Jump to content

Paul Ryan Disavows Trump's Attack on Judge


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said:

Smail's asked Momo a legitimate question and Momo's response completely validates your post.

Cravesdick regurgitated some leftard talking point just like you do Ballsack :bigfinger: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curiel appointed the Robbins Geller law firm to represent plaintiffs. Robbins Geller has paid $675,000 in speaking fees since 2009 to Trump’s likely opponent, Hillary Clinton, and to her husband, former president Bill Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An independent judiciary is extremely important. But that value is not the only one in play here. Equally important, if not more important from my perspective as a former judge and U.S. attorney general, is a litigant’s right to a fair trial. The protection of that right is a primary reason why our Constitution provides for an independent judiciary. If judges and the trials over which they preside are not perceived as being impartial, the public will quickly lose confidence in the rule of law upon which our nation is based. For this reason, ethics codes for judges — including the federal code of conduct governing Curiel — require not only that judges actually be impartial, but that they avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.”  That appearance typically is measured from the standpoint of a reasonable litigant.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/04/alberto-r-gonzales-trump-has-a-right-to-question-whether-hes-getting-a-fair-trial/?platform=hootsuite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Snake said:

Curiel appointed the Robbins Geller law firm to represent plaintiffs. Robbins Geller has paid $675,000 in speaking fees since 2009 to Trump’s likely opponent, Hillary Clinton, and to her husband, former president Bill Clinton.

Link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:

Link?

In an opinion dated October 24, 2014, the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Southern District of California certified a nationwide class against Donald J. Trump for violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) on behalf of all persons in the United States who purchased Live Events from “Trump University” from January 1, 2007 to the present. The court appointed Robbins Geller to serve as class counsel. Robbins Geller will continue to aggressively pursue the case and prepare for trial.

http://www.rgrdlaw.com/news-item-Trump-University-Class-Cert-102814.html

 

Hogan Lovells, Latham & Watkins and White & Case were among the group of firms that paid $1.75 million into Hillary and Bill Clinton coffers, as were large plaintiffs firms Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd and Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, according to a searchable database The Washington Post published last week.

The Post compiled a list of companies that have paid the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, for speaking engagements.

Robbins Geller hired Hillary Clinton for her talk, the other four firms retained Bill Clinton for his speaking services.

According to the database, Robbins Geller paid $225,500 to Hillary Clinton for a speech on Sept. 4, 2014. That discussion was already a matter of public record, but the San Diego-based firm also paid $250,000 to Bill Clinton on two separate occasions.

The first was for a speech on Sept. 8, 2009, back when Robbins Geller was known as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, while the subsequent Bill Clinton talk took place on Sept. 17, 2013.

Radnor, Pennsylvania-based Kessler Topaz, which adopted its current name in 2011, paid $500,000 to Bill Clinton for an engagement on March 7, 2014. Politico reported in May 2015 that Bill Clinton's speech for Kessler Topaz was among his priciest talks since the beginning of 2014, a year in which the former president and his wife took home more than $25 million for making speeches, with Hillary Clinton having left public service after stepping down as secretary of state in February 2013

 

Edited by Snake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
11 hours ago, Snake said:

An independent judiciary is extremely important. But that value is not the only one in play here. Equally important, if not more important from my perspective as a former judge and U.S. attorney general, is a litigant’s right to a fair trial. The protection of that right is a primary reason why our Constitution provides for an independent judiciary. If judges and the trials over which they preside are not perceived as being impartial, the public will quickly lose confidence in the rule of law upon which our nation is based. For this reason, ethics codes for judges — including the federal code of conduct governing Curiel — require not only that judges actually be impartial, but that they avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.”  That appearance typically is measured from the standpoint of a reasonable litigant.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/04/alberto-r-gonzales-trump-has-a-right-to-question-whether-hes-getting-a-fair-trial/?platform=hootsuite

How concerned are you about the independence of the judiciary given the R senates current tactics towards the SC nominee? 

 

:lmao:

 

 

And enough of your fluff :lol: Rump doesn't give a fuck who donated to who - he attacked his race :bc:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

How concerned are you about the independence of the judiciary given the R senates current tactics towards the SC nominee? 

 

:lmao:

 

 

And enough of your fluff :lol: Rump doesn't give a fuck who donated to who - he attacked his race :bc:  

Liar :bigfinger: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

Add Gay Mitch: :lol:

The Senate majority leader told Chuck Todd he “couldn’t disagree more” with Trump’s recent attacks on the Hispanic judge presiding over the Trump University lawsuit. Trump has said Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s Mexican heritage is an “absolute conflict” and has called for his recusal from the case.

McConnell distanced himself from Trump’s comments, but dodged three times when asked if they were racist:

CHUCK TODD: You know what he has said about this federal judge that’s overseeing the Trump University lawsuit. He has called – he has essentially said he cannot be impartial because he’s Hispanic. That’s – is that not a racist statement?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I couldn’t disagree more with a statement like that.

CHUCK TODD: Is it a racist statement?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I couldn’t disagree more with what he had to say.

CHUCK TODD: OK, but do you think it’s a racist statement to say?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I don’t agree with what he had to say. This is a man who was born in Indiana. All of us came here from somewhere else…

In response to conservative writer Erick Erickson’s recent comments condemning Trump’s comments about Judge Curiel as “racist,” McConnell replied, “I think the party of Lincoln wants to win the White House. The right-of-center world needs to respect the fact that the primary voters have spoken."

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/mcconnell-trump-judge-comments-i-couldnt-disagree-more

 

 

Edited by SnowRider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

How concerned are you about the independence of the judiciary given the R senates current tactics towards the SC nominee? 

 

:lmao:

 

 

And enough of your fluff :lol: Rump doesn't give a fuck who donated to who - he attacked his race :bc:  

Both irrelevant to what VBS asked and what I answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Snake said:

In an opinion dated October 24, 2014, the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Southern District of California certified a nationwide class against Donald J. Trump for violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) on behalf of all persons in the United States who purchased Live Events from “Trump University” from January 1, 2007 to the present. The court appointed Robbins Geller to serve as class counsel. Robbins Geller will continue to aggressively pursue the case and prepare for trial.

http://www.rgrdlaw.com/news-item-Trump-University-Class-Cert-102814.html

 

Hogan Lovells, Latham & Watkins and White & Case were among the group of firms that paid $1.75 million into Hillary and Bill Clinton coffers, as were large plaintiffs firms Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd and Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, according to a searchable database The Washington Post published last week.

The Post compiled a list of companies that have paid the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, for speaking engagements.

Robbins Geller hired Hillary Clinton for her talk, the other four firms retained Bill Clinton for his speaking services.

According to the database, Robbins Geller paid $225,500 to Hillary Clinton for a speech on Sept. 4, 2014. That discussion was already a matter of public record, but the San Diego-based firm also paid $250,000 to Bill Clinton on two separate occasions.

The first was for a speech on Sept. 8, 2009, back when Robbins Geller was known as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, while the subsequent Bill Clinton talk took place on Sept. 17, 2013.

Radnor, Pennsylvania-based Kessler Topaz, which adopted its current name in 2011, paid $500,000 to Bill Clinton for an engagement on March 7, 2014. Politico reported in May 2015 that Bill Clinton's speech for Kessler Topaz was among his priciest talks since the beginning of 2014, a year in which the former president and his wife took home more than $25 million for making speeches, with Hillary Clinton having left public service after stepping down as secretary of state in February 2013

 

2014 is when the court appointed Robbins Geller, now here is some reading with much more a the link in how a court appoints a class counsel. The fact of the matter is your boy Trump has no understanding of the separation of powers as defined by our Constitution, or worse yet he has little to no regard for the Constitution.

Quote

 

Why Does the Court Have Anything to Do With It? 
Class actions permit courts to adjudicate the rights of parties who are not themselves before the court. In order to ensure that the rights of these unnamed parties are fully protected, the district court actively supervises many aspects of a class action. Among the most important of these supervisory duties is to select counsel with the ability and motivation to do the best job possible for the class.

http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/practice_areas/class-actions-class-counsel.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Mileage Psycho said:

2014 is when the court appointed Robbins Geller, now here is some reading with much more a the link in how a court appoints a class counsel. The fact of the matter is your boy Trump has no understanding of the separation of powers as defined by our Constitution, or worse yet he has little to no regard for the Constitution.

 

So they could do the best job possible like changing the plaintiff and the judge not dismissing the case :lmao: fuck you're a hack Ballsack 

Edited by Momorider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:

2014 is when the court appointed Robbins Geller, now here is some reading with much more a the link in how a court appoints a class counsel. The fact of the matter is your boy Trump has no understanding of the separation of powers as defined by our Constitution, or worse yet he has little to no regard for the Constitution.

 

Irony Monday is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Snake said:

Irony Monday is it?

 

It's not even close and it's what has many, many Republicans nervous. The other issue the Republicans are very concerned about is what kind of impact will Trump have on the Senate and the House seats that are up for grabs this November, the Hispanics are a key voting block for victory and Trump disparages not only Mexican nationals but he attacks a sitting Governor,  a Federal judge from Indiana whose brother fought the Cong and the judge himself went after Mexican drug cartels which is a risky endeavor.  

The things Trumps rants and lashes out about are not good things for a party that is hoping to hold the Senate and not lose too many seats in the House.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Momorider said:

And Ballsack regurgetates from the DemonCUNTS talking points playbook one after another :lmao: 

Listen stupid, do you really think party leaders like Ryan, McConnell, Gingrich, etc. wanted to spend time on the Sunday morning talk shows denouncing things the presumptive candidate Trump has said about distinguished Americans who have a Hispanic heritage? I will answer for you Momo, it's a big fat unequivocal NO! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mileage Psycho said:

Listen stupid, do you really think party leaders like Ryan, McConnell, Gingrich, etc. wanted to spend time on the Sunday morning talk shows denouncing things the presumptive candidate Trump has said about distinguished Americans who have a Hispanic heritage? I will answer for you Momo, it's a big fat unequivocal NO! 

Ballsack is a Thrillery taint licker :flush: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bunch of overblown bullshit.

How come when an African American says he can't get a fair trial with a jury of White's he is not labeled a racist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
11 minutes ago, Cold War said:

What a bunch of overblown bullshit.

How come when an African American says he can't get a fair trial with a jury of White's he is not labeled a racist?

WTF are you babbling about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cold War said:

What a bunch of overblown bullshit.

How come when an African American says he can't get a fair trial with a jury of White's he is not labeled a racist?

Try and see what would happen if Obama said something like that. You're panties would ride up your ass so far they would become part of you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ebsell said:

Try and see what would happen if Obama said something like that. You're panties would ride up your ass so far they would become part of you 

 

It would be " your" in this case.👍

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When isn't race brought up in the judicial system?

Witnesses are excused and discredited based on race.

Jury members are excused over race.

Cases are overturned due to all white jurors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...