Republican Senator -- Time to "off-ramp" from Trump

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by caesarp, Jun 7, 2016.

  1. caesarp, Jun 7, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2016

    caesarp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #1
    Senator Graham says Trump's comments about the judge are the most un-American statement from a politician since Joe McCarthy. He also said:

    “There’ll come a time when the love of country will trump hatred of Hillary.”

    Indeed. No matter how much you hate Hillary, Trump is much worse for the country. Are you listening Trump supporters? Prominent Republicans are now backing off of this mess of a man.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry..._us_575700fee4b0ca5c7b5038c2?mmlwr099h51urf6r
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    trump supporters don't care. they are not much different from Hillary supporters.
     
  3. Praxis91 macrumors regular

    Praxis91

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
  4. caesarp thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #4
    About what -- the judge? If you believe that, you don't understand how the courts work and what conflict of interest or bias means for judges.

    "Federal judges have repeatedly and emphatically refused to recuse themselves from cases because of their race or ethnicity. These rulings were driven by two realizations: Ethnically based challenges would reduce every judge to a racial category, which would be racist in itself. And such challenges would make judges vulnerable to recusal motions — for reasons of race, ethnicity, gender or religion — in every case that came before them.

    In other words, once these challenges were allowed, there would be no end to them.

    The gravity of this matter has clearly eluded Donald Trump, who has cast aside the Constitution and decades of jurisprudence by suggesting both ethnic and religious litmus tests for federal judges. These pronouncements illustrate that Mr. Trump holds the rule of law in contempt."
     
  5. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #5
    Not a huge surprise that the white shoe brigade is supporting Trump, but for the rest of the population, does anyone want to consider the logical end of Trump's argument.

    It means that judges cannot be unbiased. And, it means that our court system is inherently broken.
     
  6. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #6
    I'd love to hear an explanation of this statement.

    Trump is lucky the original judge is no longer on the case. Not only was the judge Hispanic, the judge wa sa SHE!

    I'd add,



    https://www.yahoo.com/news/actions-...-his-job-in-trump-u-case-224338852.html?nhp=1
     
  7. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #7
    Let's face it. The only reason why Trump is making such a huge stink about this is because he knows he's going to lose.
     
  8. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #8
    His access rate in legal actions would say you are dead wrong.
     
  9. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #9
    Explain what you mean, I'm not quite following you.
     
  10. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #10
    Access rate? 3500+ of legal actions definitely shows that he is 'accessible'.

    BL.
     
  11. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #11
    Sorry, auto correct.

    Should have read "success" rate
     
  12. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #12
    "access" = "success"?
     
  13. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    Trump is making a huge stink because he's offended that anyone would criticize or challenge the Trump brand. A default judgement, showing that Trump University was a scam, would hurt the brand and the Trump empire relies on an assumption of "quality."
     
  14. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #14
    ****'s getting real.

    "I cannot and will not support my party's nominee for President"

    "Given my military experience, Donald Trump does not have the temperament to command our military or our nuclear arsenal"

    -Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL)

    Looks like someone wants to keep their Senate seat.
     
  15. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #15
    It wasn't a scam. There are literally thousands of success stories from students who were very pleased with the education they received.

    Trump is upset at the judge for releasing documents to the public that would normally have been privileged.

    Is his accusation unwarranted, when an activist judge of Mexican descent released these papers to try to hurt Trump in the primary, out of anger after Trump stated he is going to build a wall and boot out all illegal immigrants? Whose to say.

    Sounds like something done vindictively, in anger, to me.
     
  16. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #16
    I'll take Trump's lawyer's word over yours. Thanks for contributing though.
     
  17. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #17
    He's going to have a lot harder time buying people off in this one than in the past now that the public eye is on him this much. Face the facts, your candidate is a criminal with no relevant experience to the job.
     
  18. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #18
    LOL! I guess facts and sequences of things don't matter to you.
     
  19. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #19
    And you know this judge is activist, how?

    Of Mexican descent? I suppose you'd say the same of Loving v. Virginia at SCOTUS if their decision were handed down one day later, due to Thurgood Marshall, as Mildred was black.

    As the saying goes, Justice is blind, and if you are trying to justify biased because of a name, then there is no way that any person could show impartiality, because they would have everything about them picked apart because of their name.

    Shall we start with yours?

    BL.
     
  20. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #20
    I dunno. He's shown himself to be pretty savvy about playing things in his favor. He knows he can ride a not guilty verdict for all its worth in the election, claiming that they tried to take him down with inflated charges, but he still managed to knock them all on his ass. Merely being brought into court and questioning one of his brands wouldn't be enough to faze him.

    ...but knowing he's about to lose his case? Yeah, he can still play that victim card, claim it's due to some Mexican judge riding a Mexican agenda to railroad him, and call for his supporters to rally against the coming injustice. It's a desperate ploy, sure, even by his standards, and I'm sure he knows it. I doubt even he'd go to these lengths if he knew he had some other option available to him.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 7, 2016 ---
    Previous court victories mean nothing, since they represent entirely different situations. When you consider his extreme actions alongside his recent, ahem, political contribution for a surprisingly convenient favor, it isn't looking too rosy for him.
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #21
    I remain unconvinced that there are thousands of success stories from students because of the education they received at Trump University, but that wasn't actually my point, I said that a default judgment that the university was a scam would hurt the Trump brand.

    Curiel released the documents after Trump's broadside about his heritage.

    You've got the timeline wrong, so your entire argument is bunk.

    Trump won the presumptive nomination after Cruz and Kasich dropped out of the race, on May 3 and May 4 respectively.

    Trump attacked Curiel on May 27, arguing that the judge was a "hater of Donald Trump, a hater. He’s a hater. His name is Gonzalo Curiel. He is not doing the right thing. And I figure, what the hell? Why not talk about it for two minutes?"

    Trump then spent 12 minutes riffing on the court case, and said: "What happens is the judge, who happens to be, we believe, Mexican, which is great. I think that’s fine."

    Curiel was again, born in Indiana.

    Judge Curiel ordered the documents released on May 29 in response to a request from the Washington Post that the documents be unsealed by June 2.

    Moreover, courts have repeatedly shown that a judge should not recuse him or herself because of their race or heritage. And, there's simply no evidence apart from the nationality of Curiel's parents to show that he is biased against Trump or his case.

    "Whose to say" is an attempt to raise the question, arguing that the judge might be biased unless he can prove otherwise, when the argument should be the opposite—Trump should have to prove that Curiel is intentionally biased against him because of the asinine things Trump has said in public.

    As The Atlantic pointed out, conservative lawyers tried to make the same argument about an Asian-American judge, Denny Chin, and that judge responded by not only denying their request, but requiring that the lawyers recuse themselves from the case and "would not be permitted to appear in Chin’s court on any matter ever again. They would be required to show his opinion to any other judge in the district in any future case. The court clerk would also report the sanctions to every court where they held bar membership."

    The lawyers challenged Chin in the Second Circuit Court and were again slapped around, this time by chief judge Ralph Winter, who wrote:

    And, we have to consider the logic when brought to its conclusion. Which means the end of judicial independence.

    That's a good point.
     
  22. caesarp thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    #22
    Privileged documents are documents that provide legal advice to a client or reflect information that a client told a lawyer under the protection of privilege.

    The documents in question that were released are the internal instructions to be used by employees of Trump U, in how to part suckers from their money. Those are NOT privileged documents. Those are essentially an instruction manual for how the sales team was to operate, which is a normal type of business document produced in litigation, and becomes part of the public record.

    At best Trump could argue they should be deemed confidential business documents, as they could reveal information to competitors. But the weakness of that argument was that Trump U is no longer conducting business.
     
  23. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #23
    Trump is 100% racist.


    Oh, and if Trump actually believed he was right, they would have filed a motion for recusal. But they haven't.

    Trump is nothing but racist hot air.
     
  24. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #24

    Source? Do you also have a source on how many suits Trump has settled/lost/won? Curious how you came to the conclusions that you have. FYI settling law suits does not equate success.
     
  25. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #25
    Under pressure, Trump is backing down.

    He released a 700-word statement today, arguing that his words were "misconstrued."

    Trump then argues that the media is not covering the trial fairly, that he is "fighting hard to bring jobs back the United States" and that the lawsuit should have been dismissed.

    Of course, Trump has regularly been deceptive regarding the lawsuit, so no surprise that he's trying to scuttle out from his fusillade against Curiel's heritage while trying to argue, ineffectively, that he's getting a raw deal.
     

Share This Page