{"id":30398,"date":"2020-02-26T06:16:52","date_gmt":"2020-02-26T11:16:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=30398"},"modified":"2020-02-26T06:16:52","modified_gmt":"2020-02-26T11:16:52","slug":"judge-amy-berman-jackson-refuses-to-recuse-herself","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=30398","title":{"rendered":"Judge Amy Berman Jackson refuses to recuse herself"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. The fallout from the Roger Stone trial continues. Since his conviction, it came to light that at least one juror was so biased against him that she should have been removed from the jury. Then we have the actions of the judge, Amy Jackson.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Her animosity towards Roger Stone and his defense team has spilled over into the courtroom. The defense team, citing her very words and actions, asked her to recuse herself from any further role in the trial. Jackson, who is an Obama judge, has refused. Here are some of the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

Judge Army Berman Jackson<\/a>, who presided over the case of former Trump adviser Roger Stone,<\/a> denied Stone\u2019s request that she be removed from deciding whether he can have a new trial, writing Sunday that his motion seemed to be “nothing more than an attempt to use the court\u2019s docket to disseminate a statement for public consumption that has the words ‘judge’ and ‘biased’ in it.”<\/b><\/p>\n

According to Never Trumper former judge, Andrew Napolitano, the words and actions of judge Jackson flagrantly violated the constitution and the rights of Mr. Stone. Napolitano isn\u2019t alone in observing what appears top be pretty blatant bias, and possibly prejudgement in this case, two very big no no\u2019s.<\/p>\n

Stone\u2019s defense team filed a motion Friday<\/a> arguing that Jackson\u2019s statement that the jury in the case had \u201cserved with integrity\u201d should disqualify her from presiding as Stone pursued his bid for a new trial. <\/b>They argued her description of the jury was a display of bias on behalf of the judge in a case that has not yet concluded, despite sentencing, because of the bid for a new trial.<\/b><\/p>\n

Now I make no claims to understanding the nuances of a criminal case, however, if the defense team is showing new evidence that the defendant did NOT get a fair trial, the judge is supposed to review things in a dispassionate manner. Jackson, on the other hand, has done nothing but provide aid to the prosecution.<\/p>\n

Stone\u2019s lawyers claimed that an unnamed juror \u201cmisled the court regarding her ability to be unbiased and fair and the juror attempted to cover up evidence that would directly contradict her false claims of impartiality.\u201d It was an apparent reference to Tomeka Hart,<\/a> whose anti-Trump social-media posts included quoting someone who referred to Trump as the \u201c#KlanPresident.” Some of the posts later vanished from her Twitter feed.<\/b><\/p>\n

Yeah, that is pretty damning information, and as to tweets vanishing from twitter? Whatever goes on the internet, stays on the internet. Someone has those posts. The fact that this nitwit shot her mouth off should have given the judge all she would need to toss this conviction and declare a mistrial. (By the way, I\u2019m paraphrasing actual lawyers)<\/p>\n

But, Jackson shot down those arguments in her filling issued Sunday. <\/b><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no rule and no case law that would justify the recusal of a judge for bias simply because he or she says something about an issue on the docket, on the record, at some point before a reply has been filed, or before a hearing \u2013 which may or may not be required in the court\u2019s discretion \u2013 has concluded,\u201d Jackson wrote.<\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Everything I\u2019ve been reading basically shoots down Judge Jackson\u2019s filing, and this is from both sides of the aisle. I have little doubt that Roger Stone\u2019s conviction is going to be appealed, and more then likely, the conviction is going to be vacated. At that point, either a new trial will be held, or the charges dropped.<\/p>\n

If they go for a new trial, you can count on the defense team asking for a change of venue. It is impossible for Roger Stone, or anyone in the Trump Administration or campaign to get a fair trial in Washington. Frankly, if the conviction is vacated, I suspect the DoJ will not retry Mr. Stone. All the evidence that\u2019s come out both during and since the trial appears to indicate that the Mueller team set all this up. Well, we shall see what happens eventually.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

As for Obama Judge Amy Berman Jackson, she should be removed from hearing any further cases. She has shown that she is unfit for the position. Frankly, she should be told to resign or face impeachment, but with the Democratic CommuNazis in the House and Senate showing that they will protect people like Jackson, that isn\u2019t going to happen. Whether or not she can be transferred to traffic court is another matter and one I am not qualified to comment on.<\/p>\n

Thatisall<\/p>\n\"1\"2\"3\"4\"5 (1<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n

~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n