Trump should apologize for what he said about the judge

[EE_]

Trump has been attacked by both parties for saying the judge in the Trump U case is biased for being Mexican, a Hillary supporter and a member of La Raza.
Trump was attacked by Kelly Megyn last night and by Paul Ryan today.

Since critics say the judge should be held in the highest regard and considered unbiased. If I were Trump, I would apologize and submit a new list of supreme court justices picks with the most liberal, fag promoting, gun grabbing pieces of shit he can find, and just sit back and watch the republicans squeal.

Trump to republicans: "but but but, everyone knows judges are held to the highest regard and are completely unbiased...what's the problem?...you're not trying to say a supreme court judge in the highest position in the country, could be biased?"

Paul Ryan's endorsement doesn't apply to everything Donald Trump says
Jun 3rd 2016 3:43PM

House Speaker Paul Ryan is the latest to call Donald Trump out for his rhetoric against a federal judge, just one day after Ryan endorsed him.

Ryan told WISN in Milwaukee, "Look, the comment about the judge the other day just was out of left field for my mind. ... I completely disagree with the thinking behind that."

Trump told The Wall Street Journal the judge in the lawsuit against him over Trump University has "an absolute conflict" of interest because of his "Mexican heritage."

Those comments have brought Trump criticism from both sides of the political spectrum.

"Based on his ethnicity, suggesting he has an inherent conflict of interest because of his heritage. 'A Hispanic cannot judge a case against me.' That is what he Trump is saying," Megyn Kelly said.

Besides the issue of racial discrimination, many legal experts told many major news outlets, like The Wall Street Journal, that the comments from a major party presidential nominee were also "an unusual affront on an independent judiciary."

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/06/03/paul-ryans-endorsement-doesnt-apply-to-everything-donald-trum/21389201/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-1134064360_htmlws-main-bb

[Joshua01]

Telling the bare truth got him this far. Why should he change now?

[EE_]

Telling the bare truth got him this far. Why should he change now?

My point is, there is such a concern by republicans that a supreme court justice could be appointed that is very biased against conservative ideals and the constitution, but Trump is attacked for saying a lower court Mexican judge, that is indirectly connected to La Raza, could be biased against him.

[Nomoss]

My point is, there is such a concern by republicans that a supreme court justice could be appointed that is very biased against conservative ideals and the constitution, but Trump is attacked for saying a lower court Mexican judge, that is indirectly connected to La Raza, could be biased against him.
Is he not also a jew?

[cheka.]

Is he not also a jew?

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20160531-us-jewry-forces-israels-hand-over-two-state-solution/

US Jewry forces Israel’s hand over two-state solution

Palestinians are constantly accused of being the real obstacle to peace in the Middle East but a new initiative by a group of America’s most influential Jews may just prove otherwise this week.

For decades, various Western politicians have talked about a two-state solution. It has been on just about everyone’s lips outside of Israel but has never really been taken seriously within the Zionist state itself. Now, suddenly, it seems that Tel Aviv wants to embrace “two-states” and has sent instructions to its embassies, friends on university campuses and those inside other institutions far and wide to promote the notion that Israel wants to talk two-state peace.

Yiftah Curiel, the head of media operations at London’s Israeli Embassy, for instance, was despatched to Oxford last week to opine about the values and reality of a two-state solution during the prestigious university’s Union Debate on its viability. Chutzpah is a wonderfully expressive Yiddish word derived from the Hebrew “ḥutspâ”; I don’t believe that there is anything like it in the English language that can completely convey the audacity of the Israeli government. In this case, therefore, we will have to stick with chutzpah, for that is what best describes Curiel’s performance.

The acerbic Israeli columnist and journalist Gideon Levy, who followed the debate closely, observed wryly: “Do you get it? Israel claims it supports two states – perhaps because it has realised that a two-state solution is no longer viable.” What, he asked, has prevented Israel from implementing this solution over the past 50 or so years of occupation? “And how does the official representative of the state – which has never ceased building more and more settlements, the entire purpose of which is to thwart the two-state solution – dare say that Israel is in favour of dividing the land?”

Writing in Haaretz, Levy admitted: “But Israeli chutzpah knows no bounds, and neither does the temerity of its propagandists.”