|
 Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesOn the first day of former President Donald Trump's hush money trial, Judge Juan Merchan asked the prospective jurors if there was any reason they couldn't be impartial. More than half said yes, which surprised me. Who wanted out this early?
Then again, the jurors are from Manhattan. They're busy.
So far, this case has been Peak Manhattan. The charges themselves are a mix between very serious election interference and a salacious episode of Sex and the City. Mostly election interference, okay! I know it's a really big deal.
Read more at The Daily Beast.
|
|
 Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily BeastAs the first criminal trial against a former President of the United States gets underway, the biggest question facing both sides is this: How do you find twelve impartial jurors when it comes to the subject of the twice-impeached sexual assailant, serial liar, fraudster, and Bible salesman who once held the highest elected office in the land?
At this point, is anybody impartial? How is true impartiality regarding Donald Trump even possible? If 12 such people even exist, I wouldn't trust them to sit on a toilet, let alone a jury.
Nevertheless, the Constitution demands we seat 12 Americans to sit in judgment, and so I tried to put myself in the shoes of a prospective juror. Could I set aside my own somewhat biased (I hate him) feelings regarding the defendant to ensure that he gets a fair trial?
Read more at The Daily Beast.
|
|
