A prospective juror has been booted from the jury pool in the case against the Trump Organization for declaring that the 45th president is “guilty whatever the case.”
The news appears to be a preview of the mess any government agency will have if they go after President Donald Trump.
The juror, a New York advertising executive, was excused from the potential jury pool in the criminal tax-fraud trial of the Trump Org.
She told the court that “there is no chance in hell” she could be impartial about anything to do with Trump.
Trump is not on trial in the case and faces no criminal liability.
However, if Merrick Garland ever brings charges against Trump, DOJ will find it near impossible to find an impartial jury.
And if Trump haters try to sneak on any jury, Trump supporters could also do the same.
“He’s guilty in my mind whatever the case is — anything he does, anything his corporation does,” the 34-year-old Manhattan woman said before being cut from the jury pool.
Another woman was also excused from the jury for being anti-Trump and saying she didn’t think he could ever get an impartial jury.
“If it’s down to, can you be impartial about Donald Trump? I think it’s hard,” she said.
“He’s such a polarizing person.”
The woman said another potential juror was also excused because she announced to the court: “I hate Trump.”
“They’re probably not going to find someone impartial either way,” the woman added.
According to Yahoo:
Weisselberg will be the key prosecution witness against the company after pleading guilty to the tax-dodge scheme in August.
He has admitted to pocketing $1.7 million in tax-free perks over 15 years, including Mercedes-Benz luxury cars for him and his wife, free use of Trump-branded apartments on Manhattan’s Hudson River, and tuition for his grandkids’ private schools.
As part of his guilty plea, Weisselberg, who remains on the company payroll as an adviser, must pay back $2 million and serve five months in jail.
Prospective juror: It’s not that I have a problem with propaganda. I just need to know what it is. I am interested in income disparities, some people pay different interest rates… “what happened in 2008, what the Federal government did for some and not others”
— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) October 25, 2022
Con’t: “I lived in a dictatorship for a while… When I lost my freedom overseas, I saw you don’t have any type of protection. The system needs work.”
Counsel: “Thank you for those remarks… Could you be fair?”
A: I wouldn’t bring my idealism to this.— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) October 25, 2022
Ms. Coolibaly is asked if her mother working in Accounts Receivable will be a problem. Seems not.
Next up: an adjunct at NYU, in “advanced archival” —
No conflicts seen.
Next man says he likes to write political criticism. Uh oh— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) October 25, 2022
