several Clinton donors are jurist in Sussman trial

[dukkha]

This jury pool is a nightmare for the prosecutors. There are three Clinton donors on the jury. In the last 24 hours, the judge turned down a motion to dismiss a juror whose daughter is actually playing on the same team with the daughter of Sussmann. So I think for the prosecutors, it seems like the only thing that is missing on the jury is Chelsea Clinton. A jury of your peers is not supposed to mean other Clinton people.
And so, I think that the prosecutors have quite a challenge with this pool.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/turley...re-prosecutors

[dukkha]

Baker testimony blew up Sussmans claims -yet he'll walk because of a tainted jury

Must be nice to be a DC bigwig.you do what you want and you never pay the piper

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Baker testimony blew up Sussmans claims -yet he'll walk because of a tainted jury

Must be nice to be a DC bigwig.you do what you want and you never pay the piper

The defense got to ask Baker about all the other times he testified differently while under oath. Somehow I don't think Baker is a reliable witness since he now remembers clearly something that happened over 6 years ago but doesn't remember what happened the day after when they talked on the phone.

Baker was also under investigation by Durham so has every reason to lie for Durham to prevent being prosecuted. It's amazing how you don't know any of the facts in this case.

[dukkha]

The defense got to ask Baker about all the other times he testified differently while under oath. Somehow I don't think Baker is a reliable witness since he now remembers clearly something that happened over 6 years ago but doesn't remember what happened the day after when they talked on the phone.

Baker was also under investigation by Durham so has every reason to lie for Durham to prevent being prosecuted. It's amazing how you don't know any of the facts in this case.

True Baker is a crooked Swamp Critter
But the text backs him up as well.. I dont study the minutia - no point.
Durham sniffed out Clinton bought and paid for the Steele dossier and misrepresented it to the FBI while Nellie Ohr was backdooring it

Then the whole fake FISA and a special counsel appointed while page testified they had no evidence of Russian collusion
I ertainly dont expect any justice - this is the Swamp. More light on the cockroaches is the most I expect

[Poor Richard Saunders]

True Baker is a crooked Swamp Critter
But the text backs him up as well.. I dont study the minutia - no point.
Durham sniffed out Clinton bought and paid for the Steele dossier and misrepresented it to the FBI while Nellie Ohr was backdooring it

Then the whole fake FISA and a special counsel appointed while page testified they had no evidence of Russian collusion
I ertainly dont expect any justice - this is the Swamp. More light on the cockroaches is the most I expect

The text doesn't necessarily back him up. It shows he could be remembering the text and not the meeting. Doubt is required for acquittal.
You can't be convicted for robbing a bank on Oct 6 just because there is evidence of you robbing the bank on Oct 5.

[Althea]

The defense got to ask Baker about all the other times he testified differently while under oath. Somehow I don't think Baker is a reliable witness since he now remembers clearly something that happened over 6 years ago but doesn't remember what happened the day after when they talked on the phone.

Baker was also under investigation by Durham so has every reason to lie for Durham to prevent being prosecuted. It's amazing how you don't know any of the facts in this case.

They love to whine, whine, whine.

Four treasonous pieces of crap were pardoned by trump. Add to that a handul of convicted Republicans who used their positions in the House for financial gain.

Not a whimper from them.

[dukkha]

Baker wouldn't have met with Sussmann if he admitted he was representing Clinton
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...enting-clinton

[evince]

Democrats are allowed on juries fuck lips

[RB 60]

Democrats are allowed on juries fuck lips

Not when they have opinions or ties to the case they don't. And it works both ways.

That said, I don't trust the DOJ. Both prosecution and defense have the same right to pick or reject each member of the jury. They must both agree on each of the number of jurors needed and alternates.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Not when they have opinions or ties to the case they don't. And it works both ways.

That said, I don't trust the DOJ. Both prosecution and defense have the same right to pick or reject each member of the jury. They must both agree on each of the number of jurors needed and alternates.

Nope. That's not the way it works. They both don't have to agree on jurors. If the juror says they can be impartial and the judge sees no reason to not believe them then neither side can remove them unless they use one of their limited peremptory strikes.

[RB 60]

Nope. That's not the way it works. They both don't have to agree on jurors. If the juror says they can be impartial and the judge sees no reason to not believe them then neither side can remove them unless they use one of their limited peremptory strikes.

That's exactly how it works. I was the foreman on a Federal case some years ago.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

That's exactly how it works. I was the foreman on a Federal case some years ago.

As a foreman on the jury you weren't privy to the process that every juror was selected.

The transcript from the day of jury selection clearly shows the judge asking jurors if they can be impartial, and after they say, "yes." telling the prosecution they can use a peremptory strike if they don't like the juror.

[Concart]

That's exactly how it works. I was the foreman on a Federal case some years ago.

No it isn't. Being a foreman on a jury doesn't make you an expert. That's obvious in your case. The size of juries is determined by the type of charge. And jurors can be struck for no reason by either side, but they are limited in the number of strikes they are allowed. Only a judge can determine bias. But that point is moot. This case has nothing, NOTHING to do with Hillary Clinton. The fact that dukkha and you think it does shows just how ignorant you are.

[cancel2 2022]

That's exactly how it works. I was the foreman on a Federal case some years ago.

Poor Dick strikes again.

[evince]

Not when they have opinions or ties to the case they don't. And it works both ways.

That said, I don't trust the DOJ. Both prosecution and defense have the same right to pick or reject each member of the jury. They must both agree on each of the number of jurors needed and alternates.

You hate everything American


RUBEpublican