Amid the collection of Trump haters, donors to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and AOC fans, there’s yet another problematic juror who sits on the jury in the case of Hillary’s attorney, Michael Sussmann.
Sussmann faces accusations of lying to the FBI to begin the process of poisoning official D.C. with the Hillary Clinton campaign-planted story that Donald Trump was a Russian secret agent. The jury will decide if his lie was material to the seriousness with which the FBI zealously investigated the Trump-Russia connections with Alfa Bank.
That fake news led to false stories in the media about hookers jumping on Moscow beds for Trump — who wasn’t there — led to a two-year-long special counsel investigation, cost Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn his job and millions in legal fees, led to an Inspector General’s report, buttressed impeachment efforts, and helped along attempts to destroy Trump’s tenure as president.
Other than that it was a totally benign effort.
Earlier this week, I wrote about the problem with getting a fair trial in D.C. Let’s hop in the Wayback Machine from a few days back:
Juries are always problematic for Republicans or conservatives in D.C. Just ask Roger Stone, a Trump ally, who was convicted of obstruction of justice by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Mueller said Stone knew about WikiLeaks, while Stone said he did not. The jury, which included a far-left Democrat activist, convicted Stone. When the judge found out, he did absolutely nothing to give him a new and fair trial.
Many Jan. 6 protesters still awaiting trial are taking their chances on bench trials with a judge rather than subjecting themselves to a jury pool that overwhelmingly consists of far-left Democrats, federal employees, and members of the swamp where 92.1% voted for the other guy in the last presidential election. Polls of the D.C. population show “that while 80 percent of D.C. residents think defendants will receive a fair trial in the District, 1 in 5 admit that they would have their doubts if they were the ones charged, and 1 in 10 don’t believe trials will be fair.”
In addition to the incestuous cesspool of bad actors in Washington, D.C. — see the Russian Collusion aspect of this case — you can’t swing a dead cat in the DMV before you find a friend or acquaintance of a defendant at this level, which is why there should be a liberal change-of-venue policy for these cases. Jan. 6 protesters would sure appreciate it.
These cases, with a jury not predisposed to hating you, should be removed to normal America, instead of where wild-eyed Leftists and their buddies overwhelm the system.
Related: Durham Pretends FBI Was Duped by Hillary’s Lawyer Into Participating in Her ‘October Surprise’
Now, providing a possible mistrial or appealable issue for the prosecution, the Washington Times reports that juror number five is the mother of a friend of defendant Michael Sussmann’s daughter. The judge, whose own connections raise questions about his objectivity, doesn’t think that’s a problem.
A woman, identified as Juror #5, came forward Thursday morning to tell the court that she only recently discovered that her daughter and Mr. Sussmann’s daughter play on the same high school crew team.
The juror told U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper that she was unaware of the connection when shefilled out a jury questionnaire last week. The juror stressed that the daughters are not friends and there is at least a three-year age gap between the two.
She also said it was a large crew team with over 40 students, adding that she has never met Mr. Sussmann or his wife. She emphasized that she could still be fair and impartial and has no other ties to the defendant.
Judge Casey Cooper thinks juror number five should stay on the jury. Compared to Hillary supporters populating the jury, juror number five might be the least of the Durham team’s problems.
And that’s saying something.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member