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.
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.
That wasn't the point, or we didn't watch the same video. He's saying the judge isn't being fair based on not dismissing the case when the plaintiff withdrew and some other things that I already can't remember. Now, if he were biased, what might the reason be - perhaps for him his background is at odds with Trump's politics. I have no idea how you dug white nationalism out of that. And what do you mean "regards," his parents are from Mexico, how is that not his background? Are we headed down the road where "Mexican" is going to be a slur?
A founding principle of America is that anyone, from any background, can become an American. That people from all around the world come to America for a better life because they believe in the country and want to join it. That if you're born on American soil, you're in, that if you become naturalized, you're in. Only the native Americans predate this principle, for everyone else, from Curiel to Trump, heritage is heritage but citizenship is citizenship. So when Trump says that Curiel isn't capable of being an impartial American judge because, even though he was born here, his parents were not that's a big deal. If we accept what he is saying at face value then that's hugely un-American. If we read between the lines to what he is really saying, it's that Hispanics cannot be Americans.
He's saying he's biased in specifically this case. Not that Hispanics can't be federal judges or even that this judge should be impeached or however you remove judges. With respect, I don't think you're reading between the lines so much as composing.
Where is the evidence that the judge is biased? Our point is there is none, hence this is one more incident of Trump being a piece of shit to throw on the pile.
You don't think a mexican judge would be biased against trump after saying he's going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it? That mexico sends its rapists and drug dealers over to the US? It's a pretty easy connection to make, and is the simplest explanation.
On June 04 2016 09:46 biology]major wrote: You don't think a mexican judge would be biased against trump after saying he's going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it? That mexico sends its rapists and drug dealers over to the US? It's a pretty easy connection to make, and is the simplest explanation.
He isn't a Mexican he is an American. Not an American with an asterisk just an American. His ethnicity doesn't belong in a conversation about the Trump University case.
On June 04 2016 09:46 biology]major wrote: You don't think a mexican judge would be biased against trump after saying he's going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it? That mexico sends its rapists and drug dealers over to the US? It's a pretty easy connection to make, and is the simplest explanation.
Are you suggesting Trump should be permitted a change of judge on the basis of ethnicity?
On June 04 2016 09:46 biology]major wrote: You don't think a mexican judge would be biased against trump after saying he's going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it? That mexico sends its rapists and drug dealers over to the US? It's a pretty easy connection to make, and is the simplest explanation.
First, he is an American, not a Mexican.
Second, he is a Judge. Judges have a job to do, and that job requires impartiality. You are infringing upon the honor and professionalism of a sitting judge based on nothing (there is a reason his lawyers aren't making this argument in court).
Third, it isn't logically sound. Just because you hate somebody doesn't mean they hate you back. Especially when they have moral/legal reasons not to hate you back or rule in an obviously unfair manner.
Fourth, it isn't legally sound. Could you imagine if everybody who didn't like a judge/lawyer could just say "Fuck that person, fuck everything about them I hate them!... Ok, now that I've insulted them they MUST have a bias against me, so get a recusal." Would get you laughed out of court. Considering the basis of the complaint in this specific incident is racial, it is even more contemptible. .
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.
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.
That wasn't the point, or we didn't watch the same video. He's saying the judge isn't being fair based on not dismissing the case when the plaintiff withdrew and some other things that I already can't remember. Now, if he were biased, what might the reason be - perhaps for him his background is at odds with Trump's politics. I have no idea how you dug white nationalism out of that. And what do you mean "regards," his parents are from Mexico, how is that not his background? Are we headed down the road where "Mexican" is going to be a slur?
A founding principle of America is that anyone, from any background, can become an American. That people from all around the world come to America for a better life because they believe in the country and want to join it. That if you're born on American soil, you're in, that if you become naturalized, you're in. Only the native Americans predate this principle, for everyone else, from Curiel to Trump, heritage is heritage but citizenship is citizenship. So when Trump says that Curiel isn't capable of being an impartial American judge because, even though he was born here, his parents were not that's a big deal. If we accept what he is saying at face value then that's hugely un-American. If we read between the lines to what he is really saying, it's that Hispanics cannot be Americans.
He's saying he's biased in specifically this case. Not that Hispanics can't be federal judges or even that this judge should be impeached or however you remove judges. With respect, I don't think you're reading between the lines so much as composing.
Except his only evidence for this claim of bias is that the guy's parents were Mexican. That's literally it. And that's why it matters. It's the difference between saying "the black guy did it, we have a video of him doing it" and "the black guy did it, fucking niggers". Which is a pretty huge difference. If there were a smoking gun, like an email saying that Curiel planned to fuck Trump over in this case because he was mad about the wall, sure. But it's just "Hispanic Americans aren't able to be good American civil servants because they're too Mexican".
yeah if someone has views that could be interpreted as offensive then they shouldnt be judged by someone who could potentially be offended by them i foresee no negative consequences of this precedent thx trump
On June 04 2016 09:46 biology]major wrote: You don't think a mexican judge would be biased against trump after saying he's going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it? That mexico sends its rapists and drug dealers over to the US? It's a pretty easy connection to make, and is the simplest explanation.
He isn't a Mexican he is an American. Not an American with an asterisk just an American. His ethnicity doesn't belong in a conversation about the Trump University case.
This distinction is what Trump is missing. Which is why I am allowed to infer that Trump is espousing White Nationalist principles by blowing over this and slurring Judge Curiel as a "Mexican" rather than calling him an American.
No, that's silly and that comment from Trump was pretty stupid even if there 'may' be a measure of truth to it. Can say for certain, the man who can do no wrong aka god emperor who is playing 5D chess with the press stumped himself on that one.
Saying illegal immigrants do bring drugs, crime, and can be rapists is true, albeit hard to swallow for many despite overwhelming evidence. But telling an American judge that he's Mexican thus has a conflict of interest is playing the race card in a pretty bad way. Now, he is a member of La Raza and did award illegal immigrants scholarships and he is quite clearly proud of being Mexican by his own account.
So what Trump is saying can actually be true. But in this case it's pretty wrong to insinuate that without being very clear, concise and provide more evidence toward unfair treatment. I put an article here earlier though implying that the judge was quite pro illegal immigration, even awarding some scholarships.
U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel issued an order Friday unsealing various records in the suit, citing significant public interest in the matter, driven in part by Trump’s own public attacks on the judge.
However, on Tuesday evening, Curiel tried to roll back his earlier order. He said he had “mistakenly” listed some records to be released in full, when they were actually supposed to be edited or redacted to delete personal information like home addresses and personal emails.
Hillary Clinton on Friday condemned the violence that took place at a recent Donald Trump rally in California but blamed the presumptive Republican presidential nominee for inciting violence and challenged him to condemn such actions, too.
“I condemn all violence in our political arena,” Clinton told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an interview broadcast Friday. “I condemned it when Donald Trump was inciting it and congratulating people who were engaging in it. I condemn it by those who are taking violent protests to physical assault against Donald Trump.”
Clinton said the violence has to end but accused the real estate mogul of setting “a very bad example.” Trump has called his rallies “lovefests,” though he has also encouraged his supporters to “knock the crap out of” anyone they see carrying tomatoes and offered to pay the legal fees of supporters who are charged with violence at his rallies. Protesters fight at Trump San Jose rally
“He created an environment in which it seemed to be acceptable for someone running for president to be inciting violence, to be encouraging his supporters,” she continued. “Now we’re seeing people who were against him responding in kind. It should all stop. It is not acceptable.
Considering voting for Loretta Sanchez in the primary for CA senator. Couldn't ask for a greater embarrassment for the Democrat party. Also maybe make them spend some more money? It would be so much fun, since the Democrat will win the seat no matter what in the fall.
The joys of the messed up CA primary system.
Hell, if she made it to the fall and ran as a moderate would enough Republican voters go for her? Hmm, possibilities...
Normally I think that the chances of a military coup in America are pretty low, but do you think that maybe a Trump presidency would present a non-negligible chance for one?
EPT
