Comments by "Matthew Loutner" (@Matthew_Loutner) on "Judge denies Meadows' push to move Georgia election case to federal court" video.

  1. 2
  2. 1
  3.  @christopherwhittaker2620 We never know anything about the future for sure. But the evidence strongly suggests that he would not get a fair trial in Georgia. I am not sure that both sides agreeing to the jury is foolproof. It is possible that the defense may just do so many interviews that they just give up and say "I will take this one." And I am not sure, but I think there is a limit on the number of jury candidates that they can interview. And a jury candidate can always lie about their true intentions and motivations . . . Both sides picked the jury in the Derek Chauvin case and the jury convicted him on 3 counts of murder although he was innocent. Historically in the Deep South a Black man never got a fair trial no matter that both sides picked the jury. The important thing is to have a fair trial. But it is also important that the defendant BELIEVES he is getting a fair trial. We already know that the judge who denied the venue change is tainted. If you go back and listen to his statement in the video, he says that Meadows is being denied because "he had an ultimate goal of affecting state election activities and procedures." But it has not been proven in court that he was trying to do that, so the judge had no right to say that. In fact, whether Meadows was doing that or not is exactly what the trial is supposed to figure out. So this judge is saying he is guilty before the trial even takes place. The judge is biased and tainted. And now this judge has tainted the minds of anyone who heard his statement with the idea that Meadows is already guilty (which would mostly be Georgians because Georgian media will cover this more heavily).
    1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1