2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Admiral Yi]

Have you seen the interview when he referred to the judge or just know about it from second hand media reports?

I've seen footage of interviews in which he has discussed the judge.

Have you seen an interview in which he mentioned the HNBA?

[Martinus]

Have you seen the interview when he referred to the judge or just know about it from second hand media reports?

I've seen footage of interviews in which he has discussed the judge.

Have you seen an interview in which he mentioned the HNBA?

No, as I said I could not find it anywhere.

[Admiral Yi]

No, as I said I could not find it anywhere.

Then who told you that's what he said?

[Martinus]

No, as I said I could not find it anywhere.

Then who told you that's what he said?

Bill O'Reilly.

[Martinus]

So I found Trump's quote to CBS (I am not sure if this was the original interview or a follow up, admittedly), where he said: "[Judge Curiel] is a member of a club or a society, very strongly pro-Mexcian, which is fine. But I say he's got bias".

[Razgovory]

You sure you got the right group there Marty?

Donald Trump's attacks on a federal judge of Mexican heritage have ignited hundreds of postings on social media about an advocacy group for Latinos that some Trump supporters are calling a terrorist organization.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee has said that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, an Indiana native whose parents are Mexican immigrants, is making unfair rulings against him as the presiding judge in a class-action lawsuit over Trump University because of his plans to crack down on illegal immigration, including a promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

As evidence of what they say is Curiel's bias, Trump and some of his supporters have pointed to the judge's membership in La Raza Lawyers of San Diego, a local group for Hispanic lawyers that is affiliated with the Hispanic National Bar Association.

Some Trump supporters have incorrectly linked La Raza Lawyers to the National Council of La Raza, a 50-year-old civil rights group that has been strongly critical of Trump's proposals on immigration, as well as his idea to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States.

The NCLR's non-profit designation bars it from engaging in political campaigns, and the group's website describes it as a "nonpartisan voice for Latinos."

A conservative blog, GotNews.com, first noted Curiel's membership in the lawyer's group, which it identified simply as "La Raza," on May 31. A day later, another conservative website, The Daily Caller, made a link to the NCLR.

After the NCLR was first named, Trump fans on Twitter began attacking it. "Judge #TrumpHater #GonzaloCuriel is a member of the #TERRORIST group #LaRazza #BANLaRazza #GonzaloCuriel #RESIGN," wrote a user @WillysBaldSpot, whose profile describes her as a Trump supporter.

"I would never have known the "La Raza" organization existed without Trump's controversial comments. #genius," wrote @asamjulian, another self-proclaimed Trump fan.

TRUMP: "HE'S GOT BIAS"

Trump on Sunday repeated his attack on Curiel in an interview on CBS's "Face the Nation."

"He's a member of a club or society very strongly pro-Mexican, which is all fine. But I say he's got bias," Trump said in the interview.

"This judge has treated me very unfairly. He's treated me in a hostile manner, and there's something going on," he added.

The words "La Raza" translate from Spanish to mean "the race," which Trump fans cite as proof the NCLR is a group of people who hate anyone who isn't Hispanic.

Lisa Navarrete, an NCLR spokeswoman, rejected that interpretation, saying that "thousands" of groups had names that included "La Raza" as a "nod to our common heritage."

The attacks on the advocacy group are the latest signs of the increasing racial tension in the 2016 presidential race. Critics have said Trump's calls to deport undocumented immigrants and ban Muslims amount to racism. His supporters say he's defending the country from terrorism and violence.

Some supporters of the New York businessman have blamed the NCLR for the violent clashes between anti-Trump protesters and Trump fans at a San Jose, California, rally last week.

"Thank you La Raza for putting California into play for Trump," wrote another supporter, @magnifier661. "Your violent fascism turned off the voting class #MAGA (a hashtag meaning Make America Great Again)."

The NCLR has been criticized in the past for its leaders' statements on immigration - the group supports a path to citizenship for people who entered the United States illegally - but Navarrete said it has never before attracted the ire of a presidential candidate.

Over the past week, she said, she and other NCLR officials have been calling journalists and pundits they believe are mischaracterizing the group.

"We've been doing a lot of correcting the media and making sure they're not repeating what supporters of Mr. Trump are saying," she said.

"We're sitting around arguing the minutiae of banking regulation, not running around in hoods.'"

Hope Hicks, Trump's spokeswoman, declined to comment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-latinos-idUSKCN0YS2BV

[garbon]

And California is called for Hillary.

[derspiess]

Congratulations.

[The Minsky Moment]

Out of interest, I looked at some of the Curiel rulings last night.  Nothing unusual in there, much it has favored the defense.

What is unusual about the case is that Trump's initial response was to sue the lead plaintiff for libel.  That is IMO abuse of the court system to intimate a party, and it violated the California anti-SLAPP law.  Trump wouldn't let it go, and took it all the up to a request that the entire Ninth Circuit court of appeal hear it.  Legal fees were awarded again him as per statute.

[Monoriu]

I look forward to Sanders' never ending fight for the Democratic nomination after Hillary has been elected president. 

[Berkut]

What I find incredible about this entire debate around Curiel is that those defending Trump are

A) Trying to defend his personal and clearly racist attacks against a well respected sitting judge, and
B) Don't seem to understand what the real issue here is - which is that Trump is willing to use his visibility as a Presidential candidate to try to influence an active court case. Forget the racist means he is using, but just the fact that he thinks it is perfectly reasonable to use his status as a *candidate* for President to try to influence a private legal matter shows an incredible lack of basic common sense and integrity. What is he going to be willing to do as President if someone pisses him off?

[alfred russel]

Trump's attacks are racist and he is scum, but using public means to try to influence a court case is SOP. How many times is there disclosure of inadmissable evidence in a court case, or public grandstanding with a sequestered jury, or any number of matters? Theodore Roosevelt went hard after the court, FDR did as well, and Obama recently put the USSC on blast in a state of the union address. All sorts of people try to influence court decisions outside of the legal process--including protesters outside (and sometimes inside) courts.

[Berkut]

Trump's attacks are racist and he is scum, but using public means to try to influence a court case is SOP. How many times is there disclosure of inadmissable evidence in a court case, or public grandstanding with a sequestered jury, or any number of matters? Theodore Roosevelt went hard after the court, FDR did as well, and Obama recently put the USSC on blast in a state of the union address. All sorts of people try to influence court decisions outside of the legal process--including protesters outside (and sometimes inside) courts.

All sorts of people DO NOT try influence *private* legal cases using their public status. And if they do, they lack integrity when they do so.

There is a grey area, I agree, when the "private" matter is taken against a public figure clearly as a consequence of their public persona. But that isn't the case here - this case existed completely outside the scope of Trump's public status as a candidate, and it is reprehensible that he is willing to use his candidacy as a means of trying to intimidate the judge in question.

Like I said, what does that say about his willingness to use his potential Presidency as a bludgeon in his personal affairs?

[Barrister]

Trump's attacks are racist and he is scum, but using public means to try to influence a court case is SOP. How many times is there disclosure of inadmissable evidence in a court case, or public grandstanding with a sequestered jury, or any number of matters? Theodore Roosevelt went hard after the court, FDR did as well, and Obama recently put the USSC on blast in a state of the union address. All sorts of people try to influence court decisions outside of the legal process--including protesters outside (and sometimes inside) courts.

It's not that he's using public pressure to influence a court case - it's that he's using his position as Republican nominee for President to do so.

[garbon]

I look forward to Sanders' never ending fight for the Democratic nomination after Hillary has been elected president.