Clinton 46 Trump 35

[n david]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0YP2EX

New poll from May 30 - June 3.

This Judge issue likely won't sit well with voters, either.

[Originalist]

The poll is too radical of a shift too quickly to be accurate. Clinton leading among men? I don't think so.

[Originalist]

This is probably more accurate Clinton 45 Trump 40 (May 31 to June 6)

http://www.investors.com/politics/cl...choices-grows/


As for the judge comments. That will help him actually. The judge deserves to scrutinized for his La Raza connections. Alberto Gonzalez defended Trump's comments today in an op-ed.

[n david]

I disagree and will leave it at that.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Originalist

As for the judge comments. That will help him actually. The judge deserves to scrutinized for his La Raza connections. Alberto Gonzalez defended Trump's comments today in an op-ed.

I disagree. What Gonzalez defended was the right for Trump to question whether he was receiving a fair trial. I did not read anywhere that Gonzalez defended the actual attack. On the contrary, Gonzalez stated:

""'As a private citizen, Trump has a right to his opinions, regardless of whether others agree with them, or whether others consider them wise, foolish or even dangerous. Trump, of course, is more than a private citizen; as the likely nominee for president of a major political party, he speaks with a voice that carries much weight and, if successful in November, will influence millions of people. Because of this, some commentators have condemned Trump’s suggestion that Curiel step down from the case. These voices have, quite rightly, emphasized the importance of upholding our independent judiciary from baseless attacks by high-level persons from other branches of government."""

He also stated what many miss in that ethnicity or race is not reason enough for recusal:

""'Certainly, Curiel’s Mexican heritage alone would not be enough to raise a question of bias (for all we know, the judge supports Trump’s pledge to better secure our borders and enforce the rule of law). As someone whose own ancestors came to the United States from Mexico, I know ethnicity alone cannot pose a conflict of interest."""

And in an interview today, Gonzalez had stronger words against Trump's attack:

"""The fact that Donald Trump has attacked a Hispanic judge makes me angry. I’ve worked very hard with Hispanic organizations to get good quality Hispanics on our courts so it makes me angry some of these comments which I think are wrong and inappropriate,” Gonzalez said."""

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/albe...-judge-attack/

Gonzalez says it's okay for Trump to question if he's getting a fair hearing, but Gonzalez did not defend the actual attack.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by n david

I disagree. What Gonzalez defended was the right for Trump to question whether he was receiving a fair trial. I did not read anywhere that Gonzalez defended the actual attack. On the contrary, Gonzalez stated:

""'As a private citizen, Trump has a right to his opinions, regardless of whether others agree with them, or whether others consider them wise, foolish or even dangerous. Trump, of course, is more than a private citizen; as the likely nominee for president of a major political party, he speaks with a voice that carries much weight and, if successful in November, will influence millions of people. Because of this, some commentators have condemned Trump’s suggestion that Curiel step down from the case. These voices have, quite rightly, emphasized the importance of upholding our independent judiciary from baseless attacks by high-level persons from other branches of government."""

He also stated what many miss in that ethnicity or race is not reason enough for recusal:

""'Certainly, Curiel’s Mexican heritage alone would not be enough to raise a question of bias (for all we know, the judge supports Trump’s pledge to better secure our borders and enforce the rule of law). As someone whose own ancestors came to the United States from Mexico, I know ethnicity alone cannot pose a conflict of interest."""

And in an interview today, Gonzalez had stronger words against Trump's attack:

"""The fact that Donald Trump has attacked a Hispanic judge makes me angry. I’ve worked very hard with Hispanic organizations to get good quality Hispanics on our courts so it makes me angry some of these comments which I think are wrong and inappropriate,” Gonzalez said."""

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/albe...-judge-attack/

Gonzalez says it's okay for Trump to question if he's getting a fair hearing, but Gonzalez did not defend the actual attack.

Trump never said all Hispanic judges were bad. He was referring to one judge for a specific reason, and he is right. How does a Hispanic KKK member get on the bench?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Trump never said all Hispanic judges were bad. He was referring to one judge for a specific reason, and he is right. How does a Hispanic KKK member get on the bench?

He's not a "Hispanic KKK member," Originalist. The group with which he's associated is not the same, nor is it connected to the National Council of La Raza. In fact, there's a big Trump supporter on FoxNews who is also part of the very same group. Kimberly Guilfoyle of "The Five" is also in the Judge's La Raza attorney group. She's a huge Trump supporter. So I guess Trump has a big supporter who's a Hispanic KKK member. Only, again, the La Raza Lawyers Association is not the same as, nor is it connected to the National Council of La Raza.

http://m.therightscoop.com/revealed-...trump-u-judge/

[Birddog]

Hillary versus The Trumpster! Who you gonna vote for?

That is the only question here.