"TAPPER: If you are saying he cannot do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?
TRUMP: No, I don't think so at all."
Media always taking it out of context and letting the liberal public run with it. Trump is referring to a particular judge who is handling his case and he has a concern of a possible bias in the proceeding because of the current controversy of what he said. He is right to think that a certain race has more disdain for him personally than others. And if you can't see that rgambs you need to re-evaluate your definition of racism.
Your toll fee is waived on this one so you can let it all sink in that Trump will be your ruler.
The wonderful thing about our court system is a little something called precedent...
In 1998, the second circuit court of appeals briskly threw out one such claim of bias, ruling: “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge’s impartiality.”
The chief justice of the court added that who appointed a judge and an attorney’s political stances were similarly baseless complaints. “Zero plus zero is zero,” he wrote.
This is pretty funny. I'm glad you linked that article. Want to know why Trump's attorneys won't file for recusal based on race? Not only is it absurd, but more importantly read what happened to the attorneys who filed in that 1998 case mentioned above:
In a written response, Chin noted that he hadn’t been aware of Klayman’s other lawsuit. As for the questions about his race, he said, “This sentiment is absurd and demeans me individually and the Court as a whole.”
He then lowered the boom. Klayman and Orfanedes were required to withdraw as counsel from the case and would not be permitted to appear in Chin’s court on any matter ever again. They would be required to show his opinion to any other judge in the district in any future case. The court clerk would also report the sanctions to every court where they held bar membership.
Klayman and Orfanedes recruited former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark (the lawyer for, among others, Lyndon LaRouche, Slobodan Milošević, and the Branch Davidians) to appeal the sanctions. The Second Circuit briskly affirmed Chin’s order. “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge's impartiality,” wrote the chief judge, Ralph Winter, a Reagan appointee. “Nor should one charge that a judge is not impartial solely because an attorney is embroiled in a controversy with the administration that appointed the judge. … Finally, appointment by a particular administration and membership in a particular racial or ethnic group are in combination not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality. Zero plus zero is zero.”
^^^ The funny thing is that Trump may/may not file a recuse but not based on that. If anything his lawyers and the court don't want what he is putting down, giving him leverage. Trump Uninversity? who cares, if you are stupid enough to ask a rich man how to become rich....
^^^ The funny thing is that Trump may/may not file a recuse but not based on that. If anything his lawyers and the court don't want what he is putting down, giving him leverage. Trump Uninversity? who cares, if you are stupid enough to ask a rich man how to become rich....
Wrong. Do you know how damaging and embarrassing sanctions are? One of my company's main jobs is overseeing attorney firms for large commercial and non-commercial institutions. They need local counsel to litigate cases. One of the first things we do and what we do every year on all attorneys is to review court sanctions. We won't hire any counsel that has been sanctioned in the courts (unless it was for a plaintiff failing to show). Trump's attorneys do not want this hanging over them after this case is over. Precedent is quite clear.
^^^ You are not doing your job correctly. Trump is still a viable candidate that will soon oversee your company proceedings.
Really? So Trump is going to have the government oversee privately held businesses like mine? Every statement you make sinks you deeper into bizarro world.
^^^ You have to think like Trump. His billions outmatch your bank account I venture to guess. His billions can make your little company and things called courts do as he pleases. Once he is POTUS he will be hindered by the public.
^^^ You have to think like Trump. His billions outmatch your bank account I venture to guess. His billions can make your little company and things called courts do as he pleases. Once he is POTUS he will be hindered by the public.
Negative. That's what you fail to understand. We have checks and balances in this country and an impartial court, with appeals, precedents and other strengths that are built to outlast douchebag wannabe dictators like Trump. It's like I said a page or two ago... that's the strength of our Constitution. It's impervious to the whims of the masses or the dictator. The fact that he is railing in the press about Trump U. shows you the worry he has about the case and the fact that he can't get the judge recused. If he was confident in the case or that ability, he would not need to whine in the press.
And BTW, my little company has 8 billion in managed assets and we do $500MM in revenue per year. It honestly would not surprise me if we have a higher EBIT than Trump's companies combined. He's a paper tiger.
^^^ You have to think like Trump. His billions outmatch your bank account I venture to guess. His billions can make your little company and things called courts do as he pleases. Once he is POTUS he will be hindered by the public.
Negative. That's what you fail to understand. We have checks and balances in this country and an impartial court, with appeals, precedents and other strengths that are built to outlast douchebag wannabe dictators like Trump. It's like I said a page or two ago... that's the strength of our Constitution. It's impervious to the whims of the masses or the dictator. The fact that he is railing in the press about Trump U. shows you the worry he has about the case and the fact that he can't get the judge recused. If he was confident in the case or that ability, he would not need to whine in the press.
And BTW, my little company has 8 billion in managed assets and we do $500MM in revenue per year. It honestly would not surprise me if we have a higher EBIT than Trump's companies combined. He's a paper tiger.
This sounds like what Trump did while holding up his paper saying how rich he was. My managed assets are 10 billion
^^^ You have to think like Trump. His billions outmatch your bank account I venture to guess. His billions can make your little company and things called courts do as he pleases. Once he is POTUS he will be hindered by the public.
Negative. That's what you fail to understand. We have checks and balances in this country and an impartial court, with appeals, precedents and other strengths that are built to outlast douchebag wannabe dictators like Trump. It's like I said a page or two ago... that's the strength of our Constitution. It's impervious to the whims of the masses or the dictator. The fact that he is railing in the press about Trump U. shows you the worry he has about the case and the fact that he can't get the judge recused. If he was confident in the case or that ability, he would not need to whine in the press.
And BTW, my little company has 8 billion in managed assets and we do $500MM in revenue per year. It honestly would not surprise me if we have a higher EBIT than Trump's companies combined. He's a paper tiger.
This sounds like what Trump did while holding up his paper saying how rich he was. My managed assets are 10 billion
I don't own the company. I'm an EVP. We are 65% owned by private equity and the executives own a piece. My point is that we are not 'little'.
So paper tigers and sports are mute. Trump is winning.
Mute or moot? Trump winning or losing has nothing to do with his court case. Perhaps if you lived in the States, worked here or studied it a tad you would understand the strength of our systems. As is, your knowledge is quite superficial or intentionally obtuse.
^^^ I always remember in Shawshank Redemption the word obtuse used to describe the irk towards the warden. The fact is that strength can have weakness and Trump is exposing it.
^^^ I always remember in Shawshank Redemption the word obtuse used to describe the irk towards the warden. The fact is that strength can have weakness and Trump is exposing it.
So paper tigers and sports are mute. Trump is winning.
Mute or moot? Trump winning or losing has nothing to do with his court case. Perhaps if you lived in the States, worked here or studied it a tad you would understand the strength of our systems. As is, your knowledge is quite superficial or intentionally obtuse.
You are putting up an intelligent defense but you probably would be better off beating your head against a wall.
So paper tigers and sports are mute. Trump is winning.
Mute or moot? Trump winning or losing has nothing to do with his court case. Perhaps if you lived in the States, worked here or studied it a tad you would understand the strength of our systems. As is, your knowledge is quite superficial or intentionally obtuse.
You are putting up an intelligent defense but you probably would be better off beating your head against a wall.
You're right... It's like I keep hoping for a good rebuttal or something. I guess he's really indefensible.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,451
Good for Newt. It's nice to see a Trump supporter call him out for this.
After the convention everyone of the senators who have talked shit about the Trumpster will go to the voting booth with their tail between their legs to cast a vote for Trump everyone of e'm !!!!
I love that the GOP is realizing that they created a monster and are reaping what they have sown. Trump is now the titular head of the GOP and he is shaping up to cost them big on the down-ticket bids.
This business with the judge is a perfect example of how little Trump understands political realities, and how difficult the road is going to be if he can't find a way to behave like an adult with dignity.
After the convention everyone of the senators who have talked shit about the Trumpster will go to the voting booth with their tail between their legs to cast a vote for Trump everyone of e'm !!!!
Probably.... at least that's what they'll tell people, lol. Maybe there will be some secret Dem voters among them, but they'll likely take it to their graves, hahaha.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
I love when you post IH80, you think exactly like I do.
We are the same.
In 1998, the second circuit court of appeals briskly threw out one such claim of bias, ruling: “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge’s impartiality.”
The chief justice of the court added that who appointed a judge and an attorney’s political stances were similarly baseless complaints. “Zero plus zero is zero,” he wrote.
In a written response, Chin noted that he hadn’t been aware of Klayman’s other lawsuit. As for the questions about his race, he said, “This sentiment is absurd and demeans me individually and the Court as a whole.”
He then lowered the boom. Klayman and Orfanedes were required to withdraw as counsel from the case and would not be permitted to appear in Chin’s court on any matter ever again. They would be required to show his opinion to any other judge in the district in any future case. The court clerk would also report the sanctions to every court where they held bar membership.
Klayman and Orfanedes recruited former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark (the lawyer for, among others, Lyndon LaRouche, Slobodan Milošević, and the Branch Davidians) to appeal the sanctions. The Second Circuit briskly affirmed Chin’s order. “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge's impartiality,” wrote the chief judge, Ralph Winter, a Reagan appointee. “Nor should one charge that a judge is not impartial solely because an attorney is embroiled in a controversy with the administration that appointed the judge. … Finally, appointment by a particular administration and membership in a particular racial or ethnic group are in combination not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality. Zero plus zero is zero.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/the-problem-with-calling-out-judges-for-their-race/485732/
The funny thing is that Trump may/may not file a recuse but not based on that.
If anything his lawyers and the court don't want what he is putting down, giving him leverage.
Trump Uninversity? who cares, if you are stupid enough to ask a rich man how to become rich....
You are not doing your job correctly.
Trump is still a viable candidate that will soon oversee your company proceedings.
You have to think like Trump.
His billions outmatch your bank account I venture to guess.
His billions can make your little company and things called courts do as he pleases.
Once he is POTUS he will be hindered by the public.
And BTW, my little company has 8 billion in managed assets and we do $500MM in revenue per year. It honestly would not surprise me if we have a higher EBIT than Trump's companies combined. He's a paper tiger.
My managed assets are 10 billion
Trump is winning.
I always remember in Shawshank Redemption the word obtuse used to describe the irk towards the warden.
The fact is that strength can have weakness and Trump is exposing it.
Godfather.
we will find a way, we will find our place
Trump is now the titular head of the GOP and he is shaping up to cost them big on the down-ticket bids.
This business with the judge is a perfect example of how little Trump understands political realities, and how difficult the road is going to be if he can't find a way to behave like an adult with dignity.