I am asking here because all the political subs don’t allow a question, and US politics used to seemed so simple until to understand this man came along.
I am asking here because all the political subs don’t allow a question, and US politics used to seemed so simple until to understand this man came along.
It feels like, while in theory it might be possible to convict a former president, in practice it’ll be literally impossible to find a jury who aren’t biased in one way or another, because everyone has a strong opinion about the man. I’d bet my life savings that for virtually every potential juror, how they voted in 2020 has a bigger impact on their verdict than any evidence either side could possibly provide.
@starman2112 @xantoxis it’s not about bias is about facts. If proved that something happens is not biased. It is called applying the law.
Okay, I’m going to take this on its best face and believe that you might just not have thought about the process. In a jury trial, each juror gets to decide for themself what they believe happened based on the ‘facts’ presented during the trial. If you have talked to any hardcore fan of a politician, then you have seen how they can disregard just about anything that is presented about their favorite fella.
The concern that a juror who voted for Trump; watches nothing but Fox News, Newsmax, or other ‘conservative’ media; lives in an area where only other brainwashed masses live; talks about nothing political except for conservative talking points with said neighbors, friends, family, and coworkers coworkers; and is still willing to believe in Trump’s innocence despite all the public evidence we know about will vote innocent regardless of what is presented in court is a legitimate concern. Don’t be naive and think that somehow being in court will cause a tiger to change its stripes.
whew That was one hell of a run-on sentence.
@PickTheStick I see now what you mean about the pissibility of jurors beeing biased. Thanks for the context.