The Judge's Parents Were Illegals.

[easyt65]

Trump screwed the pooch on this one. This guy is a JUDGE. So much for "they are all rapists".

Again, Obama female latino USSC Justice Sotomayor agrees with Trump, having said ALL judges have racial and gender bias that 'can and will effect their judging', justfying Trump's suggesting the judge recuse himself.

To attack Trump as a racist after this is either to declare Sotomayor isn't qualified to 'judge' and make such decisions or she is also a racist.

Libs want to skip right over Sotomayor's legal opinion because her being Obama's USSC Justice, a female, and a Latino while having this opinion totally destroys their accusation that the only reason Trump would call for the judge to recuse himself is because he is a racist.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Zander is closer to David Duke than Curiel.

 

[Dragonlady]

"Wikipedia? Really?"

‘Illegal’ immigrants? Really?

You’re a scumbag, as are most on the right.

You’re a scumbag of such magnitude that you in no way deserve civil discourse – your brand of conservativism is a disease, a blight, a pestilence, the bane of the American Nation, and we can’t be rid of it too soon.

Why am I a scumbag, because I point out the fact that your little tin hero is a fraud?

You've pointed out NOTHING.

The judges parents aren't illegals. LaRaza is a not a racist organization, and you're buying into right-wing lies again. You go out of your way to lie about and vilify those you disagree with, and have no interest in the truth at all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Curiels have not been shown to have entered the country illegally.

Have the accusers' families entered the country illegally? Has that been proven to our satisfaction.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump is pissed because the judge has allowed internal documents to be seen by the public, whaaaa...

The judge did it deliberately to embarrass Trump. That's why Trump is complaining. A judge with a political agenda abused his authority to attack a candidate running for President.

What happens in court proceedings are not grounds for removal of a judge, to the extent that they are only rulings one of the parties doesn't like.

 

[easyt65]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

Not according to USSC Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's hand-picked female, Latino USSC Justice.

 

[easyt65]

Trump is pissed because the judge has allowed internal documents to be seen by the public, whaaaa...

The judge did it deliberately to embarrass Trump. That's why Trump is complaining. A judge with a political agenda abused his authority to attack a candidate running for President.

What happens in court proceedings are not grounds for removal of a judge, to the extent that they are only rulings one of the parties doesn't like.

WTF? It has happened many times before. Please show any link that supports your ignorance. I have already posted mine showing USSC Justice Sotomayor disagrees with you. I think I will take the word of a USSC Justice over yours.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The plot thickens. The liberal slander against Trump is looking more and more baseless and absurd:

Report: Were judge's Mexican parents illegals?​

The sometimes controversial scoop journalist that runs GotNews.comhas published documents that raise questions about the citizenship status of the parents of federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel, presiding over a suit against Trump University.

Charles C. Johnson put up documents showing that Curiel's father crossed the U.S. border with Mexico at least twice and might not have become a U.S. citizen.

He also published images of the death certificates of the judge's parents that apparently show no Social Security number.

"GotNews.com can find no evidence that Curiel's parents ever became U.S. citizens. For all we know, Judge Curiel is an anchor baby," he wrote.​

His parents could both be illegals, and both convicted murderers,

and that in and of itself would not be grounds for removal of the judge from this case.

You are wasting your time because your wacky accusations are irrelevant even if they were true.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

Not according to USSC Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's hand-picked female, Latino USSC Justice.

She has nothing to do with this case.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump is pissed because the judge has allowed internal documents to be seen by the public, whaaaa...

The judge did it deliberately to embarrass Trump. That's why Trump is complaining. A judge with a political agenda abused his authority to attack a candidate running for President.

What happens in court proceedings are not grounds for removal of a judge, to the extent that they are only rulings one of the parties doesn't like.

WTF? It has happened many times before. Please show any link that supports your ignorance. I have already posted mine showing USSC Justice Sotomayor disagrees with you. I think I will take the word of a USSC Justice over yours.

"... in a 1994 case, Liteky v. United States , the United States Supreme Court held that because a judge’s rulings cannot normally be shown to have be attributable to an “extrajudicial source,” and can only in the rarest circumstances evidence the requisite degree of favoritism or antagonism when no extrajudicial source is involved, such rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a disqualification motion. Liteky does not constitute binding authority on state courts; but, since Liteky was handed down, the nation’s courts have generally agreed that the rulings a judge renders in the same or a related case will almost never support a presumption of judicial bias – much less establish the bias required to warrant disqualifying the judge who issued those rulings."
Judicial Rulings, Comments or Conduct - Judicial Disqualification Resource Center

 

[JakeStarkey]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

Not according to USSC Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's hand-picked female, Latino USSC Justice.

Nope, nothing of the sort.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Trump is pissed because the judge has allowed internal documents to be seen by the public, whaaaa...

The judge did it deliberately to embarrass Trump. That's why Trump is complaining. A judge with a political agenda abused his authority to attack a candidate running for President.

What happens in court proceedings are not grounds for removal of a judge, to the extent that they are only rulings one of the parties doesn't like.

WTF? It has happened many times before. Please show any link that supports your ignorance. I have already posted mine showing USSC Justice Sotomayor disagrees with you. I think I will take the word of a USSC Justice over yours.

No, you did not. You said that she wrote she disagreed that is all.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

Not according to USSC Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's hand-picked female, Latino USSC Justice.

Nope, nothing of the sort.

Saying "nope" all the time does not alter the past.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No one has said anything. The question is one of inherent bias.

And it has been answered: there is none.

Not according to USSC Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Obama's hand-picked female, Latino USSC Justice.

Nope, nothing of the sort.

Thank you. That is what easyt is trying to do. He wrote that X said something without any proof. That is pointed out.

Saying "nope" all the time does not alter the past.

 

[rightwinger]

That is nonsense.

They became citizens.

And if they did not, who cares?

Curiel was born in the US. End of story.

What possible impact can Curiels parents immigration status have to do with a case about a fraudulent university?

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is nonsense.

They became citizens.

And if they did not, who cares?

Curiel was born in the US. End of story.

What possible impact can Curiels parents immigration status have to do with a case about a fraudulent university?

Nothing.

 

[rightwinger]

That is nonsense.

They became citizens.

And if they did not, who cares?

Curiel was born in the US. End of story.

What possible impact can Curiels parents immigration status have to do with a case about a fraudulent university?

Nothing.

Trump is entering new territory and yes, it borders on racism

This case has nothing to do with immigration, walls or heritage.......it is about a fraudulent university

To claim that no Mexican (or Muslim for that matter) should be allowed to rule an anything related to Trump is outright racist

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That is nonsense.

They became citizens.

And if they did not, who cares?

Curiel was born in the US. End of story.

What possible impact can Curiels parents immigration status have to do with a case about a fraudulent university?

Nothing.

Trump is entering new territory and yes, it borders on racism

This case has nothing to do with immigration, walls or heritage.......it is about a fraudulent university

To claim that no Mexican (or Muslim for that matter) should be allowed to rule an anything related to Trump is outright racist

Again, when were "Mexican" and "Muslim" declared racial designations?

 

[Care4all]

NO ONE from the Republican congress should ever be allowed to investigate the Clintons....it's a conflict of interest with a MOTIVE to falsely take them down, no?

NOTHING the Republicans in congress should ever be believed about what they claim the Clintons did....there is a conflict of interest and motive for the Republicans to simply manufacture their scandals and gates....


hmmmmmm, that is what BriPat is implying, isn't it???