If the 4 or whatever # of jurors remain against P's, it won't be because they aren't convinced or don't see it or don't believe it or don't understand.
It WILL be because THE JURORS don't care.
Just like govt (fhfa/ treasury/ white house) don't care. It is and will be deliberate.
Demarco admitted it. He admitted to not caring, bcuz profit or not, he wanted wind down. Admitted to not giving any appropriate amount of consideration. The very definition of arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. Demarco & govt didn't/ don't care.
And after all testimony and evidence, even with Lamberth BS, and with definitions being explained of those two words (arbitrary and unreasonable) so there is no excuse of ignorance, the jurors still say "NO"?
This case is a "SLAM DUNK"......
IF the jurors and Judge did their duty based on fact, logic, rule of law, basic math, and grammar.
But somehow these people don't grasp it?
No. It is deliberate.
Whether it be: BIAS, COMPROMISED, CORRUPTION, ETC.
BUT NOT incompetence or ignorance.
The ONLY PEOPLE to believe "fanniegate" never happened, coincidentally happen to be all the people deciding our fate?
If bias, or conflict of interest were removed, WE'D WIN in a heartbeat.
Why do you think when another country does the same exact thing, it is quickly acknowledged and condemned?
But when the people doing the condemning are guilty of the same acts then it becomes "nothing to see here".
Rules for thee and not for me, basically.
BS!
Anyway, that's my belief. If jurors come around then they weren't compromised or bias, but if not, that's exactly what they are. No way to see it another way. If so, would be naive in my opinion.
JMO
