Trump!!!

[Seattle Husker]

Good time for a review?

-- The law firm leading the lawsuit against Trump U. are heavily involved in Democrat politics, including paying the Clintons $675,000 for “speeches."

-- The Judge in the lawsuit is an open borders immigration activist with direct ties to San Diego La Raza, and has openly engaged with them on their political endeavors, including scholarships for illegal aliens.

-- The Trump U. lawsuit relies (in part) on testimony from a former disgruntled employee of the Trump Organization who went to work for #NeverTrump whacko Glenn Beck.

--The Judge “accidentally” released court records which provided the media with the names, locations, and contact information of the plaintiffs and witnesses in the case, which fueled the media narrative.

--After the “mistaken” release, Judge Curiel resealed the court records.

--The Judge is a member of an ethnic legal group, HNBA, whose specific and publicly expressed intentions are to target Donald Trump’s business interests.

Do you still think there is no need for him to recuse himself?

That's a lot of consipiracy theory to ultimately defend what by any rational position is a good case against Donald Trump and an equally rational response to his positions and rhetoric. Is accountability no longer valued by conservatives? It could be, they are closer to liberals than even they thought possible.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Soooooo, GOPers should just continue to take it in the *** instead of using the tools the liberals have taught us work?

 

[Seattle Husker]

Soooooo, GOPers should just continue to take it in the *** instead of using the tools the liberals have taught us work?

Tools liberal have taught you? Did you type that with a straight face?

I'm more interest in the recognition that both sides are cut from the same cloth. The tactics and strategy of the Repubs and Democrats, and the extremes of both sides have a common goal in mind: win. Neither side is "better" than the other and both rationalize their mud wallowing while chastising the other side for doing the same.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Trump now claiming his comments on Judge Curiel were "misconstrued" and ultimately all he wants is to get a "fair shake". He's publicly called Curiel a "hater" and a "Mexican" in response to his perceived slights. How does Trump think the bully tactics will help him get a "fair shake"? Does he think judges enjoy being libeled the same thing he's sued countless people over?

This was a statement today from a sitting Republican Senator:

 

[mb227]

That's a lot of consipiracy theory to ultimately defend what by any rational position is a good case against Donald Trump and an equally rational response to his positions and rhetoric. Is accountability no longer valued by conservatives? It could be, they are closer to liberals than even they thought possible.

What is conspiracy theory there? It was a restatement of events that have occurred and can be shown to have occurred. Which portion are you asserting has NOT occurred?

 

[Seattle Husker]

What is conspiracy theory there? It was a restatement of events that have occurred and can be shown to have occurred. Which portion are you asserting has NOT occurred?

Joe Fan is creating an argument that even Trump's lawyers aren't making in a court of law. All of those points being strung together is absolutely a conspiracy that the "left" or "Mexicans" or "La Raza" is out to get Trump. None of it actually makes a case that the judge has done anything because he's biased. This is akin to a claim that a Catholic judge should not be able to rule on a birth control case. Nobody would make that argument yet it's acceptable here as some blindly look to defend their candidate of choice.

 

[Joe Fan]

Joe Fan, your willingness to make up facts is downright Trumpian.......

• The San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is a member of the La Raza Lawyers of California, affiliated with the Chicano/Latino Bar Association of California.
• On the website of the La Raza Lawyers Association of California, at the bottom of the “Links & Affiliates Page,” the National Council of La Raza is listed.
• The website of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is joint-listed as San Diego’s Latino/Latina Bar Association.
• On the “endorsements” page, the combined website lists the National Council of La Raza as part of the “community,” along with the Hispanic National Bar Association,, a group that emerged with a changed name from the originally formed La Raza National Lawyers Association and the La Raza National Bar Association tracing its origin back to 1971.

 

[Joe Fan]

What is conspiracy theory there? It was a restatement of events that have occurred and can be shown to have occurred. Which portion are you asserting has NOT occurred?

It's simple. In the world we now live in, people run screaming from facts they find uncomfortable, inconvenient or not fitting their bias/narrative. People often stumble into the Saul Alinsky argument framework without even recognizing it.

 

[Seattle Husker]

It's simple. In the world we now live in, people run screaming from facts they find uncomfortable, inconvenient or not fitting their bias/narrative. People often stumble into the Saul Alinsky argument framework without even recognizing it.

Or some are simply suffering from confirmation bias. Further up in this thread you called La Raza a "terrorist organization" exposing your primary bias and every post about Curiel since has attempted to tie him to that organization, no matter how tenuous the tie may be as NJ Longhorn pointed out.

Confirmation bias, also called confirmatory bias or myside bias, is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities.[Note 1][1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Seattle Husker]

Lindsey Graham described this Trump attack on Curiel pretty succinctly. I wouldn't bet on the last line though for some.

"This is the most un-American thing from a politician since Joe McCarthy," Graham told The New York Times.

"If anybody was looking for an off-ramp, this is probably it," he added. "There'll come a time when the love of country will trump hatred of Hillary" Clinton.

 

[Joe Fan]

There is a claim that the future judge was himself an anchor baby

 

[Joe Fan]

"This is the most un-American thing from a politician since Joe McCarthy," Graham toldThe New York Times.

McCarthy was correct about alot of stuff. But Graham is too dumb to know that, so his attempt at an insult lacks gravitas.

 

[Joe Fan]

I am aware of an effort to file formal complaints tomorrow against Judge Curiel with both the Illinois and Indiana Bars, as well as the Federal Committee on Judicial Conduct.

We will see if this actually happens and, if so, if it goes anywhere.

Either way, it's nice to see Rs fighting back for once.

 

[Joe Fan]

Or some are simply suffering from confirmation bias. .....

This judge is hearing the case of a litigant he is boycotting.

Look at it this way, if a prospective juror were a member of an organization actively boycotting one of the litigants, that juror would be excused. It would essentially be automatic.

 

[NJlonghorn]

There is a claim that the future judge was himself an anchor baby

There's a much bigger problem. It appears Judge Curiel is in utero.

 

[Mr. Deez]

This judge is hearing the case of a litigant he is boycotting.

First, he's not.

Second, let's suppose that he is. The Texas Supreme Court takes millions of dollars from litigants that are in front of their court - petrochemical companies, insurance carriers, large retailers, manufacturers, etc. That's a far more direct showing of bias and partiality, and their rulings very strongly reflect that partiality. How many times have you complained about that here?

Look at it this way, if a prospective juror were a member of an organization actively boycotting one of the litigants, that juror would be excused. It would essentially be automatic

No, it wouldn't. Suppose someone on a venire panel in a slip and fall case against Target was a member of the American Family Association, which has boycoted Target. However, suppose that person had never expressed support for the boycott or even knew about it and claimed he or she could follow the court's instructions in the jury charge without bias or prejudice. That person's membership in the AFA would not by itself be sufficient to sustain a challenge for cause. Target may use a peremptory strike on the person, but that's their call. The person wouldn't be biased as a matter of law.

 

[UTChE96]

In addition, his ethnic-based bar association called for a boycott of all of Trump’s business ventures

I still do not understand why it is acceptable to have professional organizations based on ethnicity, race, or gender. I cannot think of anything more unprofessional than segregating yourself based on those criteria. Especially as a judge where your impartiality is so important. It's an instant loss of professional credibility in my opinion. To be clear, I have no problem with non-professional organizations that are based on those factors even though I would not want to be part of one myself.

 

[Joe Fan]

I still do not understand why it is acceptable to have professional organizations based on ethnicity, race, or gender. ....

It is not acceptable for persons of pallor.
It is decades of double standards like this that create a path for candidates like Trump

 

[Joe Fan]

...No, it wouldn't. Suppose someone on a venire panel in a slip and fall case against Target was a member of the American Family Association,.....

I concede I dont have much jury practice in state court, so maybe. But I do know how civil jury trials work in federal court (even the Southern District of California, specifically). And the case we are discussing is in federal court.

 

[Joe Fan]

Second, let's suppose that he is. The Texas Supreme Court takes millions of dollars from litigants that are in front of their court - petrochemical companies, insurance carriers, large retailers, manufacturers, etc. That's a far more direct showing of bias and partiality, and their rulings very strongly reflect that partiality. How many times have you complained about that here?......

I have long objected to the Texas system. Certain firms think they "own" certain judges.
And maybe they do? How else do you explain forum shopping? California is as bad or worse. Look at all the high profile political cases over the years that have magically appeared on the docket of the Dems' preferred judge.

 

[Phil Elliott]

"There'll come a time when the love of country will trump hatred of Hillary" Clinton.

Graham is evidently a moron who does not even know what "love of country" means. IMO loving the US = hating Hillary as she has done way more to damage the national security of the US in her time as SoS than Trump can even think of. Hillary doesn't love her country, why should the voters?

 

[Joe Fan]

Romney New Jersey votes: 185,000

Trump New Jersey votes: 351,000

It looks like Trump will break the record for primary votes. Dont have full, final numbers yet though

 

[Crockett]

I see where Trump's blatantly racists comments about the judge were "misconstrued."

Having grown up in rural Texas and dealt with loud-mouthed bullies most of my life, I'm pretty sure I can help you "construe" it properly. If the bully has gone so far and been so insulting or unfair that he faces consequences from a full on fight, loss of a job or end of an important relationship, he comes back and says "couldn't you tell? I was just bullshitting you." When Trump says something unbelievably over the top, unfair or crazy, you should understand he was just "bullshittin." Being from a macho New York background, he can't apologize or admit error. It's your fault for not understanding you weren't supposed to take it seriously.

 

[chango]

I don't think Trump is a racist. I don't think he's an idiot or a generally bad guy. The thing is - who knows what he is? He contradicts himself or changes his opinion before he completes one sentence. He talks about Mexicans loving him, and he'll get the majority of the Mexican-American vote- so why wouldn't you want a Mexican judge?
That being said, I get it if you hate Hilary and would vote for anyone to keep her out of the White House.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I concede I dont have much jury practice in state court, so maybe. But I do know how civil jury trials work in federal court (even the Southern District of California, specifically). And the case we are discussing is in federal court.

If you know how civil jury trials work in federal court, then you know that judges have broad discretion in finding bias or partiality and that there isn't a per se rule about being in a group that takes a position on an arguably relevant issue. An AFA member could serve on a jury in a case against Target in federal court, and a member of La Raza (even the real La Raza, not the lawyer's group that Curiel is a member of) could be on a jury in a case against Trump University.

I have long objected to the Texas system. Certain firms think they "own" certain judges.
And maybe they do? How else do you explain forum shopping? California is as bad or worse. Look at all the high profile political cases over the years that have magically appeared on the docket of the Dems' preferred judge.

Texas has rules determining where you can file. You can "forum shop" to a point, but it's limited - generally to a county where a defendant resided at the time the cause of action accrued or the county where the cause of action accrued. You can't just file anywhere. And yes, it makes a difference. As a plaintiff, I'd rather file an 18-wheeler case in Webb County (Laredo) than in Collin County (Plano). However, that's mostly because of the jurors, not the judges. The real influence of special interests is at the appellate court level and especially the Supreme Court level, where questions of law are being answered with significant authority. They are bought and paid for and have been for years, and it's a MUCH stronger example of partiality than anything you can point to in Trump's case.

 

[Seattle Husker]

There's a much bigger problem. It appears Judge Curiel is in utero.

LOL! Nope...no conspiracy theory here. Is this confirmation of the confirmation bias?

 

[Mr. Deez]

He talks about Mexicans loving him, and he'll get the majority of the Mexican-American vote- so why wouldn't you want a Mexican judge?

Maybe Judge Curiel didn't see the taco bowl picture. If he did, I'm sure he's understand why he should love Trump.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I still do not understand why it is acceptable to have professional organizations based on ethnicity, race, or gender.

Would you add faith and political organization to that list or are they exempt? Nobody on this thread advocating that Curiel has a "conflict of interest" have answered whether a Catholic judge should also have to recuse themselves on a birth control trial. Should that Catholic Judge be allowed to be a part of the ACLA (American Catholic Lawyers Association)? When do first amendment rights become infringed upon?

 

[Seattle Husker]

This judge is hearing the case of a litigant he is boycotting.

Is Curiel calling for the boycott? Texas ATM boosters are well known for their screams of boycotts, right? Is it logical to assume every booster club member is following or calling for the boycott simply because they are a member of the booster club?