> She is a US congressperson and can comment on anything she wishes, even ongoing investigations.

lol, no, just because you're a congressperson doesn't mean you can ignore court or fed orders. What if she talked to the press and accidentally gave away information that helped Sam Bankman-Fried develop a better defense for himself?

If you've ever had jury duty it's actually specifically outlined that you can't, so I imagine that it's the same for her.

>However, once a jury is impaneled, journalists are prohibited from interviewing jurors while the case is being presented and during jury deliberations.

Again, I'm not saying she DOES have a no-talk clause from higher ups, but it's not unreasonable at all.

>I hope she gets it together over the weekend and agrees to talk about this with the Vermont media.

I hope she doesn't, because it would mean she is an idiot and I would no longer trust her to represent me.

Have you seen Breaking Bad? There's a scene in it where they actually joke about this with Badger.

>Did you say anything stupid? And by anything stupid I mean anything at all.

So I have to emphasize again, that the thing you are asking our congressperson to do, talk about an active legal case, is so well known in the public conscious as a horrible idea that modern media actually jokes about that one of the dumber meth dealers in a TV show might do it.