It is unclear at this time who will serve on the jury in the phony trial that will begin on January 6 against former President Donald Trump for his handling of confidential papers and his role in the 2021 Capitol incursion.
U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who was nominated to the bench in 2013 by then-President Barack Obama, is widely regarded as the most stringent sentencing authority in Washington, DC for offenders charged on January 6, as The Western Journal reported.
It is common knowledge that she worked at the same law firm as President Joe Biden's controversial son Hunter Biden.
But more importantly, she has made up her mind and written it down over two years ago that Trump is the man accountable for the events of that day.
It was part of Trump's legal struggle against the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol, which is essentially a puppet show. Documents relating to Trump's actions that day were subject to an executive privilege claim.
It's not so much the fact that the ruling on November 9, 2021 was affirmed on appeal and allowed to stand by the Supreme Court (as reported by The Washington Post) as it is what came along with the ruling that was significant:
Convincing evidence that Trump planned and executed the Capitol invasion, including his claims that the election could be "rigged," his legal challenges following the election, and his address on the Ellipse on January 6.
Her ruling quoted Trump saying in that speech, “We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” and “you’ll never take back our country with weakness.”
“Shortly thereafter, the crowds surged from the rally,” Chutkan wrote, “marched along Constitution Avenue, and commenced their siege of the Capitol.”
It was a jumble of details fit for a novelist, not a judge, and it implied that the former president's statements were to blame for the subsequent violence.
And it was obviously crafted by a propagandist, since it omitted a key sentence from Trump's speech that made it apparent he wasn't advocating violence: "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
Part of the statement was released by independent journalist Julie Kelly on X (previously Twitter) with an observation that any reasonable person should find compelling:
“This statement by Judge Chutkan in her landmark ruling denying Trump exec privilege protections from House Democrats J6 committee alone should be disqualifying,” she wrote.
Even as Chutkan acknowledged that the “question of how that day’s events came about and who was responsible for them is not before the court” and the background was “not material to the outcome,” she still seemed to need to include it in her opinion in order to offer “context for the legal dispute here.”
Smith’s prosecution could be a sham, but if Chutkan is the judge, he could not ask for a better courtroom for it to play out.