Trump said Hispanics and Muslims couldn't be a federal judge. What's the big deal?

[JimBowie1958]

IOW, Trump is a racist for saying he believes he's a victim of racism. That seems to be the argument of the left and the Never Trump crowd.

Why is it "racist" to believe that a Hispanic judge who belonged to the La Raza Lawyers of San Diego and who oversaw the granting of a scholarship to an illegal alien would treat Trump unfairly based on his ethnicity and on Trump's known positions of wanting to build a wall on the Mexican border and deport illegal aliens?

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/01/ju...lawyers-group/

If a black liberal politician being sued were being treated by a white judge the same way Trump has been treated by Judge Curiel--with a bunch of very questionable rulings--liberals would not hesitate to suggest that the judge's rulings were based on racism.

Yes whites are racist if they accuse a nonwhite of being racist because only whites can be racist and for a whit to accuse a nonwhite of racism is an injustice, blah, blah, blah, fill in the blank for the next stupid ass libtard phrase here.

 

[Papageorgio]

Liberals should not be allowed to be federal judges, maybe he can send them to the death camps he is secretly building.

 

[rdean]

What part of La Raza is hard for you to understand. They can be Hispanic but not part of a racist group like La Raza.

I have to admit I love your kind. Ignorant, following a racist and determined to remain so. Must be scary. But at least you have a lot of fortitude. You'll need it.

---------------------------------

What they are attempting to do is associate Curiel with the National Council of La Raza, the radical left-wing and pro-illegal-immigration group that has gained significant notoriety in the news over the years as a group that is both anti-American and open to fomenting violent pro-immigration protests.

Curiel, however, has no affiliation with this group whatsoever. He is a member of La Raza Lawyers of California – aka the Latino Bar Association of California. They have absolutely no affiliation with National Council of La Raza.

The Dishonest Attempt to Associate Gonzalo Curiel with "La Raza" | RedState

 

[bripat9643]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

 

[rdean]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Which is? That's he was born in Indiana? Perhaps we should see his birth certificate.

 

[Vigilante]

Seven Times Democrats Were Overtly Racist On Judges Before Trump

The Daily Caller News Foundation has compiled a list of seven times liberals invoked a judge’s race.

1. Justice Sonia Sotomayor famously invoked her identity as a “wise Latina” who could outdo a white man. “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” she said in an October, 2001 speech that became a point of criticism for Republicans.
2. When Donald Trump released his list of potential Supreme Court nominees, the left was quick to point out they were all white. Think Progress published an article titled “Your Ultimate Guide To The 11 White People Donald Trump Will Consider For The Supreme Court,” which pointed out that “Only three are women. All are white.”
3. George Takei, Star Trek actor and gay rights activist, called Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a “clown in black face” after his vote against the recognition of same-sex marriage. “I mean, doesn’t he know that slaves were in chains?” Takei said. “That they were whipped on the back. If he saw the movie 12 Years a Slave, you know, they were raped.”
4. Liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson blasted Thomas for his stance against affirmative action. “I believe in affirmative action, but I have to acknowledge there are arguments against it,” Robinson wrote. “One of the more cogent is the presence of Justice Clarence Thomas on the U.S. Supreme Court.”
5. Anna Quindlen, a liberal writer for Newsweek, clearly invoked Thomas’ race in her criticism of him, saying “His judicial resume was mediocre; he was chosen because he was conservative and black, an affirmative-action hire by an administration that eschewed affirmative action.”
6. Liberal writers and activists Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon wrote an article in the Seattle Times saying Thomas was unseemly as a “beneficiary of affirmative-action programs who climbs the ladder of success by attacking affirmative action.”
7. To defend itself from criticism over nominating a white Supreme Court Justice, the White House was quick to invoke race. In a post titled, “White House Defends Diversity Record In Judicial Appointments,” the New York Times points out that Josh Earnest was eager to tell reporters that Obama had appointed a Hispanic justice to the Supreme Court and therefore, had previously embraced diversity. The defense came after attacks from the left over nominee Merrick Garland, who is white.

Read more: Seven Times Democrats Were Overtly Racist On Judges Before Trump

 

[bripat9643]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Which is? That's he was born in Indiana? Perhaps we should see his birth certificate.

He gives pro bono legal services to illegal aliens, douche bag.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Republicans hate non-white people and non-white people hate republicans.

What's the problem?

So you are a racist and a bigot. At least you are man enough to admit it.

Well he is straight up with it.

Wonder what the shite Democrats think; that the nonwhites will give them a pass?

No, Ferguson and Son Jose prove that is not true.

No, this is spinning toward race war, clear as hell now.

Fuck them, let it come.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Seven Times Democrats Were Overtly Racist On Judges Before Trump

The Daily Caller News Foundation has compiled a list of seven times liberals invoked a judge’s race.

1. Justice Sonia Sotomayor famously invoked her identity as a “wise Latina” who could outdo a white man. “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” she said in an October, 2001 speech that became a point of criticism for Republicans.
2. When Donald Trump released his list of potential Supreme Court nominees, the left was quick to point out they were all white. Think Progress published an article titled “Your Ultimate Guide To The 11 White People Donald Trump Will Consider For The Supreme Court,” which pointed out that “Only three are women. All are white.”
3. George Takei, Star Trek actor and gay rights activist, called Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a “clown in black face” after his vote against the recognition of same-sex marriage. “I mean, doesn’t he know that slaves were in chains?” Takei said. “That they were whipped on the back. If he saw the movie 12 Years a Slave, you know, they were raped.”
4. Liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson blasted Thomas for his stance against affirmative action. “I believe in affirmative action, but I have to acknowledge there are arguments against it,” Robinson wrote. “One of the more cogent is the presence of Justice Clarence Thomas on the U.S. Supreme Court.”
5. Anna Quindlen, a liberal writer for Newsweek, clearly invoked Thomas’ race in her criticism of him, saying “His judicial resume was mediocre; he was chosen because he was conservative and black, an affirmative-action hire by an administration that eschewed affirmative action.”
6. Liberal writers and activists Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon wrote an article in the Seattle Times saying Thomas was unseemly as a “beneficiary of affirmative-action programs who climbs the ladder of success by attacking affirmative action.”
7. To defend itself from criticism over nominating a white Supreme Court Justice, the White House was quick to invoke race. In a post titled, “White House Defends Diversity Record In Judicial Appointments,” the New York Times points out that Josh Earnest was eager to tell reporters that Obama had appointed a Hispanic justice to the Supreme Court and therefore, had previously embraced diversity. The defense came after attacks from the left over nominee Merrick Garland, who is white.

Read more: Seven Times Democrats Were Overtly Racist On Judges Before Trump

But the Marxist Media doesnt give a flying fuck. They want to talk about why Trump is a racist instead of letting the national conversation turn to the State Departments IG report or the new Secret Servicemans book on how outrageous the Clintons were in the White House.

I have given up that whites will ever be able to have a serious and honest discussion with liberals of any race any more.

They lie, they deflect, they do anything but acknowledge the simple truths.

They are the mental shit of Western civilization.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Judges should be white, male, heterosexual and Christian to please Trump

They actually should be as unbiased as possible in their opinions. Trump doesn't think that will happen in this case and the fact almost every single Hispanic in this country hates him may add legitimacy to his claims. Why do you have an issue with Trump receiving a fair trial?

 

[kaz]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Now a conservative Mexican, they can't be trusted ...

 

[kaz]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Which is? That's he was born in Indiana? Perhaps we should see his birth certificate.

You mean like the original birther, Obama? Wow, what a stupid lie he told when he said he was born in Kenya. That's probably why he didn't want to show is birth certificate. It proved he lied

 

[Seawytch]

I don't get it. Republicans have been anti minority for decades. Trump is only saying what the GOP has been saying behind closed doors for decades. Trump truly represents the party. What's the big deal? That's just who the Republicans are. All of us know it. Like I said, we've known it for decades.
Can you blame the guy for being honest?

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Which is? That's he was born in Indiana? Perhaps we should see his birth certificate.

You mean like the original birther, Obama? Wow, what a stupid lie he told when he said he was born in Kenya. That's probably why he didn't want to show is birth certificate. It proved he lied

Birther light, peddling his lie about Obama again. What would make Kaz lie about President Obama I wonder?

 

[NightFox]

So when Trump doesn't want a liberal Mexican, all you see is "Mexican." May want to question your assumptions on who's focused on race, Holmes

Why can't a liberal Mexican decide a case against a fraudulent university?

He has a conflict of interest, douche bag.

Which is? That's he was born in Indiana? Perhaps we should see his birth certificate.

You mean like the original birther, Obama? Wow, what a stupid lie he told when he said he was born in Kenya. That's probably why he didn't want to show is birth certificate. It proved he lied

Birther light, peddling his lie about Obama again. What would make Kaz lie about President Obama I wonder?

From my understanding Obama never wrote that he was born in Kenya in his book, however it did appear on a promotional pamphlet (not written, approved or even seen by Obama himself) which I assume is why so many people seem to think that he claimed that, so it's a case of passing along misinformation.

 

[Toro]

Mr. Trump is attacking Judge Curiel in a personal business case, not a political one, and as a candidate for President we think he should be above this kind of pettiness. His implied threat against the judge if he becomes President is more obnoxious, though we doubt he could do much about it in office. The political blowback would rightly be enormous.

What elevates Mr. Trump’s remarks to the reprehensible is his equation of ethnicity with bias. That truly is an attack on the independence of the judiciary because it means that a judge can be disqualified from a case merely for his personal background, rather than for any material conflict of interest.

The suit against Trump University is a classic civil fraud case that has nothing to do with ethnicity. Judge Curiel happens to be an American born in Indiana to immigrant parents, but that is of no legal import. He shouldn’t be judged by the ancestry of his parents any more than Chief Justice Roberts should be barred from ruling on religious liberty cases like the Little Sisters of the Poor because he is a Roman Catholic.

As a legal matter this is well established, notably in a 1998 case (MacDraw v. CIT ) in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. A litigant challenged the fairness of Judge Denny Chin due to his ethnicity. Judge Chin responded by slapping down the complaint and sanctioning the lawyers, and he was backed by the appellate judges. “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge’s impartiality,” wrote Judge Ralph Winter, a highly regarded conservative appointed by Ronald Reagan.

Apart from his racist implications, Mr. Trump is also indulging in the left’s habit of attributing the motivations of everyone and everything to race, class, gender and sexual orientation. Claiming that a person’s judgment is determined by his objective circumstances is a Marxist trope. Isn’t Mr. Trump supposed to be running against such thinking?​

Trump and the ‘Mexican’ Judge

 

[Toro]

Among the latest allies to turn against Mr. Trump on the issue was Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, a Republican facing a tough re-election fight, who said of Mr. Trump Monday, “His comments are wrong and offensive and I’ve asked him to retract them.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who has been mentioned as a potential running mate, on Monday expanded on his earlier critique.

“We don’t judge you as part of a group. That would be to suggest that blacks can’t get a fair white judge, whites can’t get a fair black judge,” Mr. Gingrich said on “The John Gibson Show.” “Once you go down that road, you destroy America. You can’t take a group definition and apply it.”​

Donald Trump Seeks to Rally Support Over His Criticism of Judge

 

[NightFox]

Mr. Trump is attacking Judge Curiel in a personal business case, not a political one, and as a candidate for President we think he should be above this kind of pettiness. e

He SHOULD be above this kind of asinine pettiness, however this sort of thing is par for the course when it comes to Donald Trump, I expect that not only will this particular imbroglio continue to escalate but that we can expect a continuous stream of ludicrous and arbitrary rhetoric coming from the Trumpian Asylum between now and November, get used to it folks.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Even conservative scholars fret about the rule of law under President Trump

If you want a sobering Monday read, check out what conservative legal scholars are saying about Donald Trump and his ability to appropriately administer executive branch powers. After a week in which Trump questioned the ethics of both Mexican and Muslim judges for no other reason than their race/religion, even conservative scholars are at their wit's end at the prospect of a Trump presidency. Adam Liptak reports:

 

[Geaux4it]

Smoke and mirrors.

The bar has been lowered into the cesspool now that Obama has reigned for 8 years. Even a caveman can do it. Obama screwed up bad

-Geaux

 

[Toro]

Mr. Trump is attacking Judge Curiel in a personal business case, not a political one, and as a candidate for President we think he should be above this kind of pettiness. e

He SHOULD be above this kind of asinine pettiness, however this sort of thing is par for the course when it comes to Donald Trump, I expect that not only will this particular imbroglio continue to escalate but that we can expect a continuous stream of ludicrous and arbitrary rhetoric coming from the Trumpian Asylum between now and November, get used to it folks.

Trump is a demagogue.

This is what demagogues do.