Why is it Offensive If Trump Feels A Mexican Judge May Be Biased Against Him

[HereticBD]

Nobody bats an eye to the idea of a white man of power holding prejudice, so why is this such an out there notion?

Just curious...


Oh', and I'm aware the guy was born in America, before that point is raised.

 

[Space]

 

[Rod1]

Why is that offensive?

Nobody bats an eye to the idea of a white man of power holding prejudice, so why is this such an out there notion?

Just curious...


Oh', and I'm aware the guy was born in America, before that point is raised.

Because the guy is not Mexican.

 

[HereticBD]

Because the guy is not Mexican.

He's of Mexican descent. One generation removed.

Let's not pretend he's Steve Jones from Washington.

 

[Sycho Sid]

You cannot get a judge recused, like Trump wants, just because you have a personal issue with that judge's ethnicity, and you think the judge cannot be professional. It would set a really dangerous precedent.

 

[sloppypie]

jesus, you trump supporters really do let that man get away with anything.

what do you truly think is the most logical situation here - that this judge is denying trump's motion because he's mexican and biased, or trump is having a hissy fit and trying to bully his way out of something.

gonna need the fucking rocket scientists and batman detectives to solve this one.

 

[Rod1]

He's of Mexican descent. One generation removed.

Let's not pretend he's Steve Jones from Washington.

The dude was born in 1953, 63 years as an American.

Thats the kind of dangerous thinking that created the japanese internment camps.

 

[HereticBD]

You cannot get a judge recused, like Trump wants, just because you have a personal issue with that judge's ethnicity, and you think the judge cannot be professional. It would set a really dangerous precedent.

I see that, but I also think it's a little dangerous to not consider it as well. Not just in this case, but in general. It's kind of like an honor system, that can't be brought into question, because it's taboo to suggest such a thing. I'm not expecting the guy to get removed from the bench, much like I wouldn't expect a white judge to be removed at the mere suggestion of racism. I just find it weird that it's only a taboo notion to suggest, if the judge isn't white.


When I read that back, it seems like I'm just baiting with the typical "reverse racism" whine, but I actually think this is worth discussing. People of power should always have their motivations questioned.

 

[lil billy]

It shouldn't be offensive to refer to his heritage - Judge Curiel himself chooses to be a member of a group which has the phrase 'The Race' in its title.

Why are liberals trying to whitewash a man who clearly still wants to associate himself with others of 'The Race?'

The guy has been a great judge by all accounts, which makes his poor decision making all the more puzzling. Poor decisions to appoint a law firm that has contriuted 500k to Clinton to one of hte plantiffs, and reversing his own decision on the release of the Trump docs.

Such a great judge could only have erred if he had a deep seated personal bias against Trump that is distortring his vision of reality and justice.

Immediate recusal is the only remedy. Do the honorable thing Judge.

 

[TheFirstEMP]

An American judge should not be looking out for the interests of Mexico.

 

[spin]

Invalidating another man's integrity based on nothing more than his ethnicity is reprehensible. Always.

And we absolutely would bat more then an eyelash if the same was said of a white person, so pick up your victim card and put it back in your pocket, and quit acting just like those SJW pussies you detest so much.


It's wrong and you know it.

 

[Sycho Sid]

I see that, but I also think it's a little dangerous to not consider it as well. Not just in this case, but in general. It's kind of like an honor system, that can't be brought into question, because it's taboo to suggest such a thing. I'm not expecting the guy to get removed from the bench, much like I wouldn't expect a white judge to be removed at the mere suggestion of racism. I just find it weird that it's only a taboo notion to suggest, if the judge isn't white.


When I read that back, it seems like I'm just baiting with the typical "reverse racism" whine, but I actually think this is worth discussing. People of power should always have their motivations questioned.

It is not the mention of his race that causes the real problem, it is Trump saying that the man cannot be unbiased because of it

 

[Space]

what do you truly think is the most logical situation here - that this judge is denying trump's motion because he's mexican and biased, or trump is having a hissy fit and trying to bully his way out of something.

Anything's possible.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/13/justice/white-racial-bias/

White judge says he sent a white man to prison because of racial bias

Frank Barbaro, who is white, said he now believes his decision to convict Donald Kagan, also white, for the murder of an African-American man named Wavell Wint was a result of his "subliminal fight against racism," he told CNN.

 

[HereticBD]

It is not the mention of his race that causes the real problem, it is Trump saying that the man cannot be unbiased because of it

But if that's his opinion, what is wrong with expressing it? The way he's been attacked, makes him seem wrong for merely suggesting it. Like it's an untouchable topic. Like, why?

 

[Sycho Sid]

But if that's his opinion, what is wrong with expressing it? The way he's been attacked, makes him seem wrong for merely suggesting it. Like it's an untouchable topic. Like, why?

One of the main reasons is Trump is running for president, and is questioning a federal judge based on nothing but Trump's own biases and personal issues. Calling for an investigation over nothing but Trump''s own prejudice.

 

[Rod1]

But if that's his opinion, what is wrong with expressing it? The way he's been attacked, makes him seem wrong for merely suggesting it. Like it's an untouchable topic. Like, why?

Its not untouchable, Trump lawyers can make the case and be made a fool.

 

[Sycho Sid]

As a complete side note: It botherrs me that a 70 year old man uses the phrase hater as well. This one is not an attack against Trump, just a personal annoyance that the phrase 'hater' has become so acceptable.

 

[Rod1]

An American judge should not be looking out for the interests of Mexico.

Explain what Trump university has to do with Mexico?

 

[Rod1]

It shouldn't be offensive to refer to his heritage - Judge Curiel himself chooses to be a member of a group which has the phrase 'The Race' in its title.

Why are liberals trying to whitewash a man who clearly still wants to associate himself with others of 'The Race?'

The guy has been a great judge by all accounts, which makes his poor decision making all the more puzzling. Poor decisions to appoint a law firm that has contriuted 500k to Clinton to one of hte plantiffs, and reversing his own decision on the release of the Trump docs.

Such a great judge could only have erred if he had a deep seated personal bias against Trump that is distortring his vision of reality and justice.

Immediate recusal is the only remedy. Do the honorable thing Judge.

If there is a personal bias against Trump is the result of Trump calling him out.

Sorry buddy but judges are still human, attacking a judge personally and then bitching because he "could be more lenient" is a joke.

 

[HereticBD]

Its not untouchable, Trump lawyers can make the case and be made a fool.

It is untouchable, because you couldn't possibly prove such a thing against a federal judge, no matter what his record was. All someone can do, is voice an opinion. I just don't get why that opinion is automatically considered wrong, given the circumstances of the guy voicing it.

Is it really out there to think this guy might have some personal issues with Trump, not related to the case?