Judge presiding in Trump U case is.... LaRaza

mexicrat. nice.
you had to know it was only a matter of time before the racism leaked out

whose racism? trump's or that of the judge?

read the thread.

I did
then read it again, until you realize the stupidity of your question.

nothing stupid about my question. I do not
believe that all citizens of the USA are obligated to learn Spanish, just as they are not
all obligatd to learn French. I read an important book-----written by an important expert in my field written about 100 years ago-----in Great Britain in ENGLISH---in the writing-----the BRIT. included an IMPORTANT example of the phenomenon he was describing by quoting HIS patient------about three pages of FRENCH. At that time all limey educated persons knew FRENCH-----
I don't
 
So you oppose racism only when it is convenient to you. Got it.

And what racism have I not attacked?

It should be clear common sense that a Presidential candidate should not - under any circumstance - attack a sitting member of the judiciary.

That is pure horse shit. Outstanding PResidents from JAckson to FDR to LBJ have criticized the judiciary.

And besides all that, nothing should prevent a DEFENDANT in a lawsuit from having a judge removed who is a member of a racist group.
 
Stop picking on Donald Trump! He's got a mex judge on his ass about being a con man, and now the entire media is plotting ambushes and he can't blow Bibi enough to keep Bill Kristol from finding someone, any one, to run as a third party candidate.
How many actual supposed victims are suing Trump? Six total in all three law suits. Several of them admit that they thought Trump University was worth their time and money but had nit picks, like Trump not selecting all the instructors himself, etc. This is out of thousands who took his school courses.

This is not a real class action lawsuit, it is a witch hunt presided over by a racist Mexicrat judge.

from the decision granting the motion for class certification:

As to the first two requirements of Rule 23(a), Defendant fails to challenge
Plaintiff’s claim that the putative class is sufficiently numerous or that common
issues of law or fact are common to the class. Plaintiff states that the members of the
proposed nationwide class in this action “number in the thousands
,” (Dkt. No. 39-1
at 14), and the Court agrees that this estimate meets the numerosity requirements of
Rule 23(a)(1). See Ikonen v. Hartz Mountain Corp., 122 F.R.D. 258, 262 (S.D. Cal.
1988) (“classes of 40 or more are numerous enough”).

The explicitly named plaintiffs (e.g. Art Cohen) are the class representatives, appointed by the judge, lol

mexicrat. nice.
ummm, in any class action, the Judge has to certify that the requirements of the number of plaintiffs and the ability of the named plaintiffs to represent the interests of the entire class of plaintiffs are met. The plaintiff attorneys name the individuals in their complaint, but for the suit to go forward, the judge has to enter an order finding they are appropriate.

But hey, he's just a stinking Mex, unlike you, who is a legal genius.
 
IF an Irish ethnic politician supports the IRA and wants to bring that war here to the USA then the public should be informed and the man should be voted out of office.

I agree, so lets see what your comparison is missing in order to stoke the white fears

Here we have an organization who has given top awards to a Jose Gutiérrez who has repeatedly encouraged antiwhite violence and la Raza has never retracted their award.

Wait, so with the IRA the guy has to support a war and with the Mexican guy an Organization gave an award and you say these are the same thing? LOL


Its always some extra shit with yall white asses. White boys have to support a fucking war before its a problem. The Mexican? All he has to do is stand there and you swear he wants to kill you. :badgrin: Faggot
 
So you oppose racism only when it is convenient to you. Got it.

And what racism have I not attacked?

It should be clear common sense that a Presidential candidate should not - under any circumstance - attack a sitting member of the judiciary.

That is pure horse shit. Outstanding PResidents from JAckson to FDR to LBJ have criticized the judiciary.

And besides all that, nothing should prevent a DEFENDANT in a lawsuit from having a judge removed who is a member of a racist group.
But generally not when they're getting sued. LOL
 
ummm, in any class action, the Judge has to certify that the requirements of the number of plaintiffs and the ability of the named plaintiffs to represent the interests of the entire class of plaintiffs are met. The plaintiff attorneys name the individuals in their complaint, but for the suit to go forward, the judge has to enter an order finding they are appropriate.

But hey, he's just a stinking Mex, unlike you, who is a legal genius.
And it is appropriate for the legal team who is bringing the suit to be major donors of the political rival of the Defendant?

lol, only in America
 
IF an Irish ethnic politician supports the IRA and wants to bring that war here to the USA then the public should be informed and the man should be voted out of office.

I agree, so lets see what your comparison is missing in order to stoke the white fears

Here we have an organization who has given top awards to a Jose Gutiérrez who has repeatedly encouraged antiwhite violence and la Raza has never retracted their award.

Wait, so with the IRA the guy has to support a war and with the Mexican guy an Organization gave an award and you say these are the same thing? LOL


Its always some extra shit with yall white asses. White boys have to support a fucking war before its a problem. The Mexican? All he has to do is stand there and you swear he wants to kill you. :badgrin: Faggot
The point is clear, La Raza morally supports violence against Anglos.

Were not not a Democratic Party hack you would admit it.
 
ummm, in any class action, the Judge has to certify that the requirements of the number of plaintiffs and the ability of the named plaintiffs to represent the interests of the entire class of plaintiffs are met. The plaintiff attorneys name the individuals in their complaint, but for the suit to go forward, the judge has to enter an order finding they are appropriate.

But hey, he's just a stinking Mex, unlike you, who is a legal genius.
And it is appropriate for the legal team who is bringing the suit to be major donors of the political rival of the Defendant?

lol, only in America
why should that matter?
 
ummm, in any class action, the Judge has to certify that the requirements of the number of plaintiffs and the ability of the named plaintiffs to represent the interests of the entire class of plaintiffs are met. The plaintiff attorneys name the individuals in their complaint, but for the suit to go forward, the judge has to enter an order finding they are appropriate.

But hey, he's just a stinking Mex, unlike you, who is a legal genius.
And it is appropriate for the legal team who is bringing the suit to be major donors of the political rival of the Defendant?

lol, only in America
why should that matter?
IT shows the political nature of the whole afair, that is to anyone other than Democrat Party hacks like you and Closed Minded
 
IF an Irish ethnic politician supports the IRA and wants to bring that war here to the USA then the public should be informed and the man should be voted out of office.

I agree, so lets see what your comparison is missing in order to stoke the white fears

Here we have an organization who has given top awards to a Jose Gutiérrez who has repeatedly encouraged antiwhite violence and la Raza has never retracted their award.

Wait, so with the IRA the guy has to support a war and with the Mexican guy an Organization gave an award and you say these are the same thing? LOL


Its always some extra shit with yall white asses. White boys have to support a fucking war before its a problem. The Mexican? All he has to do is stand there and you swear he wants to kill you. :badgrin: Faggot
The point is clear, La Raza morally supports violence against Anglos.

Were not not a Democratic Party hack you would admit it.
which would matter if the judge was a member of the group you refer to as 'la raza'

of course, it would matter for more than this case. but since he isn't a member of that group what they believe or say is irrelevant.
 
Bowie is looking for something to justify Donnie's eight grade level outrage. How about all the AGs that are going after Donnie? Are they also "Mexican?"

Why do you think someone has to be Mexican to take Trump to court?

Are you really an idiot or do you just play one on message boards?
 
IF an Irish ethnic politician supports the IRA and wants to bring that war here to the USA then the public should be informed and the man should be voted out of office.

I agree, so lets see what your comparison is missing in order to stoke the white fears

Here we have an organization who has given top awards to a Jose Gutiérrez who has repeatedly encouraged antiwhite violence and la Raza has never retracted their award.

Wait, so with the IRA the guy has to support a war and with the Mexican guy an Organization gave an award and you say these are the same thing? LOL


Its always some extra shit with yall white asses. White boys have to support a fucking war before its a problem. The Mexican? All he has to do is stand there and you swear he wants to kill you. :badgrin: Faggot
The point is clear, La Raza morally supports violence against Anglos.

Were not not a Democratic Party hack you would admit it.
which would matter if the judge was a member of the group you refer to as 'la raza'

of course, it would matter for more than this case. but since he isn't a member of that group what they believe or say is irrelevant.
and he is a member of a legal group associated with la Raza
 
So you oppose racism only when it is convenient to you. Got it.

And what racism have I not attacked?

It should be clear common sense that a Presidential candidate should not - under any circumstance - attack a sitting member of the judiciary.

That is pure horse shit. Outstanding PResidents from JAckson to FDR to LBJ have criticized the judiciary.

And besides all that, nothing should prevent a DEFENDANT in a lawsuit from having a judge removed who is a member of a racist group.

Bowie---how about you say------"having a judge removed..." who could be biased about
the particular issues of the case and the defendant. I think that the judge should step down on his own citing "the appearance of
impropriety ...." or some sort of other fudgesicle
 
ummm, in any class action, the Judge has to certify that the requirements of the number of plaintiffs and the ability of the named plaintiffs to represent the interests of the entire class of plaintiffs are met. The plaintiff attorneys name the individuals in their complaint, but for the suit to go forward, the judge has to enter an order finding they are appropriate.

But hey, he's just a stinking Mex, unlike you, who is a legal genius.
And it is appropriate for the legal team who is bringing the suit to be major donors of the political rival of the Defendant?

lol, only in America
why should that matter?
IT shows the political nature of the whole afair, that is to anyone other than Democrat Party hacks like you and Closed Minded
the political nature of the whole affair? these suits predate the donald's entry into the presidential race.
 

Forum List

Back
Top