Stipulating Trump is crazy, ok. But am I the only one who

[Laura PourMeADrink]

thinks the judge comments weren't racist? Guess I am a stickler for words and meanings and intent.

I honestly think he was saying that because of his hardline stance on Mexican immigration to the US he was questioning whether the judge could be fair. Grounds for recusal - albeit outside the box - since comments/positions made on a world stage.

Not that the judge was incompetent because he is Mexican (true racist remark)

Hate to not pile on like all the people who are piling on. Plenty of other things to pile on for.

Same with the Muslim remarks - He was just thinking in his non-political, results oriented business think... terrorism. muslim. stop muslims.

It is a fine distinction and would honestly like to discuss the distinction.

Stipulating also ...hate racism to the core of my being.

[braddy]

1. Has any source told us what race the judge is yet?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. Yes. So is that his slime? Grasping at straws to explain why

he, the almighty, is experiencing someone who may not be on his side?

cnn...

snip
But complaints about a judge based primarily on ethnicity have found little traction in the past, and have even gotten lawyers into hot water.

For example, in a 1986 case, Baltimore defense attorney Paul Evans was banned from the court and recommended for disbarment after he complained in a letter that the judge in his case "either was grossly incompetent or biased in favor" of what he called "the Jewish firm" involved in the proceedings.

An appeals court upheld the punishment, saying the letter was "undignified, discourteous, and degrading" and that Evans never demonstrated the judge's incompetence or bias using examples or evidence.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/08/politics/donald-trump-federal-judge-recusal/index.html

[braddy]

5. Do you have a link, what race is he? I tried to look up his parents but couldn't find their race.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

13. link

At his confirmation hearing, Curiel had this to say about his heritage: "My parents came here from Mexico with a dream of providing their children opportunities, and they've been able to do that with the opportunities that this country has to offer."

http://www.npr.org/2016/06/07/481140881/who-is-judge-gonzalo-curiel-the-man-trump-attacked-for-his-mexican-ancestry

[braddy]

15. It names a country, but not his race. Mexico is a country of racial diversity, it isn't a race.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

25. You are right...can't seem to find the actual race of the judge's parents

could be white, black, Asian.

So...you made my point...the whole episode is not
a good example of racism. Perhaps prejudice? ethnic hatred?

[braddy]

26. We do know that the media is determined to call it race though, this Orwellian new America, is

maddening.

[jberryhill]

2. Here's the thing...

This was the line taken by Katrina Pierson, as a sort of "let's look at the words" approach.

"...who is, we believe, Mexican"

Is it racist to "believe someone is Mexican"? Well, no, it's not. I believe quite a few people are Mexicans. I believe a good number of people are Canadians, New Yorkers, and so on.

It's the context that matters.

This case wasn't filed last year - it's been going on since 2010 - and the rulings on preliminary motions were made long before anyone knew that Trump would be kicking off a campaign based on calling Mexicans names.

There is, simply put, no conceivable nor chronologically-possible connection between any supposed animus inspired by Trump's remarks about Mexicans, and the relevant pre-trial rulings made by this judge - most of which, incidentally, were in Trump's favor. If one goes by a count of "motions granted / motions denied", Trump's side has actually had more rulings in its favor.

I get what you are saying, and so before you are roundly thrashed for appearing to stand against the tide, even if you view this thing in the most favorable possible light cast on Trump's point of view, it is more a statement of his personal paranoia than having a conceivable connection to any factual support (i.e. that the judge has been acting in anger inspired by Trump's politics).

[Laura PourMeADrink]

10. I hear you. May also be that he is inciting and fueling racist tendencies

in his voter base who hate immigrants, especially from Mexico. Not only is he saying that there has to be an explanation for anyone who gets in his way (narcissistic) but a side benefit...solidifying his racist base.

I still don't believe he is a racist - think more of a Machiavellian. He doesn't care if it's a blue blood Harvard grad, a pope, the son of a president, or a dirt farmer.....it is a person who is blocking him from getting what he wants.

[Jennylynn]

3. I'm still not sure if he actually believes in the crap he's spewing

Or if he's saying this shit in order to help himself to losing. He can't be this stupid. Not that his supporters give a shit about what he says.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

11. Agree - but he just doesn't strike me as a deep and deliberative enough thinker

to plan all this shit out.

[Jennylynn]

17. Idk. What's to plan, really?

Just say something homophobic, racist, sexist, whatever. He's been doing it for a year. It's gotta be becoming easier for him. On the other hand, if it is fake, why would he want the world to believe he's actually that type of person?

[Straw Man]

6. Here's the thing ...

Trump's logic is as follows: I have said derogatory things about Mexicans. The judge is of Mexican heritage. Therefore, he cannot be impartial and objective in any case involving me.

Following that line to its logical end, we would have to conclude that Trump can only be fairly judged by a white male of Northern European ancestry, preferably of a certain age and social class.

I would call that racism, among other things.

[Bucky]

7. You're not crazy, but you're too generous. Let's think about what Trump said...

1st - the Trump U case has nothing to do with the wall fantasy, nothing to do with immigrant, nothing to do Mexico.

2nd - So Trump's argument is that this particular judge can not rule on the facts and the law. Why?

3rd - Trump's only argument is that it's because this judge is "Mexican"

4th - Only Judge Curiel is not Mexican. Trump took one look at him, at his name, and categorized an American judge--a distinguished judge with a sterling record of being tough on crime--as "Mexican" and therefor intrinsically prejudiced against Trump, presumedly because Trump is saying terrible things about Mexican immigrants.

5th - When pressed on the issue, the only argument Trump could make is "He's of Mexican heritage and is proud of his heritage". Trump knows jack shit about this guy. These are ALL arguments based solely on the fact that Curiel is racially mestizo and has Spanish last name.

This is categorically racism.

[Bucky]

8. And all this is AFTER Curiel did Trump a huge favor by moving the case to after the election

That wasn't necessary. But it protected the integrity of the trial process and keeps Trump disintangled until after the election.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

16. Thanks B. You've made a very good argument and I appreciate it. The whole

thing is effed up for sure. He either has an amazingly bad tin ear - or he is deviously calculating to incite his racist base.

[malaise]

35. +1,000

textbook illustration of racism

[Kelvin Mace]

9. His comments were bigoted

but not racist.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

12. Interesting...never knew the difference between those two.

[Kelvin Mace]

14. Well "Mexican" is not a race

So his ignorant and bigoted remarks don't qualify as "racism" in the dictionary definition of the term.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

19. thanks. of course. guess it just bothers me that everyone uses the term

racism so loosely when there are such horrid examples elsewhere.

Nothing compares to the racial crimes against humanity - but always think about my friend who told me that no one knows what it is like to be walking down the street and passing a car where all four female occupants locked their door when they saw him. And how the pain of this has stayed with him all his life.

[Bucky]

21. Sorta, but not really. Remember that race is a social construct

Ethnologists will tell you there are three distinct races indigenous to sub-Saharan Africa, but everyone in this country just says they're all black. In our country we have this race called "Asian" but being lumped into the same race with Koreans, Chinese, Filipinos, Laotians, etc would be pretty insulting to many Japanese. The Chinese traditionally say their society has five races, but we call them all "Asian"--a category that includes Burmese, Malayans, Pakistanis, and Kazakhs, but not Iranians, who for purposes of the US Census bureau and minority business purposes are still considered white.

Race is bullshit. Saying Hispanics or Mexicans aren't a race is based on Supreme Court decision in the 1940s that ruled them to be legally white, desegregating (kind of) Mexican-Americans in Texas schools. Only Mexicans are a different race than Americans of fully European heritage. They are mestizos, mixed Spanish-Nahuatl or Spanish-Aztec or Spanish-Maya heritage--not fully white or red. Since the Mexican Revolution of the 1910s, official government policy is "We are all Mestizo" though racial distinctions still deeply matter in Mexico, but not as much as before the Revolution. Historically Mexico's racial divisiveness made Jim Crow look like a walk in the park.

It's perfectly accurate to say hatred of Hispanics is racism. Since racial divisions are fluid things established by social conventions--once upon a time Irish were not considered white--then any prejudice against any perceived racial grouping is by definition racism. Today, in America, most people consider "Hispanic" a race, despite the fact that there are red, white, brown, black and all sorts of blends of races from Latin America, the Philippines, the Caribbean, and even Europe designating themselves thus.

You can literally change your race every ten years. The Census is self declaratory. Many people have started calling themselves ethnically and racially "American" and the Census just tallies it down. But don't try to apply for the wrong scholarship. Then it's up to a judge how much the book she'll throw at your. And you know how racist those judges can be.

[Albertoo]

18. I agree

Trump is a great many things (fickle, macho, shallow, entitled, egotistic)

but probably not racist.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

20. Think his world view is much more binary. Those with me (love them) and those

against me - (stupid, biased, ill-informed).

To me, he is a fascinating case study.

Is he a disciplined enough thinker to plan this all out? "Hey, I know, there are enough yokel racist bigots out there that I can appease, and co-opt with who will help me win the nomination?"

Guess so, but still hard to imagine.

[Albertoo]

33. a disciplined enough thinker to plan this all out? Are you joking?

A baby who hasn't outgrown early youth selfishness

[840high]

32. Agree.

[qdouble]

22. Trump is an opportunistic bigot, period.

You're presupposing that bigots aren't incredibly cynical, but most are. He is actively courting the support of white nationalists and xenophobes in general. He may not actually believe all the bulllshit he says, but that's true of most racists. Racism is a system of exploiting privilege and denigrating minorities in order to get ahead. He's a classical bigot.

[TeamPooka]

23. I'm a stickler for words too and I think his comments were bigoted, prejudiced, and racist. nt

[Rex]

24. Racists hear 'words' that send them into certain reflexive states like anger or fear.

Sadly republicans cannot comprehend complex sentences and need simple, rhythmic style, spoon-fed information like a baby chick waiting for mama to return and regurgitate lunch.

Dump's supporters wait his every command. The judge could be from Mars, none of that matters. The GOP Sideshow is just winding up and getting started.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

27. So, Trump understands this to the fullest and is using it to the fullest. What do

you call a person who incites racism? I still think he's more of a Machiavellian - will do anything to get what he wants.

[Rex]

29. Yes which in my opinion means using racism or ageism or disability

really anything he can find to get publicity. I think Trump believes he can win on ratings, like he is on Shark Tank. THAT is how delusional I believe Trump is.

[MFM008]

28. Racist sexist bigoted

It's always the other persons fault but the roots are disgust of OTHER, rooting back to disgust with self.
He hates anything different.

[Tal Vez]

30. I understood Trump to say that because the judge is "a Mexican" he cannot

be trusted to perform his duty as a judge to set aside his personal feelings and judge the issues fairly. Judges commonly have opinions about issues that are associated with the case or with the parties to the case. Judges of Mexican ancestry are no less capable than judges of other ancestries to set aside any prejudices that they harbor. It is racist to suggest that there is something different about "Mexican" judges in that regard.

[shenmue]

31. Yes, you are the only one.

[Crepuscular]

34. ...

While Trumps remarks certainly give the appearance of bigotry, there may also be legitimate grounds for his claims of the appearance of bias by the judge in question.

Trump has alienated a large portion of the Latino community with his threat to build the wall and his comments about undocumented Latinos in this country. This has resulted in an understandable and perfectly legal reaction on the part of many Latinos, to oppose Trump and to take proactive steps to oppose his candidacy, as well as attacking Trumps business interests. That is all well and good but Federal Judges are supposed to be avoid potential conflicts of interest involving participants in cases in which they are presiding. The Judge in question belongs to and is active in the National Hispanic Bar Association, which has pro-actively called for boycotting Trumps business interests, specifically in response to his comments made about undocumented Latinos. Regardless of how you feel about Trump and how distasteful his comments may be, that association certainly raises legitimate questions about potential bias in the courtroom.

Let's say there was a Gay defendant in a civil case, who was ruled against by a Federal Judge who belonged to a National organization which advocated against Gay and Lesbian Rights, would it be illegitimate or surprising for that defendant to question whether the judge was potentially biased due to his public association with such an organization? I don't think most would find that surprising at all, in fact there would probably be a number of posters on this forum who would agree that the potential for bias would exist in such a case.

[Bucky]

36. oy

at some point you'll have to return that cake

[Laura PourMeADrink]

37. :)