Sunday, June 05, 2016

Vote Trump for Rule of Law

The top NY Times story was:
Donald Trump Could Threaten U.S. Rule of Law, Scholars Say

WASHINGTON — Donald J. Trump’s blustery attacks on the press, complaints about the judicial system and bold claims of presidential power collectively sketch out a constitutional worldview that shows contempt for the First Amendment, the separation of powers and the rule of law, legal experts across the political spectrum say.

Even as much of the Republican political establishment lines up behind its presumptive nominee, many conservative and libertarian legal scholars warn that electing Mr. Trump is a recipe for a constitutional crisis.

“Who knows what Donald Trump with a pen and phone would do?” asked Ilya Shapiro, a lawyer with the libertarian Cato Institute.
Shapiro is a Russian Jew who advocates open borders, on the theory that American law should not favor Americans over foreigners in any way.
And, in what was a tipping point for some, he attacked Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Federal District Court in San Diego, who is overseeing two class actions against Trump University.

Mr. Trump accused the judge of bias, falsely said he was Mexican and seemed to issue a threat.

“They ought to look into Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace,” Mr. Trump said. “O.K.? But we will come back in November. Wouldn’t that be wild if I am president and come back and do a civil case?”
Curiel identifies as Mexican and Latino, and his parents are Mexican citizens. Trump told the truth.
When Mr. Trump recently released a list of his potential Supreme Court nominees, conservative and libertarian scholars were heartened, but only to a point.

“It was a tremendous list, a great list,” said Mr. Shapiro, from the Cato Institute. “Who knows how much you can trust the list?”
I think that the problem here is that the Trump-haters fear that he is against judicial supremacy. They have liberal goals that they will never achieve by persuading the public. They count on dictatorial judges to impose them. Trump may not go along with that.

The term "Rule of Law" does not mean accepting judges opinions. It means applying written laws. Clinton is openly opposing rule of law on many fronts, such as promising to use executive power to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.

Update: Alberto R. Gonzales explains why Curiel presents an “appearance of impropriety.”

Occidental Dissent adds:
The cucks want you to simultaneously believe two things:

1.) First, a person’s racial, ethnic, cultural and religious background – in this case, a Hispanic federal judge – tells you nothing of importance about that person. Instead, we are all “individuals,” and it is a heresy against TruConservatism to suggest that “individuals” in the real world are anything more than this role in which they have been cast, which is to say, “individuals” have tribal loyalties and affiliations.

2.) Second, Donald Trump is destroying the GOP because the racial, ethnic, cultural and religious affiliations of non-Whites, whether they are blacks, Hispanics, or Muslims, is of supreme importance because these groups all have a collectivist mindset and have been offended by Trump’s racist and bigoted comments. This is also true of women who have been offended as a group by Trump’s sexist remarks over the years.

A housebroken cuck expects you to know that “we are all individuals,” but at the same time we are not. If you go off that script, it makes you a racist. Meanwhile, the Left attacks Trump as a “racist” for his comments on the Mexican federal judge, but simultaneously demands that women and “people of color” be appointed to the courts precisely because their background gives them a different perspective than cisgendered White males. Trump’s list of Supreme Court picks was attacked because of its lack of “diversity.”

The Left wants you to know that Trump is the last stand of White America. They want you to know that Whites are dying out and that racial demographics determines political power in the United States. They want to talk about it on CNN and MSNBC, but if you take them at the word and start talking about it yourself that makes you a racist. From the point of view of a cuckservative, it makes you a literal Klansman.

Trump doesn’t grasp the nuance of Judge Curiel’s objectivity, people!
Yes, it is funny to see the cuckservatives manipulated by the Left.

Update: It is amazing how many cucks are saying that Trump criticized the judge solely for being Mexican. No, he criticized the judge for bad decisions and for anti-Trump political affiliations.

6 comments:

Matthew Cory said...

Roger, go after the overeducation! That's where everybody is made into a leftist, including most immigrants, if it wasn't the global presence of American media. Pew did a poll of people in China and they were favoring markets more than Americans. The reason is quite simple: the more you "educate" people, the less they favor freedom. It just makes people left-brained. Cuba had one of the highest literacy rates in the world but was in extreme poverty.

The facts about the education system are undeniable and the same for economic freedom. These 33 degrees can't even invent. The Drapers of the world just "bank".

Arguing politics is pointless when they have already been able to build an army!

Anonymous said...


So why don't you think that racial demographics don't determine political power in the U.S. ? I think that for the most part, they do.

Anonymous said...


Maybe it's laudable that Trump is standing up for his rights with the judge. Maybe his case has merit and Trump Univ. was a fine educational facility but, it's almost comical how he doesn't see the big picture. Is he that self-absorbed ? He could have been talking about his perceived strengths to the electorate over the jobs numbers and how his business background could produce more jobs, etc. for days. Instead, he chooses to discuss his personal legal problems and calling out an American born judge. Have you heard that Mexican- American voters are now flocking to the polls to register to vote against him since he's criticised the judge ? He's playing right into Clinton's narrative of him being a racist, too, whether he is or isn't.

He's running for president and has a decent chance at placing multiple judges on the Supreme Court, but he's focused on this one judge instead ? And it involves pocket change relative to Trump's fortune. He could very well have had his attorney just file a motion and kept his mouth shut. He could have settled the case and focused on becoming the next president. He could have handled it a lot of other ways that would have accomplished the same thing without creating a backlash against him that's going to cost him a lot of votes.
So, once again, he's strengthened his support with his base and lost some who were on the fence about him. Actually, this time, he probably lost some who were in his corner, while losing many that weren't going to vote at all and will now vote against him well as many who were on the fence about him. But no, he's too thin skinned to not just keep his mouth shut and leave it to his lawyers. He lacks restraint. That's a form of being thin skinned. He doesn't realize that there's times when the best counterpunch is no counterpunch

Roger said...

Trump is playing the long game. For almost 11 months now, I have read experts say every week that he is ruining his chances with his comments. Those experts have been proved wrong every time.

My guess is that the judge was only appointed because he is a Mexican-American, and that he has made bad rulings. You are welcome to follow the case, if you think that it is so important.

Anonymous said...


Maybe you and Adams are correct and he'll win the general election although I think the general election is a completely different sort of ball game. I don't think it will be any one action or statement of Trump's that will cause him to lose but, rather the totality of what he's said and done.

I think that a lot of people will be following this case. A lot of people think that Trump is complaining about the judge because Trump has such a weak case to start with and Trump knows he'll lose the case. If you look into the case, you can see why people might think that. Of course, Clinton's affiliation with a for-profit school appears, even more, damning but, little is being said about that.

Roger said...

Yes, it is possible that Trump is blaming the judge partially because he is worried about losing the case, and thinks that the judge is biased against him.