. . . from Pat Buchanan
Stated succinctly, Donald Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over a class-action suit against Trump University, is sticking it to him. And the judge’s bias is likely rooted in the fact that he is of Mexican descent.
Can there be any defense of a statement so horrific?
Just this. First, Trump has a perfect right to be angry about the judge’s rulings and to question his motives. Second, there are grounds for believing Trump is right.
On May 27, Curiel, at the request of The Washington Post, made public plaintiff accusations against Trump University — that the whole thing was a scam. The Post, which Bob Woodward tells us has 20 reporters digging for dirt in Trump’s past, had a field day.
And who is Curiel?
An appointee of President Obama, he has for years been associated with the La Raza Lawyers Association of San Diego, which supports pro-illegal immigrant organizations.
Set aside the folly of letting Clinton surrogates like the Post distract him from the message he should be delivering, what did Trump do to be smeared by a bipartisan media mob as a “racist”?
He attacked the independence of the judiciary, we are told.
But Presidents Jefferson and Jackson attacked the Supreme Court, and FDR, fed up with New Deal programs being struck down, tried to “pack the court” by raising the number of justices to 15 if necessary.
Abraham Lincoln leveled “that eminent tribunal” in his first inaugural, and once considered arresting Chief Justice Roger Taney.
The conservative movement was propelled by attacks on the Warren Court. In the ’50s and ’60s, “Impeach Earl Warren!” was plastered on billboards and bumper stickers all across God’s country.
The judiciary is independent, but that does not mean that federal judges are exempt from the same robust criticism as presidents or members of Congress.
Obama himself attacked the Citizens United decision in a State of the Union address, with the justices sitting right in front of him.
Apparently, it is now not only politically incorrect, but, in Newt Gingrich’s term, “inexcusable,” to bring up the religious, racial or ethnic background of a judge, or suggest this might influence his actions on the bench.
But these things matter.
Does Newt think that when LBJ appointed Thurgood Marshall, ex-head of the NAACP, to the Supreme Court, he did not think Marshall would bring his unique experience as a black man and civil rights leader to the bench?
Surely, that was among the reasons Marshall was appointed.
When Obama named Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, a woman of Puerto Rican descent who went through college on affirmative action scholarships, did Obama think this would not influence her decision when it came to whether or not to abolish affirmative action?
“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,” Sotomayor said in a speech at Berkeley law school and in other forums.
Translation: Ethnicity matters, and my Latina background helps guide my decisions.
All of us are products of our family, faith, race and ethnic group. And the suggestion in these attacks on Trump that judges and justices always rise about such irrelevant considerations, and decide solely on the merits, is naive nonsense.
There are reasons why defense lawyers seek “changes of venue” and avoid the courtrooms of “hanging judges.”
When Obama reflexively called Sgt. Crowley “stupid” after Crowley’s 2009 encounter with that black professor at Harvard, and said of Trayvon Martin, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” was he not speaking as an African-American, as well as a president?
Pressed by John Dickerson on CBS, Trump said it’s “possible” a Muslim judge might be biased against him as well.
Another “inexcusable” outrage.
But does anyone think that if Obama appointed a Muslim to the Supreme Court, the LGBT community would not be demanding of all Democratic Senators that they receive assurances that the Muslim judge’s religious views on homosexuality would never affect his court decisions, before they voted to put him on the bench?
When Richard Nixon appointed Judge Clement Haynsworth to the Supreme Court, it was partly because he was a distinguished jurist of South Carolina ancestry. And the Democrats who tore Haynsworth to pieces did so because they feared he would not repudiate his Southern heritage and any and all ideas and beliefs associated with it.
To many liberals, all white Southern males are citizens under eternal suspicion of being racists.
The most depressing thing about this episode is to see Republicans rushing to stomp on Trump, to show the left how well they have mastered their liberal catechism.
Note from Grandma Thunder:
All men of good will MUST become aware of the danger of a porous border. Those seeking racial equality (a good thing) at the same time are unwilling to see that this is not about race, this is about control and legality. Such politically correct politicians deny the danger to America of radical Islam, and the danger of gang think (rape and violence and drugs) from South of our border. No not all Latinos are bad, nor ar all Muslims bad but until we are able to differentiate better, the only way to protect ourselves is to control the illegality, putting us all at risk.
Because of the escalating terrorism we have every right to demand checkpoints at both physical and financial borders around the USA.
This effort to take Trump down is betraying the better interests of all Americans, he is the one on our side.
As American citizens we should carefully look at what is right, what is wrong here. Then ask yourself what is right and what is wrong about America? Is this important in the light of all that has to be fixed in America or has this court case become a nasty distraction from the big job at hand.
Lastly is it not crazy that the left and Main Steam Media is trying to make Trump guilty of fraud?
Recognize we are looking here at the right and wrongs of trading value for value. Giving something for nothing can be seen as fraud. So often I find HRC & cronies attacking Trump on the very sins they themselves harbor: I ask you (in the light of fraud) to examine the FED, the Clinton Foundation, and all of the Goldman Sucks investment advisers who are backing Hillary because she has promised Banking as Usual, and corrupt Politics as Usual. This court is trying to tear down the one man trying to bring back order and rule of law with intent to make America Great Again.
An honest judge would see the better interests of America and throw out this nasty case. Is it not sad that not everyone wants to climb out of poverty. In education you can take a horse to water but not force him to drink. If it is proven that even some of the students got the data, and got results, this case cannot be legally prosecuted.
Sorry to the students who felt cheated that they didn’t become the rich Donald Trump (with no smarts and no effort on their part)
The Right and the Left see money, business, and for that matter good and bad differently. There is a different moral compass. This is defined beautifully in the works of Robert Kyosoki. Rich Dad, Poor Dad.
Some of the students (I hope) it will be proven, grabbed the data and climbed up.
Quote for the Week
I know people who are losing their jobs or their houses, and they blame technology or the economy or their boss.
Sadly they fail to realize that they might be the problem.
Robert T. Kiyosaki – Rich Dad, Poor Dad
| About the Author
Lynn Verhoeff (Grandma Thunder) has published two books, “Politics IOU” and “Magic Money” both on Kindle. The first is satirical about banking and the second, examines the conflict of our times, Globalism vs Patiotism. You can read more at fb Grandma Thunder – an Independent Voice or Blog/Grandma Thunder or Free Books by Grandma