Latest Email, Trump vindicated over Mexican Judge, Clinton campaign collusion

The ones which he was crucified for. Just shows you how clueless the Anti Trump crowd is. They must not feel good now.

as an aside, Trump has been "crucified" mostly for wanting to go around grabbing women's pussies........LOL
 
The ones which he was crucified for. Just shows you how clueless the Anti Trump crowd is. They must not feel good now.

as an aside, Trump has been "crucified" mostly for wanting to go around grabbing women's pussies........LOL

Clinton has been crucified for doing that, rather than just talking about it.
 
sg5t28.jpg

The networks all give me more free air time than those losers running against me put together, and I have been a real boon to their ratings!


Donald Trump in October:

110c6qd.jpg

The networks are all giving me more free air time than Crooked Hillary! It's rigged! Waaaaaaaaaah!

A Trump surrogate on MSNBC just said that the election is rigged because Hillary Clinton has more newpaper endorsements than Trump does.

I guess that the Trump surrogate doesn't understand that it's the individual papers, not the collective that decides who they will or won't endorse.

To be fair, although Trump has lost the endorsement of many conservative papers who have for the most part previously endorsed GOP candidates, he DOES have one paper that endorsed him.

When people are singing praises about Trump, he thinks they're the greatest. When they point out something he did wrong, he thinks they're the worst.
 
cureil_email.jpg


That's Judge Curiel's wife having a nice sit down with Podesta.. The sleaze from the Corrupt Left and their Media Whores knows no end.
http://i2.wp.com/www.angrypatriotmovement.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/cureil_email.jpg

Secondary link
SWEET VINDICATION! Leaked Email Proves TRUMP WAS RIGHT About ‘Mexican Judge’

Do you truly not recognize that what you call vindication of Trump's assertion is not that at all. Trump asserted by implication that Judge Curiel was incapable of doing his job -- the job of impartially overseeing the carriage of justice -- because the man is a Mexican. Trump said at one event, "We have a very hostile judge. Now, he is Hispanic." That is the very definition of racism. That's not "somewhat" racist; it's textbook racist.

What's even more pitiable and disgusting is that Trump apparently doesn't (didn't) actually know what the definition of racism is.

Tapper: Is it not -- when Hillary Clinton says this is a racist attack, and you reject that -- if you are saying he can't do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?

Trump: No. I don't think so at all.​

Fortunately, it doesn't matter whether Trump thinks so or not. The definition of racism is what it is, and what it is isn't open to debate; the definition of "racism" not something whereof one's thinking it should be different is worth a hill of beans. As a result of hearing his remarks about Judge Curiel, the American public know that definition is just one of the many things Trump does not know.

Trump did not assert, as one may at least plausibly infer from the Wikileak, that the judge or anyone in his family's association with Hillary Clinton be the reason Trump believes he getting his way at in court. Furthermore, the idea that because the Judge's wife visited a debate site with a group of college students in no way attaches to Judge Curiel's ability to his job. Just as one cannot legitimately blame a wife for her spouse's deeds and ideas, one cannot ascribe to a husband those of his wife.

In the secondary link's article that you provided is written:

In the email exposed by Wikileaks, Knox College President Teresa Amott is evidenced writing to John Podesta, “Carolyn Curiel was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site. She and I exchanged raves about the two of you.”

Carolyn Cruiel serves as the Executive Director of the Purdue Institute for Civic Communication. She is, in and of herself, a political activist and one that comes down far to the Left of center.​

So what? That is Carolyn Curiel, not Judge Curiel. Have you forgotten (or never known of) James Carville and Mary Matalin?

And lest the "peanut gallery" misinterpret what I've written. I'm not defending anything other than intellectual integrity and cognitive analytical rigor. It's likely the "peanut gallery" also thinks I'm attacking Trump. That perception is not hard for them to arrive at seeing as the man so infrequently exhibits anything resembling intellectual integrity and analytical rigor.
 

Forum List

Back
Top