Ahead of political operative Roger Stone’s sentencing hearing next week, President Donald Trump and other prominent Republicans are alleging that his jury was biased.

In November, Stone was found guilty of obstructing justice, witness tampering and lying under oath to investigators. Prosecutors initially recommended seven to nine years of jail time, which Trump complained about on Twitter.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) then stepped in to say that a much shorter sentence was appropriate, prompting four prosecutors to withdraw from the case in protest.

Some Stone supporters are claiming that the head juror on the case, Tomeka Hart, lied about her views during jury selection. But court records show that Stone’s defense team was aware of her political background and did not ask the judge to exclude her from the jury.

Why are Trump and others alleging Stone’s jury was biased?

After the prosecutors withdrew from Stone’s case, Hart responded with a Facebook post that was published in The Commercial Appeal and other new outlets.

“It pains me to see the DOJ now interfere with the hard work of the prosecutors,” she wrote. “They acted with the utmost intelligence, integrity, and respect for our system of justice.”

Hart, who works for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, previously served on the board for Memphis City Schools. She also ran as a Democrat for the House of Representatives in 2012.

After Hart’s post received attention, conservative news outlets dug into Hart’s social media, finding she had posted Tweets that were critical of Trump.

How did the court conduct jury selection for Stone’s trial?

Last year, Stone asked for a new trial, arguing that an unnamed juror was biased because she was a tax attorney for the Internal Revenue Service. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rejected that request in an order that provides some insight into how Stone’s jury was selected.

The process started with a questionnaire, which 120 potential jurors took to determine if they had a bias that would prevent them from fairly evaluating the case.

In September, prosecutors and Stone’s defense team asked the court to remove candidates from the jury pool based on their answers to the questionnaire. Stone’s attorneys requested 54 potential jurors be eliminated. The court tossed out 38, all of whom were on Stone’s wish list for removal. The rest of those on Stone’s list never wound up serving on the jury.

Stone’s attorneys asked the court to remove nine more candidates from the jury pool in November, and two of those were eliminated. The other seven also didn’t go on to serve on the jury.

Eventually, the remaining group of potential jurors came to court, where Stone’s attorneys, prosecutors and the judge questioned them to determine if they had any biases against Stone.

What happened during the final jury selection in court?

During the proceeding, Stone said he had food poisoning and left the courtroom, waiving his right to participate in the jury selection.

Stone’s team tried to remove another potential juror, who ended up on the final jury after Jackson rejected the request.

Reuters reported that Jackson did not exclude potential jurors solely for their opinions about Trump or because they worked for the federal government. Some potential jurors were eliminated when they said they couldn’t ignore their opinions about Trump and remain fair during Stone’s trial.

Did Hart conceal her background as a Democrat during jury selection?

I emailed Stone’s lead attorneys to ask two questions: Did they know about Hart’s background, including her Democratic campaign for Congress, during jury selection? And did they ask the court to exclude her from the jury?

Attorney Bruce Rogow did not answer the questions. In an email, he said: “We are looking into several issues and that is the best I can do for you.”

Around the same time of our email exchange, conservative site The Daily Caller posted a transcript from that day in court.

The transcript, which identifies Hart as juror No. 1261, shows that Stone’s defense team was aware she had run for office as a Democrat. Hart said she didn’t know the specifics of Stone’s case, aside from his connection to Trump’s campaign and the Mueller investigation. When asked if she could fairly serve on the jury given Stone’s connection to the Trump campaign and the Republican party, she said yes.

Stone attorney Robert Buschel asked Hart several questions and did not ask the court to remove her from the jury pool.

I asked Rogow and Buschel to explain this decision, but they did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Contact Big If True editor Mollie Bryant at 405-990-0988 or bryant@bigiftrue.org. Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.

We’re nonpartisan and nonprofit. Support Big If True.