So...white jury isn't fair to black defendant; But Hispanic is fair to Trump???

[Pogo]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Is this epic hypocrisy on the left? Or....are ONLY white judges and jurors capable of being biased??? One of the two must be true.

did trump claim the judge might be racially biased against him....... i don't think so....

Nope. He said he thought the judge is "Mexican", and that "that's fine". Which does invite the question, if it's "fine" ---- then why did he bring it up? What's its relevance to the standing of a fraud suit? Aye, there's the rub.

for political reasons..............????

On the judge's part?

That would require some kind of evidence. "His parents back in Indiana were Mexican" is way too much of a leap. By that same logic, Rump is German, therefore he's a Nazi. It's the same thought process.

So no, I mean for logical reasons.

 

[bucs90]

A) Are you serious? How many links do you want on the unfairness of white juries to black defendants? You want Washington Post, NY Times, SCOTUS or college professors???

B) If it doesn't matter....then why the fuck would a juror or judges white skin matter on whether Jerome murdered someone or not?

Congratulations....you've stumbled upon liberal hypocrisy.

So I was right --- "countless" does mean "zero".

Pogo....so sad.....there's hundreds. I'll start with CNN and Washington Post

Supreme Court's ruling on excluding blacks from juries fixes a racial wrong - CNN.com

How big of a difference does an all-white jury make? A leading expert explains.

You actually think that "Mexican" is a race?

Where did I say Mexican? The judge is Hispanic....and ethnicity....the twisted cousin of race.

And if it's "unfair" for black defendants to have white judges or mostly white juries..has lefties have claimed....then Trump has a point about a Hispanic judge overseeing his case.

Once again, Idiot --- from YOUR OWN LINK:

It ruled that prosecutors purposefully kept African-Americans off

Heloooo? That's your own link talking. Can you read?

Yes I can.....it's my link. And again...WHY WOULD IT MATTER???

You're stepping into it here.

Why would it matter if they ensured an all white jury?
Why would it matter if they didn't put blacks on it?

Libs have said for years that RACE MATTERS on juries.

Why????

 

[Yurt]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Is this epic hypocrisy on the left? Or....are ONLY white judges and jurors capable of being biased??? One of the two must be true.

did trump claim the judge might be racially biased against him....... i don't think so....

Nope. He said he thought the judge is "Mexican", and that "that's fine". Which does invite the question, if it's "fine" ---- then why did he bring it up? What's its relevance to the standing of a fraud suit? Aye, there's the rub.

for political reasons..............????

On the judge's part?

That would require some kind of evidence. "His parents back in Indiana were Mexican" is way too much of a leap. By that same logic, Rump is German, therefore he's a Nazi. It's the same thought process.

So no, I mean for logical reasons.

i just asked you a question.....evidence is not necessary....and it could be possible.....

 

[Pogo]

So I was right --- "countless" does mean "zero".

Pogo....so sad.....there's hundreds. I'll start with CNN and Washington Post

Supreme Court's ruling on excluding blacks from juries fixes a racial wrong - CNN.com

How big of a difference does an all-white jury make? A leading expert explains.

You actually think that "Mexican" is a race?

Where did I say Mexican? The judge is Hispanic....and ethnicity....the twisted cousin of race.

And if it's "unfair" for black defendants to have white judges or mostly white juries..has lefties have claimed....then Trump has a point about a Hispanic judge overseeing his case.

Once again, Idiot --- from YOUR OWN LINK:

It ruled that prosecutors purposefully kept African-Americans off

Heloooo? That's your own link talking. Can you read?

Yes I can.....it's my link. And again...WHY WOULD IT MATTER???

You're stepping into it here.

Why would it matter if they ensured an all white jury?
Why would it matter if they didn't put blacks on it?

Libs have said for years that RACE MATTERS on juries.

Why????

WRONG. Again, as your own links point out, intentional racial stacking of juries -- by the prosecution -- is wrong, and more to the point it's ILLEGAL. "Why"? I can't imagine why they would do that in a Jim Crow legacy South (BOTH of your citations are in Georgia) where the Klan was regularly given a pass in the event it ever even came up for trial, can you?

In any event that's got no relationship here because (a) "Mexican" is not a race, nor does it have any such Klan history, and (b) A FUCKING JURY IS NOT A JUDGE.

 

[Pogo]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Is this epic hypocrisy on the left? Or....are ONLY white judges and jurors capable of being biased??? One of the two must be true.

did trump claim the judge might be racially biased against him....... i don't think so....

Nope. He said he thought the judge is "Mexican", and that "that's fine". Which does invite the question, if it's "fine" ---- then why did he bring it up? What's its relevance to the standing of a fraud suit? Aye, there's the rub.

for political reasons..............????

On the judge's part?

That would require some kind of evidence. "His parents back in Indiana were Mexican" is way too much of a leap. By that same logic, Rump is German, therefore he's a Nazi. It's the same thought process.

So no, I mean for logical reasons.

i just asked you a question.....evidence is not necessary....and it could be possible.....

"It could be possible" is not evidence. It isn't even an argument.

"It could be possible" that I'm an elephant-turtle from the planet Ztiav. It's irrelevant.

If I'm a judge, should I be pulled from a case involving someone who's German because my parents were French?

So yes, evidence is absolutely necessary. Rump isn't a Southern prosecutor picking an all-white jury here --- he's the defendant. This entitlement complex has long ago run its course.

 

[The Irish Ram]

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

So sick of the monotonous, "fails as a false comparison fallacy". 3 negatives in seven words. That means the absolute opposite of the point you are trying to make.
So Clay, let's dissect your one and only retort:

Fails - to not succeed.
False - inaccurate
Comparison - differentiation
Fallacy - a failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid.
So, what you are saying in English would be that I did not succeed in making an inaccurate differentiation that would make my argument invalid. Which means my argument is indeed valid. I failed to succeed in inaccuracies. Therefore, I succeeded in accuracy.

Fails as a false comparison fallacy = I did not succeed in making an inaccurate differentiation that would render my argument invalid.

It would appear that are the ignorance putz. Nevertheless, while you and I may not agree, I have always treated you with respect.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Back on topic, If whites can be biased based strictly on race, then so can blacks, hispanics, and asians...
A judge can't make the case for one without including the possibility of bias regarding the others.

 

[tinydancer]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

I don't. Let's see these "countless links". Or does "countless" mean "zero"?

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Sooo...... what the fuck does the ethnicity of a judge (from Indiana) have to do with whether a business was running a fraud operation or not?

He's with La Raza and appointed two law firms that gave the Clintons almost a million dollars in speakers fees.

This is a political witch hunt.

 

[Pogo]

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

So sick of the monotonous, "fails as a false comparison fallacy". 3 negatives in seven words. That means the absolute opposite of the point you are trying to make.
So Clay, let's dissect your one and only retort:

Fails - to not succeed.
False - inaccurate
Comparison - differentiation
Fallacy - a failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid.
So, what you are saying in English would be that I did not succeed in making an inaccurate differentiation that would make my argument invalid. Which means my argument is indeed valid. I failed to succeed in inaccuracies. Therefore, I succeeded in accuracy.

Fails as a false comparison fallacy = I did not succeed in making an inaccurate differentiation that would render my argument invalid.

It would appear that are the ignorance putz. Nevertheless, while you and I may not agree, I have always treated you with respect.

This fails as a deliberate misunderstanding fallacy

You're deliberately misreading the word "as", used her for a comparator to demonstrate how something is done, e.g. "come as you are".

The statement is "this fails". How does it fail? In what way? What function? "As a false comparison fallacy".

False Comparison Fallacy is a single entity, "false comparison" modifying fallacy (what kind of fallacy? False Comparison).

A False Comparison Fallacy purports to compare two comparators that are not comparable. As in, say, (watch it, there's as again) the OP trying to compare a judge with a jury. Every fallacy is fallacious, this one simply happens to articulate the negative-truth in its name, also known as False Analogy. It's a simple description of what the asserter is doing via disingenuousness.

 

[tinydancer]

It doesn't matter what Trump says or does. This is the left wing narrative in every freaking election that the R <fill in the blank> candidate is sexist and racist.

That's how the mother truckers play their game no matter who the candidate is. Same old same old.

 

[Pogo]

Back on topic, If whites can be biased based strictly on race, then so can blacks, hispanics, and asians...
A judge can't make the case for one without including the possibility of bias regarding the others.

"Hispanic" is not a race. Neither is "Mexican". Nor does either have a KKK/Jim Crow kind of history anyway. And the judge is from Indiana so there's a better case to be made that he's "Indian".

NOR is a judge the same thing as a jury, as the False Comparison Fallacy this thread tried to take off with ignores.

NOR in any case does being "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White", "Asian" or anything else have jack squat to do with whether a fraud case can proceed or not. There's nothing particularly "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White" or "Asian" in fraud. It's a simple legal definition.

 

[Pogo]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

I don't. Let's see these "countless links". Or does "countless" mean "zero"?

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Sooo...... what the fuck does the ethnicity of a judge (from Indiana) have to do with whether a business was running a fraud operation or not?

He's with La Raza and appointed two law firms that gave the Clintons almost a million dollars in speakers fees.

This is a political witch hunt.

Funny then that it was filed in 2013 ----- three years ago.

Maybe they give stock tips too.

 

[bucs90]

Back on topic, If whites can be biased based strictly on race, then so can blacks, hispanics, and asians...
A judge can't make the case for one without including the possibility of bias regarding the others.

"Hispanic" is not a race. Neither is "Mexican". Nor does either have a KKK/Jim Crow kind of history anyway. And the judge is from Indiana so there's a better case to be made that he's "Indian".

NOR is a judge the same thing as a jury, as the False Comparison Fallacy this thread tried to take off with ignores.

NOR in any case does being "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White", "Asian" or anything else have jack squat to do with whether a fraud case can proceed or not. There's nothing particularly "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White" or "Asian" in fraud. It's a simple legal definition.

A judge is a human. Just like 12 humans on a jury.

So you're saying only whites can be bias since whites in the past were racist? And you're saying Hispanics can't be racist or bias?

And there's nothing "white" or "black" in "murder" it's just murder so race of those who judge the case....as judge or juror....shouldn't matter according to YOUR logic right?

 

[tinydancer]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

I don't. Let's see these "countless links". Or does "countless" mean "zero"?

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Sooo...... what the fuck does the ethnicity of a judge (from Indiana) have to do with whether a business was running a fraud operation or not?

He's with La Raza and appointed two law firms that gave the Clintons almost a million dollars in speakers fees.

This is a political witch hunt.

Funny then that it was filed in 2013 ----- three years ago.

Maybe they give stock tips too.

Look what the bigotted La Raza Judge did just last month. He needs to be removed from the case.

"On May 27, 2016, Curiel granted a request by the Washington Post for public release of certain documents that had been filed in the case. He noted they were "routine" and many already publicly available."

Well if they were already available why did the WP have to get the release from the La Raza Judge? The Judge is a bigot with an agenda,. I hope Trump nails him to the wall.

Trump University - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh and he also did this. He needs to be bitch slapped into eternity.

"On March 21, 2016, over objections from the attorneys for Trump University, Judge Curiel allowed Makaeff to withdraw as the lead plaintiff,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University#cite_note-37 naming Sonny Low[c] in her stead, resulting in the case title Low v. Trump University, LLC"

 

[Pogo]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

I don't. Let's see these "countless links". Or does "countless" mean "zero"?

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Sooo...... what the fuck does the ethnicity of a judge (from Indiana) have to do with whether a business was running a fraud operation or not?

He's with La Raza and appointed two law firms that gave the Clintons almost a million dollars in speakers fees.

This is a political witch hunt.

Funny then that it was filed in 2013 ----- three years ago.

Maybe they give stock tips too.

Look what the bigotted La Raza Judge did just last month. He needs to be removed from the case.

"On May 27, 2016, Curiel granted a request by the Washington Post for public release of certain documents that had been filed in the case. He noted they were "routine" and many already publicly available."

Well if they were already available why did the WP have to get the release from the La Raza Judge? The Judge is a bigot with an agenda,. I hope Trump nails him to the wall.

Trump University - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh and he also did this. He needs to be bitch slapped into eternity.

"On March 21, 2016, over objections from the attorneys for Trump University, Judge Curiel allowed Makaeff to withdraw as the lead plaintiff, naming Sonny Low[c] in her stead, resulting in the case title Low v. Trump University, LLC"

--- AND???

You made no point here TD. And I might add, sycophantic hero-worship doesn't look good on you. Grow a pair. Metaphorically I mean. Rump's a big boy, let him handle it.

OK just kidding about the "big boy", he's obviously anything but, but hey, he made his bed.

 

[HUGGY]

I still wonder why Trump brought the whole matter up in an address to his rally audience. How could he possibly help himself divulging his displeasure with the Hispanic judge? As a candidate for POTUS his talking points should be better crafted towards his end game.

How is he going to conduct important discussions in the Oval office if he cannot stay on point during his run for the office. This is a bizarre side track that he created himself.

 

[norwegen]

Back on topic, If whites can be biased based strictly on race, then so can blacks, hispanics, and asians...
A judge can't make the case for one without including the possibility of bias regarding the others.

"Hispanic" is not a race. Neither is "Mexican". Nor does either have a KKK/Jim Crow kind of history anyway. And the judge is from Indiana so there's a better case to be made that he's "Indian".

NOR is a judge the same thing as a jury, as the False Comparison Fallacy this thread tried to take off with ignores.

NOR in any case does being "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White", "Asian" or anything else have jack squat to do with whether a fraud case can proceed or not. There's nothing particularly "Mexican", "Hispanic", "Indian", "Black", "White" or "Asian" in fraud. It's a simple legal definition.

A judge is a human. Just like 12 humans on a jury.

So you're saying only whites can be bias since whites in the past were racist? And you're saying Hispanics can't be racist or bias?

And there's nothing "white" or "black" in "murder" it's just murder so race of those who judge the case....as judge or juror....shouldn't matter according to YOUR logic right?

Our country has shifted shamefully far to the left. Once, when equality ended at features essential to human nature - i.e., sentience and a capacity for faith - then a jury of peers was just a jury of peers.

Now that the lefties have injected features accidental to human nature - i.e., race, gender, intelligence, income, and all the rest - into our our measure of equality, a jury has to be "diverse."

Trump, the Progressive that he is, is just echoing a liberal bromide.

 

[LoneLaugher]

This thread premise is a fine example of nutter logic.

 

[Rocko]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Is this epic hypocrisy on the left? Or....are ONLY white judges and jurors capable of being biased??? One of the two must be true.

Two wrongs dont make a right.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I can provide countless links of liberals saying this....that white judges and jurors aren't fair to black defendants. Overwhelming evidence of this being claimed.

And libs....well....they believe it.

I don't. Let's see these "countless links". Or does "countless" mean "zero"?

So....how can they then blame Trump for thinking his judge might be racially biased towards him???

Sooo...... what the fuck does the ethnicity of a judge (from Indiana) have to do with whether a business was running a fraud operation or not?

He's with La Raza and appointed two law firms that gave the Clintons almost a million dollars in speakers fees.

This is a political witch hunt.

Funny then that it was filed in 2013 ----- three years ago.

Maybe they give stock tips too.

Look what the bigotted La Raza Judge did just last month. He needs to be removed from the case.

"On May 27, 2016, Curiel granted a request by the Washington Post for public release of certain documents that had been filed in the case. He noted they were "routine" and many already publicly available."

Well if they were already available why did the WP have to get the release from the La Raza Judge? The Judge is a bigot with an agenda,. I hope Trump nails him to the wall.

Trump University - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh and he also did this. He needs to be bitch slapped into eternity.

"On March 21, 2016, over objections from the attorneys for Trump University, Judge Curiel allowed Makaeff to withdraw as the lead plaintiff, naming Sonny Low[c] in her stead, resulting in the case title Low v. Trump University, LLC"

There is nothing outrageous or controversial about either of orders.

Court proceedings are public records, barring specific exceptions. Trump's lawyers failed to meet those exceptions, so the documents were released. I can show you the SCOTUS rulings, if you want.

As for allowing the lead plaintiff to drop out - that move allowed them to move the trial back till after the election, which is what Trump wanted anyway.