Each side can reject a certain number of jurors but that number is finite. In DC the population consists mainly of people employed by the federal government directly or whose job depends on the Federal Government being inefficient, lax, overspending, not changing. This best fits the Democrat party and the number of Dems to Republicans on the voter rolls are overwhelmingly Dems. Given that as the base from which to pick jurors, The chances of getting a conviction are slim at best. If 99% of the jurors are Dems who all voted for Hillary, how many would vote against her people at trial? If Durham tried Sussman in a place like Salt Lake City or Boise, ID I think the outcome would be much different. I don't know what rules are in place for federal trial venues but DC would be one of the worst to gain a conviction of Dems.
Each side can reject a certain number of jurors but that number is finite. In DC the population consists mainly of people employed by the federal government directly or whose job depends on the Federal Government being inefficient, lax, overspending, not changing. This best fits the Democrat party and the number of Dems to Republicans on the voter rolls are overwhelmingly Dems. Given that as the base from which to pick jurors, The chances of getting a conviction are slim at best. If 99% of the jurors are Dems who all voted for Hillary, how many would vote against her people at trial? If Durham tried Sussman in a place like Salt Lake City or Boise, ID I think the outcome would be much different. I don't know what rules are in place for federal trial venues but DC would be one of the worst to gain a conviction of Dems.
Perhaps the mountain of unimpeachable evidence yet still being found innocent is supposed to cause an outrage they've already planned for.
Maybe this will all go down like it should and it will cause even more panic and show just how much control the DS has lost.
shrug maybe when the sky's the limit you can reason just about anything.