Posted on 06/09/2016 8:13:50 AM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
We watch Trump take on every item that comes up against him. He aims to win.. . that’s how he created his wealth and all he has built... in his being, he’s going to win. They criticize him for being thin skinned and going for the jugular... but that is what it takes to go up against the powers that be, especially in an election like this. Any other candidate would crumble and mumble their way to a loss against the likes of hillary and the left.
It isn’t being thin skinned.... it’s handling a problem as soon as it happens and winning it... and then on to the next. This problem happens to be the left, congress, the media and the republicans... that’s a pretty large group to win against... but he will because he has learned how. Trump won’t be losing... it’s not in his blood to lose.
The La Raza judge kerfuffle was in large part a fabricated excuse by the GOPe to once again demonstrate how much they hate Trump.
Gives a whole new meaning to the expression "trumped up."
The best that can be hoped for is that weasels like Ryan will go down like the Titanic after hitting a truth iceberg.
Or the National Association of Gals (NAG)
PFL
Looking at the membership protocol for the organization in question, it doesn’t appear to practice invidious discrimination.
And the Trump U dustup is going to vanish when Trump spills the details of Bill Clinton getting $16.5 million as a no-show “Chancellor” of Laureate University.
In 1939, Thurgood Marshall was chosen to be the Director of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund.
Trump seems to have a plan and be a couple steps ahead of the pack. I think the media is blindly rushing into an ambush and I like it.
Trump is right more times than wrong-— The Judge stinks of bias and maybe even law breaking? He needs investigation if nothing else.
Hillary once called one of her husbands aides a F’n Jew Bastard. No bigotry there.
bump
I don’t worry about Trump not defending himself. He does understand the rule that in politics as a non leftist as soon as you apologize or “explain” anything your campaign and career are over. Trump will not ignore these things but his defense will be point to point, third party, and effective and won’t be “defense” as the press understands it. It will be more the facts becoming evident to the point that the opposition changes the subject. As confident as the left is of its own Righteousness they will not “change the subject” until they are thoroughly discredited on the subject. I am long past the point of second-guessing Trump. When he does something that might normally make me cringe, I feel a little pull on my nerves then it goes away. I know that Trump is controlling this thing, whatever it is.
Hey as long as the La Raza legal group admits anyone of any race or ethnicity who shares its political goals, Curiel didn’t break a code of conduct.
According to the mission statement, a purpose of this organization is to “Strongly advocate positions on judicial, economic and social issues to political leaders and state and local bar associations that impact the Latino community.”
I think the offense might fall under 2A instead in the realm of impropriety by failing to appear impartial.
“Canon 2A. An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges#c
I informed the Moron of the Judge's links to La Raza that would require him to Recuse himself from the Case against Mr. Trump due to his Conflict of Interest.
Even the hint of impropriety would be a cause of action in an Appeal if Trump lost the Case, so the Judge is wasting the Court's time and money overseeing the Case.
I look forward to the response. I visit Fakebook once a week to respond to the Butt hurt Liberals who seem to be offended by my repudiation of them.
Most are Fakebook Friends of a former coworker who has revealed herself to be a Hillary loving Liberal on Steroids, although we came to the conclusion that we can agree to disagree.
Her Fakebook Friends can't stand me and hurl the usual personal insults. My new favorite is a Woman in her 50’s who called me a Douche Bag (and a few other choice insults) because she didn't like my critique of her Savior, the Butcher of Benghazi.
Pure entertainment for me, and I almost feel a little Guilty egging them on. #;^)
I think the further people dig into Judge Curiel and his conduct on the case combined with his political connections and ties to radical La Raza activists the worse things are going to get for both him and the Democrats.
One thing is perfectly clear even now - this Judge violated ethical rules and should have recused himself from this case because he has such transparent conflicts of interests that bias against Trump.
That alone is going to sink him
I’m still not seeing it. There is nothing wrong or improper with belonging to an organization whose intent it is to advocate for a certain segment of society, especially when that segment faces challenges that are specific to it and has been historically under-served. If the membership in the organization excluded people on the basis of ethnicity it would be an issue. It doesn’t; it isn’t.
You would be favoring one group over others, which fails on the criteria of impartiality. Which by definition is impartial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.