NEW! Jack Smith Wants To Ask Trump Jurors If 2020 Election Was 'Stolen' In Mar-a-Lago Classified Documents Case

[MAGA Macho Man]

[Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump’s classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was “stolen” and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort]

["Highlighting the politically charged nature of the case, prosecutors objected to a set of questions proposed by the defense asking jurors if they are registered to vote, whether they vote with a particular party"]

So Jack Smith want to ferret out anybody who isn’t getting news and information from sources NOT under the control of the CIA, FBI, and the Biden Administration. That’s act alone precludes a fair trial, and those questions SHOULD NOT be allowed. This is a violation of your first amendment rights. Apparently Jack Smith doesn't believe in a ‘jury of your peers.’

Feds Want To Ask Trump Jurors If 2020 Election Was 'Stolen' - Law360

Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump's classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was "stolen" and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

www.law360.com

 

[wamose]

It sounds like Jack Smith is trying to ferret out anyone who might be open minded. No wonder his decisions are overturned so often. MAGA

 

[Mac1958]

It's the obvious question. Weed out the manipulated rubes.

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

wamose Fact!

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

It's the obvious question. Weed out the manipulated rubes.

This shows the absurdity of the attempt to prosecute the President.

There is NO jury in this country that won’t have partisan opinions of Trump, and that’s who’s really on trial.

The prosecution will argue essentially that there can be no Trump supporters...meaning that they will tolerate only Trump’s opposition. A politically biased jury is nothing but a kangaroo court, a political show trial.

 

[Mac1958]

There is NO jury in this country that won’t have partisan opinions of Trump, and that’s who’s really on trial.

Well, we agree on that one. There will be at least one True Believer on any jury, so I don't expect him to be convicted of anything due to hung juries.

 

[BULLDOG]

[Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump’s classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was “stolen” and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort]

["Highlighting the politically charged nature of the case, prosecutors objected to a set of questions proposed by the defense asking jurors if they are registered to vote, whether they vote with a particular party"]

So Jack Smith want to ferret out anybody who isn’t getting news and information from sources NOT under the control of the CIA, FBI, and the Biden Administration. That’s act alone precludes a fair trial, and those questions SHOULD NOT be allowed. This is a violation of your first amendment rights. Apparently Jack Smith doesn't believe in a ‘jury of your peers.’

Feds Want To Ask Trump Jurors If 2020 Election Was 'Stolen' - Law360

Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump's classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was "stolen" and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

www.law360.com

It's perfectly natural to want to identify those who tend to fall for discredited conspiracy theories. How can you expect an honest unbiased decision based on the facts from a conspiracy theory nut who believes the election was stolen.

 

[wamose]

It doesn't matter if you're a closed minded radical or an open-minded person. You should be able to see that these trials main purpose is to damage Trump and steer voters against him. It's taxpayer funded election tampering, plain and simple. So, it's a win-win for the unhinged TDSers. Very unfair. MAGA

 

[Independent thinker]

It's the obvious question. Weed out the manipulated rubes.

LOL. And yet you only want to weed out the manipulated rubes of one side and allow the manipulated rubes of the left to be jurors.

 

[d0gbreath]

Well, we agree on that one. There will be at least one True Believer on any jury, so I don't expect him to be convicted of anything due to hung juries.

If a jury doesn't reach a verdict, the case usually gets tried over again.

 

[BULLDOG]

It doesn't matter if you're a closed minded radical or an open-minded person. You should be able to see that these trials main purpose is to damage Trump and steer voters against him. It's taxpayer funded election tampering, plain and simple. So, it's a win-win for the unhinged TDSers. Very unfair. MAGA

You might be correct if there was no demonstrable evidence of trump actually breaking the laws for which he has been charged. Running for office doesn't make you immune from our legal system.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Cool, the Trump attorneys should ask potential jurors of J6 was an insurrection.

 

[BULLDOG]

Cool, the Trump attorneys should ask potential jurors of J6 was an insurrection.

Great idea.

 

[Cellblock2429]

[Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump’s classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was “stolen” and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort]

["Highlighting the politically charged nature of the case, prosecutors objected to a set of questions proposed by the defense asking jurors if they are registered to vote, whether they vote with a particular party"]

So Jack Smith want to ferret out anybody who isn’t getting news and information from sources NOT under the control of the CIA, FBI, and the Biden Administration. That’s act alone precludes a fair trial, and those questions SHOULD NOT be allowed. This is a violation of your first amendment rights. Apparently Jack Smith doesn't believe in a ‘jury of your peers.’

Feds Want To Ask Trump Jurors If 2020 Election Was 'Stolen' - Law360

Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump's classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was "stolen" and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

www.law360.com

/----/ OOOPSIE

Judge Cannon, in What Could Be a Win for Trump, Appears Open To Disqualifying ‘Naked Emperor’ Jack Smith

The jurist says that briefs taking the position that the special counsel’s appointment was unconstitutional could be of ‘considerable help’ to her.

www.nysun.com

The jurist says that briefs taking the position that the special counsel’s appointment was unconstitutional could be of ‘considerable help’ to her.
lctg=1535151599&recognized_email=michaelswedenberg%40gmail.com&newsletter-access&utm_source=MG&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Evening%20Sun%20%202024-03-07

 

[Synthaholic]

So Jack Smith want to ferret out anybody who isn’t getting news and information from sources NOT under the control of the CIA, FBI, and the Biden Administration.

He doesn't want mindless cult zombies on the jury, ready to absolve Dear Leader, no matter what the evidence says.

 

[Synthaholic]

The prosecution will argue essentially that there can be no Trump supporters...meaning that they will tolerate only Trump’s opposition.

False. They will accept Trump 2016 voters. They won't accept cultists.

 

[Cellblock2429]

He doesn't want mindless cult zombies on the jury, ready to absolve Dear Leader, no matter what the evidence says.

/-----/ It's democRATs trying to destroy our democracy. (Yeah, I know we're a republic, but I have to talk to democRATs on their simplistic level.)

 

[Dragonlady]

[Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump’s classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was “stolen” and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort]

["Highlighting the politically charged nature of the case, prosecutors objected to a set of questions proposed by the defense asking jurors if they are registered to vote, whether they vote with a particular party"]

So Jack Smith want to ferret out anybody who isn’t getting news and information from sources NOT under the control of the CIA, FBI, and the Biden Administration. That’s act alone precludes a fair trial, and those questions SHOULD NOT be allowed. This is a violation of your first amendment rights. Apparently Jack Smith doesn't believe in a ‘jury of your peers.’

Feds Want To Ask Trump Jurors If 2020 Election Was 'Stolen' - Law360

Florida federal prosecutors want to ask potential jurors in Donald Trump's classified documents case if they believe the 2020 election was "stolen" and if they hold opinions about how the FBI executed a highly publicized search warrant at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

www.law360.com

If you believe things that are not true, you're not a good candidate for the jury.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Since being mentally competent is a requirement to sit on a jury...

..... ..... ..... ..... I'm not seeing the problem.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

It is very common for lawyers to try to eliminate fair jurors in favor of juror much more likely to decide the case in their favor before it even starts. Trump's attorneys will try the same. It is expected. The jury usually boils down to what is left over after both sides exercise their pre-emptive rejections, and both sides try to convince the judge to dismiss less favorable jurors for cause.

The key to this will be the judge. Will she allow either side to rig the case, or will she ensure fairness? If she will ensure fairness, what will that look like? I only see two ways to be fair:

1) Eliminate all questions about politics or about the defendant, thus making the jury politically a cross-section of Americans.

2) Let both sides ask whatever questions it wants, and give each a greater than usual number of pre-emptive rejections due to the highly political nature of the case.

3) The judge ask numerous questions about politics and eliminate anyone with a political opinion.

The first two would almost surely lead to a hung jury. The third, while very, very difficult to do, would more likely lead to a verdict one way or the other.

That is, barring the "stealth juror" problem that I talked about on another thread, which neither scenario, and likely no scenario can prevent.