On June 2, 2016, Trump told the Wall Street Journal that Curiel had "an absolute conflict" in presiding over the litigation given that he is "of Mexican heritage" and a member of a Latino lawyers’ association. (When Trump said in a separate interview that Curiel "is a member of a club or society, very strongly pro-Mexican" in referfence to the group, PolitiFact National rated his statement Mostly False.) Trump told the journal the judge’s background was relevant because of his campaign stance against illegal immigration and his pledge to seal the southern U.S. border. "I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest," Trump said.
But Trump expanded on those comments during two Sunday talk show interviews that aired June 5, 2016. Here are the relevant excerpts.
CBS’ Face the Nation
This was the exchange about the judge between Trump and host John Dickerson on CBS’ Face the Nation. The interview was recorded on June 3, 2016.
Dickerson: Let me ask you about, what does the Mexican heritage of the judge in the Trump University case have to do with anything?
Trump: I think it has a lot to do with it. First of all, I've had terrible rulings forever. I had a judge previous to him and it would have been a very quick case. This is a case I should've won on summary judgment. This is a case -- and nobody writes this, and they all know it, but they don't like to write it -- the plaintiff in the case was a woman. She was so bad that under deposition it was over. I mean, she couldn't have been the -- it was a disaster. They went before the judge, they said, "We don't want her to be the plaintiff. We want to put somebody else in." So we said, "Well, that's fine. Dismiss the case. You have to dismiss the case." Wait a minute -- she gave letters, the most incredible reviews of the college you've ever seen, of the university. She gave the most incredible -- then on top of it, we have a tape where she's talking about it in the most glowing terms. You wouldn't speak about your college --
Dickerson: But Mr. Trump, what does this have to do with his parents being from Mexico, how does that --
Trump: Excuse me, excuse me, I'm just saying. We're getting terrible rulings. We go to the judge, we say to the judge, "Hey, you can't let her out of the case." He let her out of the case. We said, "Well, if you're going to let her out of the case, she's the plaintiff. If you're going to let her out of the case, the case is over." No, the case isn't over. OK? Now --
Dickerson: Give me the thought process, though, why -- how does this work?
Trump: He has given me -- my thought process --
Dickerson: No, no, for him, how do his Mexican parents have to do with him not ruling for you?
Trump: He is a member of a club or society, very strongly pro-Mexican, which is all fine. But I say he's got bias. I want to build a wall. I'm going to build a wall. I'm doing very well with the Latinos, with the Hispanics, with the Mexicans, I'm doing very well with them, in my opinion. And we're going to see, you're going to see, because you know what, I'm providing jobs. Nobody else is giving jobs. But just so you understand, this judge has treated me very unfairly, he's treated me in a hostile manner. And there's something going on.
When a woman can be a plaintiff in a case and then say, "I don't want to be" -- and you know why they don't want to be a plaintiff? They don't want her, the lawyers asked that she not be a plaintiff because they would have lost the case immediately.
Dickerson: So, I'm trying to figure out your thinking here, though. If his Mexican heritage -- the fact that his parents were Mexican immigrants -- is a barrier to him doing his job,why would any Mexican voter vote for you? Wouldn't they be the same barrier -- same problem?
Trump: No. They're going to vote for me because I'm going to bring jobs into the country --
Dickerson: But isn't it the same problem? Because you want the wall and all of that?
Trump: No, totally different.
Dickerson then asked Trump what if the judge on the case were Muslim. After some back-and-forth about that and immigration, attention returned to the judge and race.
Dickerson: Isn't there sort of a tradition, though, in America that we don't judge people by who their parents were and where they came from?
Trump: I'm not talking about tradition -- I'm talking about common sense, OK? He's somebody, he's proud of his heritage. And I think that's great that he's proud of his heritage.
Dickerson: But you're saying it's a barrier to him doing his job.
Trump: Well, he's not treating me -- he's not treating me fairly.
Dickerson: And you think it's not because -- you think it's because of where his parents came from?
Trump: I've had numerous lawyers. Look, I have a case where thousands of people have said it was a great school. They've written reviews where they say it's a great school. Not a good school, like great. They gave it the highest marks. I have thousands of these papers. It should've been a summary judgment case, meaning the case should've been dismissed.
And I had a judge who was very fair. I have a lawyer that came in when he came in. I mean, the lawyer, on the other side, sort of entered the case when he entered the case, and we're trying to figure out what that's all about.
Dickerson: Would you have your lawyers say, "Hey, throw this out because the judge is --"
Trump: Well, I may do that now -- we're finding things out now that we didn't know before --
Dickerson: Because of his Mexican heritage, though --
Trump: No, but because of other things. I mean because of other things.
Dickerson: You've said you want to reopen --
Trump: How do you allow a case to proceed when the plaintiff asks to be dismissed from the case? The plaintiff, the one that brought the suit, said, "I don't want to sue anymore. I don't want to sue anymore." They didn't want to sue. You know why they didn't want to? Because she can't win the case. Because she was a disaster. So the lawyers want her dismissed from the case. They go before the judge and he lets her out? Well, he can let her out, but you have to dismiss the case.
Dickerson: Yeah, I guess I'm just still confused how -- what his Mexican parents have to do with that. Let me --
Trump: Excuse me. I want to build a wall. I mean, I don't think it's very confusing.
Dickerson: Well.
Trump: Has nothing to do with anything except common sense. You know, we have to stop being so politically correct in this country. And we need a little more common sense, John. And I'm not blaming. I'm proud of my heritage, we're all proud of our heritage. But I want to build a wall. Now, the Hispanics, many of them like what I'm saying. They're here legally. They don't want people coming and taking their jobs and taking their house and everything else. They don't want that.
Dickerson then changed topics.
CNN’s State of the Union
Host Jake Tapper also asked Trump about his comments at some length during their interview on CNN’s State of the Union.
Tapper: You said that you thought it was a conflict of interest that he was the judge because he's of Mexican heritage, even though he's from Indiana.
Trump: OK. Yes. Yes.
Tapper: Hillary Clinton said that that is a racist attack on a federal judge.
Trump: Oh, she's so wonderful. You know, I mean, here's a woman that should be put in jail for what she did with her e-mails, and she's commenting on this.
Tapper: But what about the substance of the …
Trump discussed the plaintiff, how well his school did on student reviews, and how Judge Curiel would not dismiss the case after the lead plaintiff didn’t want to pursue it.
Tapper: But what does that have to do with his heritage?
Trump: I will tell you what it has to do. I have had ruling after ruling after ruling that's been bad rulings, OK? I have been treated very unfairly. Beforehand, we had another judge. If that judge was still there, this case would have been over two years ago.
Let me just tell you, I have had horrible rulings. I’ve been treated very unfairly by this judge. Now, this judge is of Mexican heritage. I'm building a wall, OK? I'm building a wall. I am going to do very well with the Hispanics, the Mexicans.
Tapper: So, no Mexican judge could ever be involved in a case that involves you?
Trump: Well, no, he is a member of a society where -- very pro-Mexico. And that's fine. It's all fine.
Tapper: Except that you're calling into question his heritage.
Trump: I think he should recuse himself.
Tapper: Because he's Latino.
Trump: Then you also say, does he know the lawyer on the other side? I mean, does he know the lawyer? And a lot of people ...
Tapper: But I am not talking about that. I'm talking about ...
Trump: No, that's another -- that's another problem.
Tapper: But you're invoking his race when talking about whether or not he can do his job.
Trump: Jake, I'm building a wall, OK? I'm building a wall. I’m trying to keep business out of Mexico. Mexico's fine. There's nothing ...
Tapper: But he's American. He's an American.
Trump: He's of Mexican heritage. And he's very proud of it, as I am where I come from, my parents.
Then there was an exchange about details of the case before the conversation turned back to the judge.
Trump: Jake, if he was giving me fair rulings, I wouldn't be talking to you this way. He's given me horrible rulings.
Tapper: But I don't care if you criticize him. That's fine. You can criticize every decision. What I'm saying is, if you invoke his race as a reason why he can't do his job ...
Trump: I think that's why he's doing it.
Tapper: But ...
Trump: I think that's why he's doing it.
The conversation then switched to Clinton, before returning to the judge.
Tapper: Is it not -- when Hillary Clinton says, this is a racist attack -- and you reject that -- if you are saying he can't do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?
Trump: No, I don't think so at all.
Tapper: No?
Trump: No. He's proud of his heritage. I -- I respect him for that.
Tapper: But you're saying he can't do his job because of that.
Trump: Look, he's proud of his heritage. OK? I'm building a wall. Now, I think I'm going to do very well with Hispanics.
Tapper: He's a legal citizen.
Trump: You know why I'm going to do well with Hispanics?
Because I'm going to bring back jobs, and they're going to get jobs right now. They're going to get jobs. I think I'm going to do very well with Hispanics. But we're building a wall. He's a Mexican. We're building a wall between here and Mexico.
The answer is, he is giving us very unfair rulings, rulings that people can't even believe. This case should have ended years ago on summary judgment. The best lawyers -- I have spoken to so many lawyers. They said, this is not a case. This is a case that should have ended.
This judge is giving us unfair rulings. Now I say why. Well, I want to -- I'm building a wall, OK? And it's a wall between Mexico, not another country, and ...
Tapper: But he's not -- he's not from Mexico. He's from Indiana.
Trump: In my opinion -- he is -- his Mexican -- Mexican heritage. And he's very proud of it.
Tapper: But you're not from Scotland because you have Scottish heritage.
Trump: Hey, you know what? I'm not building a wall between Scotland and the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Paul Ryan and others have stated, this is a TEXTBOOK example of a racist statement.
Do I expect Blind Drumpf sheep to acknowledge that? Of course not, they overlook and just nod in agreement at every racist statement the idiot makes. That's why they're blind sheep.
Courts & Law
[h=1]Justices throw out death sentence given to black man by all-white jury[/h]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...39544e-20f6-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html
so this is ok, but not ok for Trump to think a Mexican judge could be partial against him?
To Elizabeth Warren, specifically, even if she's not Native American, which is totally irrelevant to anything, and to Native Americans generally. It's like derisively calling a Jew, or someone you think is a Jew, Hymie, a Black, Sambo, etc. When the idiot Virginia Senator Allen derisively called a Black Person a Makaka years ago, he was rightfully lambasted, and his Political career was done. Drumpf gets away with it because the media continually gives him passes for racist shit like this.
Not sure what article you're referring to, but read this:
Historically inaccurate, immature and racist - Trump's 'Pocahontas' insult is just what you'd expect: John L. Micek
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. (L) and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump (R)
PrintEmail
By John L. Micek | jmicek@pennlive.com Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on June 28, 2016 at 1:22 PM, updated June 28, 2016 at 4:04 PM
Donald Trump's latest presidential pivot didn't last long.
His rapacious ego dented and his equally thin skin nicked by U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren's criticism of him during a joint appearance with Hillary Clinton on Monday, the presumptive GOP nominee went right back into fourth-grade tyrant mode:
"Crooked Hillary is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the U.S. Senate, goofy Elizabeth Warren, who lied on heritage," he Tweeted.
<twitterwidget class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" id="twitter-widget-0" data-tweet-id="747415955400196096" style="position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; transform: rotate(0deg); max-width: 100%; width: 500px; min-width: 220px; margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump
Crooked Hillary is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the U.S. Senate, goofy Elizabeth Warren, who lied on heritage.
9:07 AM - 27 Jun 2016
</twitterwidget>Trump's retreat to the playground was confirmed by a Tweet from MSNBC reporter Hallie Jackson:
<twitterwidget class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" id="twitter-widget-1" data-tweet-id="747481696057065472" style="position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; transform: rotate(0deg); max-width: 100%; width: 500px; min-width: 220px; margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
Follow
Hallie Jackson ✔@HallieJackson
"She made up her heritage," Trump tells me of Elizabeth Warren. Adds "what she did was very racist." Again calls her "Pocahontas." (more tk)
1:28 PM - 27 Jun 2016 · Manhattan, NY, United States
</twitterwidget>If you haven't figured it out by now, giving his critics patronizing nicknames is Trump's thing.
He's variously referred to his former GOP primary competitors as "Little Marco," and "Lyin' Ted." Clinton joined the ranks as "Crooked Hillary."
Trump doesn't look much like a President of all Americans - native or otherwise - either.
Trump has been calling Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, "Pocahontas" for a while now. It's a reference to the controversy surrounding her tough to substantiate claim to Cherokee heritage.
Trump trots out the nickname whenever Warren scores rhetorical points, as was the case on Monday, when she hammered Trump and his "goofy" campaign slogan.
"Donald Trump says he'll make America great again," Warren said, according to The New York Times. "I ask, for who exactly? For families that don't fly to Scotland to play golf?"
While she hasn't been able to prove her Cherokee blood sufficiently to qualify for tribal citizenship, Warren's claim that family lore indicates Cherokee descent is common in her home state of Oklahoma.
Whether she's used her heritage for political gain is a separate matter entirely - and worthy of debate.
That still doesn't justify or excuse Trump's use of the Pocahontas name to turn Warren into some kind of Progressive Disney Princess.
The only intent there is to minimize Warren - and, by extension, Clinton -- in the eyes of voters.
Trump is calling "on the only image of a native woman he's ever heard of, who has been commodified and sexualized beyond belief," said Karenne G. Wood, the director of Virginia Indian Programs at the Virginia Foundation for the Humanities in Charlottesville, Va.
Wood, a member of the Monacan Indian tribe, who has written about Pocahontas and the symbolic importance of her story, said Trump's nickname for Warren could be "construed as racist."
"He's pulling something out of his limited arsenal," Wood said, adding that the nickname "minimizes Sen. Warren as a female leader. It makes her look like a character in the Disney movie."
That Trump invokes only the basest racial, ethnic and religious stereotypes is hardly a shocker. In his reductive calculus, all undocumented Mexicans are rapists and murderers and all Muslims are potential terrorists.
It's also a reminder that, when it comes to their own history, Americans - from presidential candidates on down - are depressingly blind.
The real Pocahontas, a Powhatan woman from Virginia named Matoaka, was a much more complex - and far more tragic - figure. Pocahontas was a nickname, according to a tribal history.
The real Matoaka, was taken prisoner at age 17 while on a social visit to Jamestown Colony and was held hostage for more than a year, according to the tribe's website.
She was released from captivity when she agreed to marry a colonist named John Rolfe, with whom she had only one child. The real Pocahontas, by then renamed Rebecca Rolfe, died at age 21, almost right after the family returned to England in 1617, the tribal history indicates.
Capt. John Smith's famous tale about Matoaka saving him from stoning by her father, Chief Powhatan probably didn't happen as advertised. And Smith and Matoaka were never an item.
So when "Trump makes cracks against Warren, he uses the Native American community like a whip -- like an inanimate object, or a people dead and gone, not likely to respond," journalist Simon Moya-Smith, a member of the Oglala Lakota Nation, wrote for CNN back in May.
But with Pocahontas and her story thrust back into the headlines, native people are responding.
Trump's shot at Warren is a "misappropriation of who we are, not only the Powhatan people, but of over 500 federally recognized tribes," said Roy Bundy, , the tribal representative for the Powhatan Renape Nation in Riverton, N.J. "He lumps them together under this one name 'Pocahontas.'"
In Trump's eyes, "if you don't look like a Native American, if you don't have long hair and braids and feathers hanging from your hair, you're not a Native American," Bundy continued. "He deems us only externally, if you don't look like a native to him, you're not a Native American."
And based on that measure, Trump doesn't look much like a President of all Americans - native or otherwise - either.
[FONT="]sorry, forgot to post...here it is, and I will read yours.
Earlier this month I wrote a post wondering if Americans are just worn out when it comes to the politics of outrage.[/FONT]
[FONT="]“Look at accusations of racism. They’ve become rote in modern politics,” I wrote. “Something anyone watching cable news for more than 15 minutes, or scrolling through any of their various social media feeds, will see/hear routinely. It happens so often that, for the general public, I think the accusation has begun to lose its meaning. Like a word that begins to sound funny when you keep repeating it over and over again.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]I thought of that yesterday when someone at the Donald Trump press conference in Bismarck told the candidate he was being “offensive” when he described liberal U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]This was immediately described as “racist” by some, including Nicole Robertson, a writer working with the Three Affiliated Tribes who was the person who told Trump he was being offensive:[/FONT]
[FONT="]I will predict that Trump saying “Pocahontas” will have almost zero political repercussions for him. Because, to allude to my previous point, accusations of racism get tossed around in American politics these days so frequently that I’m just not sure the greater electorate really cares any more.[/FONT]
[FONT="]For the sake of politics some – mostly our friends on the left, I’m afraid – have lowered the bar for racism so low that it includes a lot of things that might be edgy or provocative but that most reasonable people don’t really consider to be all that, you know, racist.[/FONT]
[FONT="]If Trump had made some insult about Native Americans generally, or had expressed sympathy for their treatment during America’s westward expansion or something like that, then sure. I get it. That’s racist and offensive.[/FONT]
[FONT="]But calling Elizabeth Warren Pocahontas to tease her for making some very silly claims about her cultural heritage? Claims not even The Atlantic, hardly a bastion of right-wing sympathies, could substantiate?[/FONT]
[FONT="]C’mon. This sort of silliness, and the candidate’s willingness to gleefully blow right through it, is the foundation of Trump’s appeal.[/FONT]
Earlier this month I wrote a post wondering if Americans are just worn out when it comes to the politics of outrage.[/FONT]
[FONT="]“Look at accusations of racism. They’ve become rote in modern politics,” I wrote. “Something anyone watching cable news for more than 15 minutes, or scrolling through any of their various social media feeds, will see/hear routinely. It happens so often that, for the general public, I think the accusation has begun to lose its meaning. Like a word that begins to sound funny when you keep repeating it over and over again.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]I thought of that yesterday when someone at the Donald Trump press conference in Bismarck told the candidate he was being “offensive” when he described liberal U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]This was immediately described as “racist” by some, including Nicole Robertson, a writer working with the Three Affiliated Tribes who was the person who told Trump he was being offensive:[/FONT]
“We don’t go out of our way to call people anything,” said Robertson, who owns a media company and is based in Calgary, Alberta. “To me, that sort of shows the leadership of somebody and their character. I really believe that today was very telling.”
Three Affiliated Tribes Councilman Ken Hall, who was working with Robertson during the oil industry conference, said Thursday that Trump should explain himself or apologize.
“We’re in 2016. We’re not living in the 1800s anymore. We’re professional people. We’re accomplished people. We’re proud people,” said Hall, who was representing Missouri River Resources at the conference. “And these kinds of remarks don’t sit well with us.”
[FONT="]It’s not my place to tell people what they should and should not be offended by. Personally, I would think it’s far more offensive that Senator Warren used an apparently trumped up Native American heritage to abuse diversity policies and advance her career, and I sort of resent being put in a position of defending Trump who I generally find to be an obnoxious ass, but whatever.[/FONT]Three Affiliated Tribes Councilman Ken Hall, who was working with Robertson during the oil industry conference, said Thursday that Trump should explain himself or apologize.
“We’re in 2016. We’re not living in the 1800s anymore. We’re professional people. We’re accomplished people. We’re proud people,” said Hall, who was representing Missouri River Resources at the conference. “And these kinds of remarks don’t sit well with us.”
[FONT="]I will predict that Trump saying “Pocahontas” will have almost zero political repercussions for him. Because, to allude to my previous point, accusations of racism get tossed around in American politics these days so frequently that I’m just not sure the greater electorate really cares any more.[/FONT]
[FONT="]For the sake of politics some – mostly our friends on the left, I’m afraid – have lowered the bar for racism so low that it includes a lot of things that might be edgy or provocative but that most reasonable people don’t really consider to be all that, you know, racist.[/FONT]
[FONT="]If Trump had made some insult about Native Americans generally, or had expressed sympathy for their treatment during America’s westward expansion or something like that, then sure. I get it. That’s racist and offensive.[/FONT]
[FONT="]But calling Elizabeth Warren Pocahontas to tease her for making some very silly claims about her cultural heritage? Claims not even The Atlantic, hardly a bastion of right-wing sympathies, could substantiate?[/FONT]
[FONT="]C’mon. This sort of silliness, and the candidate’s willingness to gleefully blow right through it, is the foundation of Trump’s appeal.[/FONT]
I read the article you posted Guesser, and as I am sure you are not swayed by the article I posted, nor am I from this one. Listen, I am not a Trump supporter, but I just have to try to stop you from saying he is being racist, cause it's all silly to me. I will be voting for Trump though because he is still a million times better than Hillary and Co.
Drumpf has made and continues to make racist statements throughout the campaign. You know it's really bad when his supporters, reluctant though they may be, like Paul Ryan, have to call him on them, not to mention his cheerleaders in the media.
There ARE other choices besides Drumpf and Hillary. I'm choosing someone else, and if all of us that were dissatisfied with these 2 did the same, things would get interesting.
Only a complete race-baiting idiot would call Trump a racist for calling Warren Pocahontas. He's calling her that because she's lying her ass
off about being part Indian. He's not calling her that because he thinks Indians are somehow an inferior race.
These fucking liberal puppets and their knee-jerk racism slurs, it's so predictable.
off about being part Indian. He's not calling her that because he thinks Indians are somehow an inferior race.
These fucking liberal puppets and their knee-jerk racism slurs, it's so predictable.
