Leaked Email Proves TRUMP WAS RIGHT About ‘Mexican Judge’

[Revmitchell]

The Clinton campaign and the mainstream media actively misrepresented statements by Donald Trump not too long ago about activist judge Gonzalo Curiel. They said Trump called him unfit to hear a case involving Trump University because the judge was Mexican. This is far from the truth.

But even as the Left insists on the validity of their cherry-picked and manipulated depiction of what Trump said about Curiel, evidence is emerging that proves Curiel is, in fact, as activist as the misrepresentations of the Left have protested. Judge Curiel’s wife has popped up in, of all places, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails, exposed by Wikileaks. It seems Mrs. Curiel is an avid Progressive and a huge fan of Podesta and the Center for American Progress.

http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/sweet-vindication/

 

[Don]

The sad part is: those that are castigating Trump for his iniquities, are turning a blind eye to Hillary's own iniquities.

And vice versa.

 

[Zaac]

The sad part is: those that are castigating Trump for his iniquities, are turning a blind eye to Hillary's own iniquities.

And vice versa.

No they aren't. You just got a bunch of silly minded Christians who think their dislike of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine means that Christians with God sense should flock to the anti-Christ everything, disgusting candidate they're supporting.

Our eyes are anything but blind as we aren't supporting her and have given no pretense that we are.

A lot of Christians on the other hand have no problem supporting that man because there's an R after his name.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Zaac]

The Clinton campaign and the mainstream media actively misrepresented statements by Donald Trump not too long ago about activist judge Gonzalo Curiel. They said Trump called him unfit to hear a case involving Trump University because the judge was Mexican. This is far from the truth.

But even as the Left insists on the validity of their cherry-picked and manipulated depiction of what Trump said about Curiel, evidence is emerging that proves Curiel is, in fact, as activist as the misrepresentations of the Left have protested. Judge Curiel’s wife has popped up in, of all places, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails, exposed by Wikileaks. It seems Mrs. Curiel is an avid Progressive and a huge fan of Podesta and the Center for American Progress.

http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/sweet-vindication/

That email proves nothing of substance towards the judge's alleged implicit bias towards Donald Trump due to his being of Mexican descent.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Lewis]

Judge is Curiel is a member of the Hispanic National Bar Association, which published a press release on July 2nd 2015:

"Other businesses and corporations should follow the lead of NBC/Universal, Univision and Macy’s and take similar actions against Donald Trump’s business interests. We can and will make a difference."

He should have recused himself from the Trump lawsuit.

 

[Zaac]

Judge is Curiel is a member of the Hispanic National Bar Association, which published a press release on July 2nd 2015:

"Other businesses and corporations should follow the lead of NBC/Universal, Univision and Macy’s and take similar actions against Donald Trump’s business interests. We can and will make a difference."

He should have recused himself from the Trump lawsuit.

Perhaps. But Trumps objection wasn't to something the HNBA had done or to the fact that he (the judge)was affiliated with that group.

Here we are months later and some are acting like Trump made this point. He did not. He spoke of the judge's Mexican heritage.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Lewis]

Verbalization skills are not Trump's strong point. But the point he attempted to make was correct.

 

[Zaac]

Verbalization skills are not Trump's strong point. But the point he attempted to make was correct.

It was not correct. He knew nothing about the man other than he was of Mexican descent. And this article still presents no reason to believe his Mexican ancestry would influence his ability to impartially judge cases.

Gosh if the only folks able to judge his cases were folks he hadn't insulted, he would only have old white judges...which may be what he wants.

Fortunately, he doesn't get to control the judicial branch.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Aaron]

It was not correct. He knew nothing about the man other than he was of Mexican descent. And this article still presents no reason to believe his Mexican ancestry would influence his ability to impartially judge cases.

Gosh if the only folks able to judge his cases were folks he hadn't insulted, he would only have old white judges...which may be what he wants.

Fortunately, he doesn't get to control the judicial branch.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

It's hard not to picture Zaac with his fingers plugging his ears and chanting, LA LA LA LA LA LA LA!!!

 

[Aaron]

But, the above is not the case. The case is that Zaac knows the truth, but chooses to repeat the lie.

 

[Zaac]

But, the above is not the case. The case is that Zaac knows the truth, but chooses to repeat the lie.

[emoji57] [emoji107]

What's the truth is you don't know what you're talking about. Trump didn't make an issue of the judge's associations at the time. He spoke of his stupid wall and the judge's Mexican heritage.

So to try to come back and attempt to reframe the truth might work with some of you square peg in a round hole types, but it doesn't fool me.

This new attempt to defend his original stupid comments with irrelevant information is as stupid as his original comments.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Lewis]

It was not correct. He knew nothing about the man other than he was of Mexican descent.

You don't know that at all. It is your assumption. Trump's lawyers would have known about Judge Curiel's associations, and would most likely have relayed that to him.

 

[Use of Time]

You don't know that at all. It is your assumption. Trump's lawyers would have known about Judge Curiel's associations, and would most likely have relayed that to him.

Really, I mean he definitely would have brought it up in the interview. Come on people at least try to be honest about this.

 

[Lewis]

Really, I mean he definitely would have brought it up in the interview. Come on people at least try to be honest about this.

How about Judge Curiel should have been honest? He knew that his association with the Hispanic National Bar Association was a conflict of interest, considering that they had publicly made it clear they wanted to damage Trump's businesses.

 

[Benjamin]

Really, I mean he definitely would have brought it up in the interview. Come on people at least try to be honest about this.

The truth is the judge was biased, not only biased but as much evidence shows both he and his wife were/are extreme liberal activists especially in the field of immigration The truth is when it came this man being in charge of the legal matters facing Trump it was equivalent to putting the fox in charge of guarding the hen house. Trump was/is in the process of shutting down illegal immigration, saw this judge as biased and on an agenda and called it like it was. Of course the leftist jumped all over this and used it as an excuse to call Trump racist. ...if you want to be honest...

 

[Don]

Really, I mean he definitely would have brought it up in the interview. Come on people at least try to be honest about this.

You know they're right about this. The judge should have recused himself for conflict of interest. He *had* to have known that all this would come out; if not during the hearing, then afterwards, causing immediate grounds for vacating any decisions, or for re-trial or appeal.

 

[Zaac]

You don't know that at all. It is your assumption. Trump's lawyers would have known about Judge Curiel's associations, and would most likely have relayed that to him.

What is it with y'all and this onslaught of ridiculously foolish posts? His lawyers didn't know squat. If they had , he would have qualified his comments at the time. His problem was exactly what he said: the judge's Mexican heritage.

There's no need to attempt to rewrite the truth into something else. It's documented. The world knows what his issue was with the judge.

 

[Zaac]

How about Judge Curiel should have been honest? He knew that his association with the Hispanic National Bar Association was a conflict of interest, considering that they had publicly made it clear they wanted to damage Trump's businesses.

Then his lawyers would have to prove it to be a conflict of interest. It wasn't. It isn't. Just an excuse NOW to try to cover up for Trump's disgusting comments.

 

[Use of Time]

The truth is the judge was biased, not only biased but as much evidence shows both he and his wife were/are extreme liberal activists especially in the field of immigration The truth is when it came this man being in charge of the legal matters facing Trump it was equivalent to putting the fox in charge of guarding the hen house. Trump was/is in the process of shutting down illegal immigration, saw this judge as biased and on an agenda and called it like it was. Of course the leftist jumped all over this and used it as an excuse to call Trump racist. ...if you want to be honest...

So a judge that is was anti-immigration would be unbiased I guess?

 

[777]

Deep into the hypothetical, but if Hillary was involved in a lawsuit and the presiding judge was anti-immigrant and belonged to a group that specifically stated they were against her, that judge would not be unbiased.

This guy isn't either and should have recused himself and there's no way to force him out without hitting the black-robed wall. Trump has every right to say anything he wants to about this judge or any other topic, there is still a first amendment right now.

Actually, somebody like Trump is preferable because you know what he thinks about - if he views you as "deplorable", he'll say it. If he viewed this judge as a "needy Latino", he would've said that. If he thought you were some backwards Catholic, he'd say it. Not so with the other one.