4 ms·

How are Trump's remarks about the judge racist? He never said Mexicans are not smart, should go to different schools, or that they can't drink from the same wa

by ap3 10y ago

How are Trump's remarks about the judge racist? He never said Mexicans are not smart, should go to different schools, or that they can't drink from the same water. All he said that this judge in particular has a background as an activist lawyer that belongs to an organization that promotes separation of the latino race, and has participated in granting scholarships to undocumented mexicans. And he suggests that background creates a bias in the case. American society would not accept a judge with ties to the segregationist movement presiding over the case of a black man accused a crime against a white man. Or how about a judge that was part of BLM presiding the case of a white cop accused of killing a black youth? Would that be racist too? Are defense attorneys racist when they dismiss jurors? Judges are people too, everyone has biases.

graycat 10y ago
> And he suggests that background creates a bias in the case. Not really. We have to be more careful with the words than that. Here's the difference: Trump said that the judge's rulings show that the judge is biased. So, if we accept that the judge is biased, then we want a reason, that is, we want some motivation. Well, it turns out, this judge has Mexican ancestry, is active in some pro-Mexican political causes that conflict with Trump's campaign positions on illegal Mexican immigration. So, Trump said that it appears that this pro-Mexican background of the judge is the judge's motivation for the judge being unfair to Trump. The huge point is, Trump never claimed that a judge with Mexican background could not be fair. Instead Trump claimed that it was solid that this judge WAS already unfair to Trump and, then, later, saw as motivation the judge's pro-Mexican background. It has been easy for the media to distort this situation into Trump claiming that the judge must be unfair because he has a Mexican background. Nope, that's a huge distortion, playing with words. Simply put, Trump claims that the judge is unfair because of the judge's rulings.
- justjico 10y ago
  He also believes a Muslim judge could be unfair to him because of his policies. I think the media is not really distorting his thinking but rather clarifying it. Similar to when he said Obama has something else going on with regards to radical Islam. He didn't say it, but said people should fill in the blank. Also, his lawyers have never filed such a claim.
  - graycat 10y ago
    It's a tricky issue of language and the use of because. I tried to be clear. And it really is clear: Trump claims that the judge IS unfair, and his reasons for saying that are that, as Trump claims, the judge has ruled in unfair ways. So, we get this far, the judge unfair, without mentioning Mexico. Or, the REASON Trump is saying that the judge is unfair is "because" of the judge's rulings against Trump. Then, as in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE with > All I'm trying to do is figure out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. And a lot of people agree with it. All I want to do, all I want to do is find out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. Trump is looking for the judge's motivation -- common enough in legal cases, right? So, Trump concludes that the judge's motivation in being unfair is the judge's Mexican background and support of pro-Mexican causes that conflict with some of Trump's campaign positions. So, we have two uses of "because". Really the second use would be better written, Trump says that the judge's motivation to be unfair was "because" of the judge's Mexican background, etc. That is, Trump is addressing not just one point about the judge but two -- (1) unfair rulings and (2) motivation for the unfairness. The Mexican part has only to do with point (2). But, sure, the media that wants headlines claiming that Trump is racist leaps to combine points (1) and (2) and say that Trump says that the judge is unfair "because" of his Mexican background, etc. No: Trump says that the judge is unfair "because" of the judge's rulings and then says that the judge is motivated to be unfair "because" the judge's Mexican background conflicts with Trump's campaign positions. The media has leaped, nearly in unison, to have a lot of fun, get a lot of clicks, confusing the rulings and the motivations for the rulings to claim that Trump is racist. Trump has claimed that the media is dishonest and disgusting, and IMHO this is an example. Was the judge unfair? Heck if I know -- I'm not a lawyer. But, unfair or not, maybe as a defendant, as part of a good defense, Trump gets to push back against the judge. But no way does the record support that Trump is being racist, that is, support that Trump says that any judge with a Mexican background will automatically be unfair. In one interview, Trump was asked why he didn't say that the judge's rulings were unfair and stop there and not mention Mexico. Sure, Trump might have done that. But Trump says he is a "counter puncher" and, e.g., ready to attack back, in this case, say that the motivation (right, my attempt at being more clear) of the judge was the Mexican stuff. In such counter punching, Trump builds his reputation as no pushover and gets more media attention. In response in this case, much of the media took the opportunity to attack back by playing with the word "because" by conflating the two issues, the rulings and the motivations. IMHO, Trump is this and that but he's not racist at all. The media -- too often deliberately disgustingly deceptive. As you mention, for a Muslim judge, would he have to be unfair? Nope. But if a Muslim judge WERE unfair, could his motivation for being unfair be that he was a Muslim and Trump's campaign statements about Muslims? Sure. Again, there is not just one point to be explained but two -- (1) unfairness and (2) motivation for unfairness. Being Mexican or Muslim would have only to do with (2).

by ap3 10y ago

graycat 10y ago

> And he suggests that background creates a bias in the case. Not really. We have to be more careful with the words than that. Here's the difference: Trump said that the judge's rulings show that the judge is biased. So, if we accept that the judge is biased, then we want a reason, that is, we want some motivation. Well, it turns out, this judge has Mexican ancestry, is active in some pro-Mexican political causes that conflict with Trump's campaign positions on illegal Mexican immigration. So, Trump said that it appears that this pro-Mexican background of the judge is the judge's motivation for the judge being unfair to Trump. The huge point is, Trump never claimed that a judge with Mexican background could not be fair. Instead Trump claimed that it was solid that this judge WAS already unfair to Trump and, then, later, saw as motivation the judge's pro-Mexican background. It has been easy for the media to distort this situation into Trump claiming that the judge must be unfair because he has a Mexican background. Nope, that's a huge distortion, playing with words. Simply put, Trump claims that the judge is unfair because of the judge's rulings.

justjico 10y ago
He also believes a Muslim judge could be unfair to him because of his policies. I think the media is not really distorting his thinking but rather clarifying it. Similar to when he said Obama has something else going on with regards to radical Islam. He didn't say it, but said people should fill in the blank. Also, his lawyers have never filed such a claim.
- graycat 10y ago
  It's a tricky issue of language and the use of because. I tried to be clear. And it really is clear: Trump claims that the judge IS unfair, and his reasons for saying that are that, as Trump claims, the judge has ruled in unfair ways. So, we get this far, the judge unfair, without mentioning Mexico. Or, the REASON Trump is saying that the judge is unfair is "because" of the judge's rulings against Trump. Then, as in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE with > All I'm trying to do is figure out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. And a lot of people agree with it. All I want to do, all I want to do is find out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. Trump is looking for the judge's motivation -- common enough in legal cases, right? So, Trump concludes that the judge's motivation in being unfair is the judge's Mexican background and support of pro-Mexican causes that conflict with some of Trump's campaign positions. So, we have two uses of "because". Really the second use would be better written, Trump says that the judge's motivation to be unfair was "because" of the judge's Mexican background, etc. That is, Trump is addressing not just one point about the judge but two -- (1) unfair rulings and (2) motivation for the unfairness. The Mexican part has only to do with point (2). But, sure, the media that wants headlines claiming that Trump is racist leaps to combine points (1) and (2) and say that Trump says that the judge is unfair "because" of his Mexican background, etc. No: Trump says that the judge is unfair "because" of the judge's rulings and then says that the judge is motivated to be unfair "because" the judge's Mexican background conflicts with Trump's campaign positions. The media has leaped, nearly in unison, to have a lot of fun, get a lot of clicks, confusing the rulings and the motivations for the rulings to claim that Trump is racist. Trump has claimed that the media is dishonest and disgusting, and IMHO this is an example. Was the judge unfair? Heck if I know -- I'm not a lawyer. But, unfair or not, maybe as a defendant, as part of a good defense, Trump gets to push back against the judge. But no way does the record support that Trump is being racist, that is, support that Trump says that any judge with a Mexican background will automatically be unfair. In one interview, Trump was asked why he didn't say that the judge's rulings were unfair and stop there and not mention Mexico. Sure, Trump might have done that. But Trump says he is a "counter puncher" and, e.g., ready to attack back, in this case, say that the motivation (right, my attempt at being more clear) of the judge was the Mexican stuff. In such counter punching, Trump builds his reputation as no pushover and gets more media attention. In response in this case, much of the media took the opportunity to attack back by playing with the word "because" by conflating the two issues, the rulings and the motivations. IMHO, Trump is this and that but he's not racist at all. The media -- too often deliberately disgustingly deceptive. As you mention, for a Muslim judge, would he have to be unfair? Nope. But if a Muslim judge WERE unfair, could his motivation for being unfair be that he was a Muslim and Trump's campaign statements about Muslims? Sure. Again, there is not just one point to be explained but two -- (1) unfairness and (2) motivation for unfairness. Being Mexican or Muslim would have only to do with (2).