Quote:Y'know, on second thought, if you say a man can't do his job because of his ethnic background, that's a blatantly racist statement.

 

And that's what Donald did.  So maybe he is racist after all, and his apologists are once again trying to tell us "what he really meant".

 

For someone who "tells it like it is", he sure has a hard time telling us what he really means.

 

Unless Donald thinks that non-white races are inferior, in which case, he's doing a hell of a job telling us what he really means.

 

Donald Trumps comment was about the perceived conflict of interest on immigration policy.  

 

But let's go back in time a little bit.  

 

The left BURNED DOWN A CITY because Darren Wilson was White.  The Justice Department launched a federal civil rights investigation, that legal experts KNEW couldn't find wrong doing because Darren Wilson was White.  This was in contradiction of direct exculpatory evidence and lent credence to the claims that ultimately lead to the destruction of Ferguson Missouri.  

 

I don't want to hear this moral high hoarse crap.  

 

The whole concept of jury selection is based on understanding the subjective nature of those who sit in judgement.  If this judge were on a jury panel he would have been stricken first.  Because of his political affiliations dealing with a potential candidate for president the request for recusal is prudent not just valid.  

 

THIS CASE should NEVER have gone to trial.  The lead plaintiff had to be severed from the case because she was so shamefully discredited for crying out loud.  

---