Liz Cheney is a hero for standing up for the truth, and resisting this retaliatory cancel culture that she was subjected to."

Raskin emphasized his gratitude toward the Capitol Police, and finished his argument by saying convicting Trump is a vote for the "security of our democracy."

"They attacked this building, they disrupted the peaceful transfer of power, they injured and killed people, convinced that they were acting on his instructions, and with his approval, and protection," Raskin finished. "And while that happened, he further incited them, while failing to defend us. If that's not ground for conviction, if that's not a high crime and misdemeanor against the republic in the United States of America then nothing is. President Trump must be convicted for the safety and security of our democracy and our people."