7 out of 12 votes in the judge that was chosen from a share of 96 possible judges in New York are still being filled as of Tuesday evening. The jury of the former president’s “peers” has a common trait, however, so much: they generally receive their information from the same left-wing media that has spent years decrying Trump.
Of the 96 possible jurors, more than half were “dismissed immediately Monday after indicating that they could not fairly reach a decision, ” The New York Times ( NYT ) reported. Some jurors who were able to survive until Tuesday after resigned, with one expressing regret for not being as independent and objective as hoped.
Jurors 1 to 7
Of the currently selected judges, two are from outside the 50 state, according to ABC News. One hails from Ireland, works as a marketer, and is reportedly set to offer as the case’s director. The judge told the jury he reads MSNBC, The New York Times, the Daily Mail, and Fox News, and apparently said he has “heard of some” of the other lawfare circumstances being waged against the previous president.
The other foreign-born judge is from Puerto Rico and called Trump “fascinating and strange, ” according to ABC News. His usual information resources are the Daily News, The New York Times, and Google.
That jury reportedly claimed that when Trump “walks into a space… he sets people down in one way or another.” Truly, this one person can do all of this. ”
Additionally, the situation has two attorneys. One is an Oregon-born commercial attorney who regularly reads the NYT, Google News, and Wall Street Journal. The judge, according to ABC News, “suggested that he could conclude the former president’s intentions without ‘reading his brain. ‘ ”
The other prosecutor on the judge reads the NYT, New York Post, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post. The juror said he does n’t “have opinions about [ Trump ] personally. He backed some of Trump’s laws while in office, according to ABC News, but he disagreed with others. ”
The final three judges are women. One works as an cancer nurse and generally gets her reports from the NYT, CNN, Google, and Facebook. While she reportedly states she does n’t “really have ” an opinion on Trump, she added “No one is above the law. ”
Left-wing activists and politicians have used that phrase to support the law enforcement actions taken against Trump, despite the fact that Joe Biden has avoided charges for improperly keeping classified documents and an alleged foreign bribery scandal.
Another female judge, described by the NYT as a “young dark girl, ” is a born-and-raised New Yorker who teaches English Language Arts at a charter school. She primarily obtains her news using TikTok and Google, but ABC News reported that she “does n’t really care about the news.”
“President Trump speaks his mind, ” the jury reportedly said. “And I’d more that than one who’s in business who you don’t realize what they’re considering. ”
The second women judge is a Walt Disney Company software engineer who writes for TikTok and the NYT for information. She promised to be objective and fair to the court. ”
Jurors ’ ‘News ’ Sources Have a History of Leftist Activism
The majority of the media outlets that the above judges rely on to get the information are corporate media sources or Big Tech platforms with alleged prejudices against Trump and another non-leftists.
Six out of the jury claimed to receive information from the NYT. That paper helped spread the Russia-collusion hoax, with three of its reporters winning a Pulitzer Prize for their “reporting ” which FBI official Peter Strzok, who ran the investigation into the alleged collusion, privately acknowledged was filled with “misleading and inaccurate” information, as pointed out by The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway.
Following The publication of a 2017 article titled “Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence, ” Strzok stated in private notes that officials had not seen any instances of people associated with the Trump team making contact with [Russian Intelligence Officials ]. We are not aware of ANY Trump officials speaking with Russian knowledge officers. ”
The Times cited private intelligence officials as the basis for its history.
“Widely accepted by the media and political establishment, ” the Times story did “much to cement the false and destructive Russia conspiracy theory, ” Hemingway wrote.
By 2020, the Times ’ editorial board had flat-out published an editorial titled “End Our National Crisis: The Case Against Donald Trump. According to its leade, Trump’s re-election plan poses the biggest threat to American politics since World War II. ”
[READ NEXT: Here’s How The Media Are Lying Right Now: NYT Editor Blames Swing Voters Who ‘Don’t Know Or Remember ’ Trump ]
According to Pew Research, 4 out of 10 TikTok users claim to use the software as a regular news supply, according to a common pattern that suggests this is true for many jurors who cited the Chinese-owned app as one of their sources for news. These customers are “especially good ” to be Democrats, under 50 years old, and/or people, Pew noted.
Democrats are concerned about losing the system as national security fears grow as efforts to ban the spyware grow. Reuters noted that a “US ban of TikTok would rob Biden, Democrats of 2024 election tool, ” noting Biden’s campaign uses TikTok to make videos like one “skewering ” Trump “about cutting Social Security spending. ” Politico published a similar statement about young Democrats ’ affection for keeping TikTok round.
Additionally, a number of judges cited Google as a cause of their information. Google has a reputation for amplifying left-wing media while suppressing traditional viewpoints and obstructing readers with information like the bribery scandal involving the Biden household. The platform “interfered ” in elections at least 41 times over 16 years, a study from the Media Research Center found. “ In every case, Google harmed the candidates – regardless of party – who threatened its left-wing candidate of choice, ” the MRC concluded.
Jury Selection
Before questioning the future judges, the prosecution and defense were given their names so they could seek the jury ’ social media activity, CNN reported.
Each side has the right to proactively reach up to 10 jurors at any time, and it may also request that the judge strike any jurors who exhibit bias. If the judge finds reason, the struck judge is not included in the 10 proactive attacks. One of Trump’s doctors, Todd Blanche, asked the prosecutor to eliminate potential jury who claimed not to have thoughts about Trump but whose social media posts, Blanche argued, indicated then. Judge Juan Merchan removed two — including a man who “had posted ‘lock him up ’ on Facebook ”— but refused to attack three people, according to CNN.
One possible judge, a girl who had posted a picture she took of a crowd of people celebrating after Biden won the election in 2020, was objected to by Blanke, but Merchan refrained from striking her and chastised Trump in the process.
One potential judge, who was afterwards let go because of a work conflict, told reporters outside the court that she firmly believed in the value of giving Trump a fair test before going on to record all the reasons she disliked and did no “approve of what he did as president.” ”
The Trump team is not the only one in the court who is concerned about being influenced by discrimination. Politico identified Judge Juan Merchan’s child Loren as the leader of Authentic Campaigns, a Democrat advertising agency with customers like Vice President Kamala Harris and California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff. Merchan himself donated to President Joe Biden’s plan in 2020 and to an anti-Trump class called “Stop Republicans. ”
Why Is Trump in Court Anyways?
In one of Democrats ’ many acts of lawfare against the former president, Manhattan D. A. Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 matters connected to the rumor that he had Michael Cohen as a lawyer to cover up an alleged affair with Stormy Daniels. Bragg alleges that Trump broke the law by requiring his business to treat the alleged obligations to Daniels as “legal costs ” rather than plan expenses. Past FEC Commissioner Brad Smith argued in these pages that hill is trying to convert misreporting to a misdemeanor charge because it was done to cover up a murder. ”
According to Bragg, Trump’s failure to disclose the payment as a battle costs prevented the electorate from knowing any information that might have had an impact on their decisions. ” But as The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland has noted, “there is little immoral about purchasing damaging information to reduce its publication. ”
The Federalist’s election correspondent, Brianna Lyman.
