|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 04 2016 06:03 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
Watch this 2 minute Trump Video where to triples down on attacking Judge Curiel for being "Mexican" (thus non-American like Trump is). I recant my objections to calling his ass fascist. He has straight up racial theories going on. Trump is not pretending to be racist to win over the rubes, this is the real Trump if you listen to him. If you vote for this steaming pile of shit, that shit will stain you for the rest of your days. All Trump voters will be made to account for this garbage.
He's saying the judge's background could explain if he was biased in the case because of Trump's politics. After months of being taught that, with his stance on immigration, Trump is a racist and Hispanics don't like him, why is that suggestion so unfathomable? All-white juries aren't great for black defendants, right? I could understand if someone was reasonable, like, "That's possible, but it's not true in this instance: Trump U is just that much of a ripoff." But instead we have to fill social media with calling him a "steaming pile of shit" to make sure the media fills the news with important issues like this.
|
On June 04 2016 06:41 Paljas wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 04:36 biology]major wrote:
The wall represents a much needed giant middle finger to mexico, for taking advantage of our weakness for so many years. lmao this is some single digit iq shit
Sure, we're a massive military and the go-to world police. Sure we topple governments, pillage entire regions and install puppet dictators. Sure, we manage to handle Russia and China at the same time. But Mexico? Yeah, we can't deal with that fucker. Way too smart and rich for us. Totally has a functioning, dignified government.
|
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that.
|
Even Ryan is disavowing the attack on the Judge and Trump's baseless claim that the Judge was biased. And as someone deals with a a lot of different judges, citing their race or background as a reason for bias is a really fucking stupid plan. Like getting held in contempt if you do it in open court levels of stupid.
|
On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that.
"I want to build a wall against illegals. But legals love the idea of making immigration fair. That's why legals love me. That judge, who was born in the united states to two parents who legally immigrated? He likely dislikes me because I want to build a wall."
|
On June 04 2016 06:55 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:03 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Watch this 2 minute Trump Video where to triples down on attacking Judge Curiel for being "Mexican" (thus non-American like Trump is). I recant my objections to calling his ass fascist. He has straight up racial theories going on. Trump is not pretending to be racist to win over the rubes, this is the real Trump if you listen to him. If you vote for this steaming pile of shit, that shit will stain you for the rest of your days. All Trump voters will be made to account for this garbage. https://twitter.com/TheLeadCNN/status/738831980201119744 He's saying the judge's background could explain if he was biased in the case because of Trump's politics. After months of being taught that, with his stance on immigration, Trump is a racist and Hispanics don't like him, why is that suggestion so unfathomable? All-white juries aren't great for black defendants, right? I could understand if someone was reasonable, like, "That's possible, but it's not true in this instance: Trump U is just that much of a ripoff." But instead we have to fill social media with calling him a "steaming pile of shit" to make sure the media fills the news with important issues like this.
if he has a problem with the judge, the proper method of dealing with it is a motion for recusal, and appealing that motion for recusal if it's denied. not calling out the judge like this.
so there's no basis for what trump is doing other than being an ass; and it's not an important issue except insofar as it reveals trumps failings.
|
On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that.
So you're going with the fact that Hispanics don't all love him. I assume that allows the possibility that an individual might be biased against him, no? 
|
On June 04 2016 06:55 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:03 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Watch this 2 minute Trump Video where to triples down on attacking Judge Curiel for being "Mexican" (thus non-American like Trump is). I recant my objections to calling his ass fascist. He has straight up racial theories going on. Trump is not pretending to be racist to win over the rubes, this is the real Trump if you listen to him. If you vote for this steaming pile of shit, that shit will stain you for the rest of your days. All Trump voters will be made to account for this garbage. https://twitter.com/TheLeadCNN/status/738831980201119744 He's saying the judge's background could explain if he was biased in the case because of Trump's politics. After months of being taught that, with his stance on immigration, Trump is a racist and Hispanics don't like him, why is that suggestion so unfathomable? All-white juries aren't great for black defendants, right? I could understand if someone was reasonable, like, "That's possible, but it's not true in this instance: Trump U is just that much of a ripoff." But instead we have to fill social media with calling him a "steaming pile of shit" to make sure the media fills the news with important issues like this.
The point is Trump regards Judge Curiel as a Mexican and thus less American than Trump. This is pure racism. No way to spin this and Trump is insisting Curiel's Mexicanness makes him biased against all-American Trump. That is straight white nationalist talk and you know it.
Also, if you really want to fight this on the merits, know that Judge Curiel has been more than fair to Trump.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/donald-trump-gonzalo-curiel/485636/
"In short, if Curiel is a “hater of Donald Trump,” there is no evidence of it in this case. There’s nothing unusual or suspicious about his rulings so far in the lawsuits. While Curiel has allowed the case to proceed to trial, he has granted Trump some partial victories along the way on the size and scope of the cases. And instead of letting the trial unfold alongside Trump’s bid for the White House, Curiel delayed its start until after the election.
Indeed, what’s not in the public record is telling. Trump has publicly complained about Curiel since at least 2014, when one of his lawyers claimed Trump would ask Curiel to recuse himself based on his alleged (and unspecified) “animosity toward Mr. Trump and his views” after Curiel rejected his motion for dismissal. Almost two years later, no motion for recusal can be found on the docket of either case, then or now."
|
On June 04 2016 07:01 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:55 oBlade wrote:On June 04 2016 06:03 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Watch this 2 minute Trump Video where to triples down on attacking Judge Curiel for being "Mexican" (thus non-American like Trump is). I recant my objections to calling his ass fascist. He has straight up racial theories going on. Trump is not pretending to be racist to win over the rubes, this is the real Trump if you listen to him. If you vote for this steaming pile of shit, that shit will stain you for the rest of your days. All Trump voters will be made to account for this garbage. https://twitter.com/TheLeadCNN/status/738831980201119744 He's saying the judge's background could explain if he was biased in the case because of Trump's politics. After months of being taught that, with his stance on immigration, Trump is a racist and Hispanics don't like him, why is that suggestion so unfathomable? All-white juries aren't great for black defendants, right? I could understand if someone was reasonable, like, "That's possible, but it's not true in this instance: Trump U is just that much of a ripoff." But instead we have to fill social media with calling him a "steaming pile of shit" to make sure the media fills the news with important issues like this. if he has a problem with the judge, the proper method of dealing with it is a motion for recusal, and appealing that motion for recusal if it's denied. not calling out the judge like this. so there's no basis for what trump is doing other than being an ass; and it's not an important issue except insofar as it reveals trumps failings.
We discussed that during lunch today and my attorney said it wouldn’t matter how much money Trump was paying, he wouldn’t file that motion with a gun to his head. Let alone argue it in court.
|
On June 04 2016 07:04 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that. So you're going with the fact that Hispanics don't all love him. I assume that allows the possibility that an individual might be biased against him, no?
One is a fact based on poll number and other data. The other is a member of the a Justice of the US court system being motivated by his racial background against Trump due to Trump's plan to build a wall. The difference is pretty clear if you take half a second to think about it.
|
On June 04 2016 07:04 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that. So you're going with the fact that Hispanics don't all love him. I assume that allows the possibility that an individual might be biased against him, no?
An individual might be biased against him, sure. But the reason that Trump gave was that he was Mexican.
|
It's a legtimate concern. Racism against minorities has completely vanished, however racism against whites is a huge problem thanks to the fearmongering left in this country.
|
Poe's law is in full effect right now, but I am pretty sure this isn't trolling.
|
On June 04 2016 07:04 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that. So you're going with the fact that Hispanics don't all love him. I assume that allows the possibility that an individual might be biased against him, no?
His argument is basically: I hate Mexicans. This judge is Mexican. Therefore he hates me.
Beyond being not factually accurate, it's an embarrassing fallacy.
|
On June 04 2016 07:33 Ravianna26 wrote:
It's a legtimate concern. Racism against minorities has completely vanished, however racism against whites is a huge problem thanks to the fearmongering left in this country.
it's very confusing to say something obviously false as if you believe it; because on the internet there's crazy people who believe all sorts of crazy things, and it's hard to tell.
|
On June 04 2016 07:36 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 07:04 oBlade wrote:On June 04 2016 06:56 On_Slaught wrote:
I thought the non illegal Hispanics all loved Trump? I mean, Trump himself said so. If thats the case, why would a Hispanic citizen born in Indiana have a bias against Trump? It's almost as if he knows the garbage he spews is just that. So you're going with the fact that Hispanics don't all love him. I assume that allows the possibility that an individual might be biased against him, no? His argument is basically: I hate Mexicans. This judge is Mexican. Therefore he hates me. Beyond being not factually accurate, it's an embarrassing fallacy.
well if you remove the people you want to discriminate from power then the discrimination gets much easier. How could we ever put women in charge of anything? now it's terribly difficult to get them into the kitchen again!
This is honestly such a shitshow. How can anybody vote for this guy without feeling embarrassed.
|
Trump's previous interviews about how he doesn't want his wife to work, have a job and "goes through the roof" if dinner isn't on the table when he gets home" are going to be a talking points in the near future.
|
If there's only one breadwinner in the family, the other had better have dinner on the table when the breadwinner wants it regardless of sex.
|
Its been a while since I seen someone use the term 'breadwinner' without it dripping with irony. And go employ that choice theory out there in the relationship world. Tell me how it works out. I'll wait.
|
On June 04 2016 04:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 04:22 xDaunt wrote:On June 04 2016 04:20 KwarK wrote:On June 04 2016 04:08 xDaunt wrote:On June 04 2016 04:05 farvacola wrote:On June 04 2016 04:00 xDaunt wrote:On June 04 2016 03:57 farvacola wrote:On June 04 2016 03:44 xDaunt wrote:On June 04 2016 03:34 farvacola wrote:
When you paint the opposition as folks who "support illegal immigration," its quite easy to dictate the substance of their beliefs. However, the only people who "support illegal immigration" are border state business owners who likely vote Republican without question.
Those in favor of soft immigration policies while work is done on actual, substantive reform are rather different. Sorry, but the Democrat Party in virtually its entirety supports illegal immigration by hampering enforcement and demonizing proponents of enforcement. And yes, business owners who support illegal immigration need to be strung up as well. EDIT: Hell, Democrats aren't even honest enough to call illegal immigration what it is: ILLEGAL. They contort themselves so badly to pander to Hispanics that they refer to illegal aliens as undocumented workers. It's sheer madness. Democrats don't collectively share in the same immigration platform and like plansix pointed out, enforcement under Democrats is by no means "hampered" generally speaking. That is unless you also meant "enforcement" to include the state tolerated gangs of vigilante immigrant hunters who roam large segments of the border looking to catch other people like animals. In that case, yes, Democrats attempt to hamper enforcement, that much is true  As for the terminology issue, I guess it's not exactly surprising that you'd single out the words being used instead of the substance of the thing being discussed. That liberals and conservatives use different words to describe the same thing ought surprise no one. Yes, please tell me more about how serious democrats are with enforcement of illegal immigration laws. It's a wonder that the border patrol supports Trump over them! Are you really pointing to the opinions of a group whose very livelihood depends on the vigorous implementation and enforcement of a particular legal scheme as evidence that vigorous enforcement of said legal scheme is a net positive? Objection, bias, your honor. I'm not even arguing whether enforcement of illegal immigration is a "net positive." I'm merely pointing out that democrats aren't interested in enforcement. And the fact that you brought up the merits of enforcing illegal immigration laws in response to my argument betrays the truth of the matter: democrats aren't serious about enforcement. At least have the decency to be honest about your party's position. If most people who do not have a legal right to be in the United States don't enter by crossing the border outside of the recognized crossing points, in what way is building a wall being interested in enforcement? If Hillary said that she was going to stop immigration by reforming Wall Street would that count as being serious on enforcement? Or would she have to show how the two are linked? I ask because Trump seems not to have made the case for the wall beyond it being a wall. Walls work? I seem to recall Israel having similar success with its walls. It certainly is better than having no wall. You're advocating a hugely expensive public construction project on the grounds that walls are better than not walls?
You forgot - Mexico is going to pay for the wall!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
