Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Adam H. Kerman" Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Former Fed Prosecutor Apparently Fine With Trump-Haters On Hush-Money Jury, Terrified A Trump Supporter Will "Sneak" In Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:48:42 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: Injection-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:48:43 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0c1a1efb370b6e8b3eb15d6a8d69088f"; logging-data="2511946"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/EbFdbttnQbO0yb8SgJOW37uYlVhL4/b4=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:vsp4VYN2l5RCsv+JIBuIE3qI7wc= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 3221 Ubi's asinine crosspost cut BTR1701 wrote: >Ubiquitous wrote: Citation for the article plagarized by Ubi the shithead Former Fed Prosecutor Apparently Fine With Trump-Haters On Hush-Money Jury, Terrified A Trump Supporter Will 'Sneak' In By Virginia Kruta The Daily Wire Apr 16, 2024 https://www.dailywire.com/news/former-fed-prosecutor-apparently-fine-with-trump-haters-on-hush-money-jury-terrified-a-trump-supporter-will-sneak-in >>Former federal prosecutor Sunny Hostin admitted that she was worried about >>the prospect of a Trump supporter being able to sneak onto the jury in the >>former president's Manhattan hush-money trial but shared no such concerns >>that Trump haters might do so. >For her to advocate that it's okay if someone who hates Trump is on the >jury but someone who likes him should be barred is all the evidence >necessary to show that this woman should be disbarred. Why do any of you watch this show, let alone watch any daytime television? I had no idea she was a lawyer, let alone a former prosecutor. In America, we have secret ballots by law. I shouldn't be required to reveal my partisanship on a jury questionaire. I might support or oppose a politician who has been charged criminally, but that has nothing to do with whether I would excuse criminal behavior. If I'm empaneled, then I'm swearing an oath to consider the evidence impartially. I've already got all sorts of opinions on all sorts of issues that could be related to the trial, all of which I'd have to set aside when considering the value of evidence presented. >And yes, it's going to be real hard for the prosecution to challenge >people merely for their votes in the last presidential election if they >were for Trump but not if they were for Biden. Both votes imply a bias >and I'd love to watch the prosecution try to make the argument that it's >totes cool to have a jury packed with people who are biased against the >defendant but not to even have one who's biased for him. He can use his peremptory challenges as he wishes as he cannot challenge for cause.