How does Amy Berman Jackson wind up being the judge in so many legal actions against President Trump?
For example, there are four District Court judges for the District of Columbia. But 6 of the 12 cases brought by Robert Mueller against Trump administration people found their way into Judge Jackson’s courtroom.
Don’t you find that a bit strange?
Could it be that Judge Jackson, an Obama appointee, gets them by coincidence? Just plain dumb luck? You can believe that if you want to, I suppose. But count me out.
And now, for the Roger Stone case, here she is again. In all her Obama-appointed glory.
So what is the 1st thing that she does, when a controversial juror might or might not be seated?
Here is the story, excerpted from Chuck Ross’s article at dailycaller.com:
The judge overseeing the trial of Roger Stone rejected a request from the Trump confidant’s defense lawyers Tuesday to remove a potential juror whose husband works on the Justice Department unit involved in the Russia investigation and who admitted to having negative views of President Donald Trump, according to reports.
At the beginning of jury selection, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee, said that she would not remove potential jurors solely on the basis that they work for the federal government or because of their views of Trump.
The potential juror served as a press secretary in the Office of Management and Budget during the Obama administration, according to Politico and Reuters. She also admitted to having a negative view of Trump.
The potential juror’s husband also currently works in the Justice Department’s national security division, which was involved in the investigation of the Trump campaign and other Trump associates, including Stone.
Stone and his lawyers have raised concerns that he cannot get a fair trial in Washington, D.C., a staunch liberal enclave.
The juror they sought to strike from the pool acknowledged following developments in the special counsel’s investigation. But Jackson said that she accepted the potential juror’s claim that she did not have an opinion of the Stone case.
“She said credibly she doesn’t have an opinion on this case,” Jackson said, according to Reuters.
Does anyone have the pelotas to tell me that this does not stink to high heaven?
Does anyone believe for even one second that, if a potential juror came in with a history of supporting Donald Trump, Amy Berman Jackson would allow that juror to sit?
There is no way I will not believe that the fix is in. Period.
How about you?