From his announcement last June 16th that he was seeking the Republican nomination Donald Trump's candidacy was scoffed at.
His
critics, in the GOP and media, were quick to condemn Trump for labeling
his opponents,
such as "low energy Jeb". but his opponents launched the first salvos
when referring to him as an "entertainer" and "reality show star", an
obvious insult of the first order.
Anyone
knowledgeable knows Trump is one of the most successful real estate
developers in the world, more accomplished than most of the politicians
running for the presidency.
What
really got under the skin of establishment politicians and their donors
was when Trump stated "all politicians do is talk" and "anyone who
gives a politician $5 million expects something in return". While no
one challenged these statements, millions watching the first debate at
home knew exactly what he meant.
The
year long battle had begun and no need going over the countless
attempts from within the Republican Party to destroy Trump's candidacy.
All we need to do is review the latest matter, Trump's criticism of a federal judge.
The
judge is Gonzalo P. Curiel’s who is adjudicating a lawsuit against
Trump University. Trump is displeased with his rulings and cited the
judge was "Mexican". Immediately, leaders of both political parties went
after Trump, naturally saying it was
"racist".
The media, as expected, pounced on Trump with glee, believing THIS is what will bring him down and seal the long anticipated coronation of Hillary Clinton.
The media, as expected, pounced on Trump with glee, believing THIS is what will bring him down and seal the long anticipated coronation of Hillary Clinton.
But, was Trump really hurling the 'go to' "R-word", or was he inferring something else? I found it to be an inference.
In
the real world if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its most
likely a duck. And, unlike politicians and the media, Donald Trump
lives in the real world, the world where any affront should be responded
to, which he did.
What I saw was not a racist criticism, I saw the same 'duck' Trump saw.
Consider
the ruling Curiel made. Even though the plaintiff decided not to go
forward with her suit, the judge said the trial must continue
Curiel also happens to be a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association that represented the plaintiff, and that also paid thousands to the Clintons for speeches. Yet, the judge saw no reason to recuse himself.
Curiel also happens to be a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association that represented the plaintiff, and that also paid thousands to the Clintons for speeches. Yet, the judge saw no reason to recuse himself.
The
conclusion Trump reached seems reasonable, a judge with Mexican
heritage, member of a group that wants illegals to remain, supports
Democrats and decides to continue a trial without a plaintiff is so far
out of the norm, there appeared to be bias on the part of Curiel, NOT racism!
And, speaking of race. the name, 'San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association' should trouble those who shiver when the "R-word" is used. "La Raza” translations to "THE RACE.", a name which should be of concern to the media, but apparently is not.
It
wasn't too long ago a member of Congress called Supreme Court
Justice Clarence Thomas an "Uncle Tom". It was reported but there was
no demand he apologize! The "R-word" in this instance remained on the
shelf waiting for the appropriate moment!
Enter Donald Trump!
THAT is ideological bigotry, and perfectly fine!
No comments:
Post a Comment