Given recent rumblings in the media about a potential pardon for ex-officer Derek Chauvin following his conviction over the George Floyd case, old footage has popped up of a podcast where Tim Pool got a Democrat to admit the former cop may not have been given a fair shake.
Back in May, Gov. Tim Walz, a Minnesota Democrat and failed vice presidential nominee, created controversy by saying President Donald Trump was getting ready to pardon Derek Chauvin, according to the New York Post.
“If Donald Trump exercises his constitutional right to do so, whether I agree — and I strongly disagree with him — if he issues that pardon, we will simply transfer Derek Chauvin to serve out his 22 and a half years in prison in Minnesota,” the Minnesota Star Tribune reported.
While interviewing then-Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson in December 2023, Pool mentioned an idea that isn’t often mentioned: Was a fair trial for Chauvin even possible?
“If a judge were to say, ‘A fair trial would not be possible, so we’re going to do it here anyway,’ would you find that acceptable in terms of how our system is supposed to work?” Pool inquired, setting the trap.
Williamson replied, “I’ve never heard a judge say, ‘I admit you couldn’t get a fair trial here, but we’re going ahead with the trial anyway.’”
“Let’s say that hypothetically happened,” Pool continued.
“I mean, even in those cases, there is such a thing as judicial prejudice,” Williamson explained. “Somebody would be arguing that there was judicial prejudice and the case would not stop there.”
Talk about backtracking.
Marianne Williamson, seems like a nice person, but Holy Moly is she Biased and Super Uninformed on the Derek Chauvin case and many other instances of the evil done by people of the “Left”. pic.twitter.com/szxgiNRVH9— The Raymond G Stanley Jr (@raymondgstanley) December 22, 2023
Do you believe Derek Chauvin should be pardoned?
“What if the case did stop there?” he asked. She quickly retorted: “If the case did stop there, I’d be the first to say this is wrong.”
“So will you stand up in defense of Derek Chauvin?” he shot back.
After a very long pause, Williamson seemed to short circuit. She finally said there was “legitimacy” to the case moving forward, given that “everybody saw the video” of Floyd dying.
“How could there be lack of prejudice anywhere?” she asked.
“Right,” Pool said. “So the question is about the Constitution and what is fair in the court of law, and not what we want to have happened because of our feelings.”
The podcast host concluded his argument by explaining that if the defendant has no chance of receiving a fair trial in any venue, then there should be “no trial at all.”
Williamson seemed disgusted and said it all amounted to a simple disagreement. Her flimsy defense was that it was an “overriding circumstance.”
There are, in fact, a myriad of reasons to question the Chauvin case.
Emmy-winning local reporter Liz Collin has given various interviews and shared investigative reporting on the subject. The saga became even crazier after Chauvin survived being stabbed 22 times in prison.
Forget the mysterious issue of Chauvin’s original police handbook showing the maneuver he employed as approved. Or the outrageous behavior exhibited by Floyd during the arrest. There’s also the massive amount of fentanyl that Floyd had in his system, and the autopsy stating there were “no life-threatening injuries identified.”
Even CNN had to recognize how heart failure and drug abuse played a role.
Then why is it considered murder, and why were thousands of people allowed to set an entire city on fire?
It was allowed to happen so the country could be further divided. Chauvin played the scapegoat. Floyd was cast as the hero, and no one was allowed to question the results.
It was just another day in the woke Marxists’ America.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
