- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,146
I had the dubious pleasure of hearing much of Donald Trump's press conference live on the radio today and some of it was shocking, even by Trump standards. An editorial in, "The New York Times" puts the issue very succinctly.
"Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy presents decent people everywhere with a dilemma: Sprayed with an open fire hose of schoolyard insults, locker-room vulgarities and bizarre policy pitches by the presumptive Republican nominee, they must make hard choices. Is this latest comment so outrageous, so much worse than all the others, as to require its own response?
Speak up too often and you risk sounding like a car alarm, so urgent and yet so familiar that residents no longer hear it. But don’t speak up often enough and you risk turning the unacceptable into the unremarkable."
So what did he do this time? He, as a presidential candidate, attacked a federal judge who is about to rule on a case in which he is a litigant.
"In a rambling, 11-minute stream of vitriol, Mr. Trump, who has attacked Judge Curiel before, called him 'very hostile' and a 'hater of Donald Trump,' and said he 'should be ashamed of himself. I think it’s a disgrace that he’s doing this.'
One would think Mr. Trump, whose sister is a federal appellate judge, would know how self-destructive it is for any litigant anywhere to attack the judge hearing his or her case. But Mr. Trump is not any litigant; he is running to be president of the United States — a job that requires at least a glancing understanding of the American system of government, in particular a respect for the separation of powers. When Mr. Trump complains that he is 'getting railroaded' by a 'rigged' legal system, he is saying in effect that an entire branch of government is corrupt."
In a masterpiece of understatement, Judge Curiel, who is prevented by ethical rules from responding directly to comments like these, noted in his order that Mr. Trump 'has placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.'"
For the entire editorial, click here...http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/opinion/donald-trump-and-the-judge.html?ribbon-ad-idx=19&rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=context®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article
"Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy presents decent people everywhere with a dilemma: Sprayed with an open fire hose of schoolyard insults, locker-room vulgarities and bizarre policy pitches by the presumptive Republican nominee, they must make hard choices. Is this latest comment so outrageous, so much worse than all the others, as to require its own response?
Speak up too often and you risk sounding like a car alarm, so urgent and yet so familiar that residents no longer hear it. But don’t speak up often enough and you risk turning the unacceptable into the unremarkable."
So what did he do this time? He, as a presidential candidate, attacked a federal judge who is about to rule on a case in which he is a litigant.
"In a rambling, 11-minute stream of vitriol, Mr. Trump, who has attacked Judge Curiel before, called him 'very hostile' and a 'hater of Donald Trump,' and said he 'should be ashamed of himself. I think it’s a disgrace that he’s doing this.'
One would think Mr. Trump, whose sister is a federal appellate judge, would know how self-destructive it is for any litigant anywhere to attack the judge hearing his or her case. But Mr. Trump is not any litigant; he is running to be president of the United States — a job that requires at least a glancing understanding of the American system of government, in particular a respect for the separation of powers. When Mr. Trump complains that he is 'getting railroaded' by a 'rigged' legal system, he is saying in effect that an entire branch of government is corrupt."
...
"For good measure, Mr. Trump added that Judge Curiel 'happens to be, we believe, Mexican.' False; the judge is from Indiana. But facts are, as always, beside the point for Mr. Trump, who reassured his audience that 'the Mexicans are going to end up loving Donald Trump when I give all these jobs.' (Presumably he was not referring to those he has promised to deport if he is elected.)In a masterpiece of understatement, Judge Curiel, who is prevented by ethical rules from responding directly to comments like these, noted in his order that Mr. Trump 'has placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.'"
For the entire editorial, click here...http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/opinion/donald-trump-and-the-judge.html?ribbon-ad-idx=19&rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=context®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=article