Trump is a racist and every leftist is not, yeah right!
E. Ablorh-Odjidja

June 10, 2016

The Trump University case has brought up again charges of racism against Trump. The #NeverTrump Republicans have joined the crusade. These are mostly failed Republican presidential hopefuls.

Rather than worry more about the political correctness machine that constantly damns them, these Republicans worry about the purported inelegance of Trumps outbursts.

 “Donald Trump has stirred racism charges by calling out the Hispanic heritage” of U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel who will decide on the class action suit against Trump University, reports the Washington Examiner.  

Will Judge Curiel decision be just?  Does the case have merit or Trump has reason to suspect that his campaign message against illegal Hispanics has made him a target?

Consider the trend and actors in the case so far.

Of all the judges to pick for the case against Trump, must it be Judge Cureil?  A Clinton appointee, a Democrat, who “for years been associated with the La Raza Lawyers Association of San Diego, which supports pro-illegal immigrant organizations,” according to known information sources.

There are other links of association that suggests Judge Cureil Hispanic activism.  No surprise for the ordinary guy in the street.  After all, this is the age of diversity.
 
But curiously, why is it so decidedly necessary for a US citizen judge to have this many active ethnic associations?  Will a suspicion of bias in his court matter, in a case against another ethnic?

With haste on a Friday, the judge caused the public release of “nearly 400 pages of Trump University “playbooks” that described sales techniques and investment strategies taught at the Trump University ... against the objections of legal counsel representing Trump.”

On the following Tuesday, when the documents were already public, Judge Curiel “tried to roll back his earlier decision, saying he mistakenly listed some records to be released ...” reported WND.

Of course, Judge Cureil can't “roll” back the released information, nor the damage the release might cause Trump.
 
 But, was the release an act of a mistake or intentional - all part of the ethnic "impartiality."?

Be mindful, courts are careful about suspicions of bias or conflict of interest. I was kicked off a jury trial because I declared that my daughter was an attorney who at the time worked for the Federal government.

The ethnic concern against Trump because of his immigration policy stance must also worry the fair minded in this case against his university.

Another interesting angle to this case.
 
WND again reports that prior records confirm a suspicion of activism on the part of the law firm that brought the case to Judge Cureil court: 
 
This  “law firm ...paid Bill and Hillary Clinton a total of $675,000 for speeches.” Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/attorneys-suing-trump-u-paid-675000-to-clintons-for-speeches/#OoyRoztos0TwSW82.99.

The coincidence of an activist judge and an activist law firm begs the question whether this firm went shopping for a sympathetic judge to do maximum damage to Trump.

The sheer notion must tug significantly on the mind, even if the idea of judge shopping is untrue, t

What cannot be denied, however, is the impact of this judge on this case; of a Hispanic activist judge whose court this Clinton friendly law firm has comfortably placed the case.
 
The perception of bias is out there, even if Trump wouldn't mention it.

Then, there is the case of a political season which is polluted with indoctrination.  Judge Cureil may be an upright legal scholar. But it would be naive to assume that the court system in the US has no ideological prejudices.

Case in point, Clarence Thomas' aspiration for a seat at the Supreme Court. And the interest of those behind Anita Hill of “pubic hair on coke bottle” declaration to end it.

Judge Thomas had an ideological  bias.  So did those who opposed him.  Therefore, to pretend that some judges don't push ideology, but only the law, is to do damage to reason.

Trump has said he will nominate conservatives judges to the bench. He would also built a wall against illegal Hispanic immigrants.  It stands to reason that there would be opposition to him.
 
He would be fought by those who don't want conservative judges as well as those who don't want to "build a wall" against illegal Hispanic immigration.

Could this class action case be an attempt to silence Trump through the guise of the court, not the law?

So  when Trump fights back in his blunt way and is met with cries of racism, we should not be blind to the probability of intention.   A reason of heritage issue and accusation of bias should have prompted Judge Cureil to recuse himself.  He should have seen this conflict coming.

And many have already hinted out the heritage bias.

Ann Coulter for instance writes, “Curiel has distributed scholarships to illegal aliens. He belongs to an organization (La Raza) that sends lawyers to the border to ensure that no illegal aliens' "human rights" are violated. ......"

Alas, Ann Coulter is a conservative writer.  But listen to the anti-Trump Republican politicians, Romney, Ryan, Gingrich and the like and you would hear the perfidy.  They are proper and quick to infer also that Trump is a racist because of his opposition to Judge Cureil.

These Republicans seem to have forgotten the common truth about ideological warfare; That Democrats and liberals would use every tactic to smear Republicans – charges of racism, gender, wealth inequalities and sexual style preferences - all the negatives.

Romney went down in 2012, in part because of gender issues: He kept “a binder” on women!

He was too wealthy.  He owned Bain Capital, even though he is worth far less than Trump now.

Trump has yet to banish Muslim from the US and he has been attacked as intolerant.

Truth is it is rather the Muslim leadership in theocratic states that are intolerant.  A non Muslim cannot be a citizen in Saudi Arabia.  And for centuries, public worship of non-Muslim religion is not allowed there.

The double standard does not end here. It flows into the Trump versus Hillary Clinton case.

Trump sells his brand of university to erstwhile students who did not get rich as they thought they could prior to taking the courses. But learning and results are never hitched intravenously because education is not  blood transfusion.
 
Besides, these adult students were given the opportunity of a three day audit of the courses; money back guaranteed.

But fair enough. Go ahead and call the Trump University experience“fraudulent.” However, be honest to note that Trump was selling his own brand, not the office of the Secretary of State of the United States like Hillary Clinton.

Hillary email server scandal suggests that some activities at the Secretary's office went to benefit the Clinton Foundation. And that some of her assistants double-dipped as employees at State and her Foundation.

This is a blatant misuse of a very high public office. A fraudulent, morally and ethically offensive display of power and arrogance than the abuse of the private brand that Trump is charged with in the university case.
 
Mailonline publication reports that the "FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton’s email server as a "criminal" matter."

Realize that offenders of abuses, like the email case have quickly gone to jail or promptly been driven out of office.
 
David Patraeus, a much, much decorated general, "pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified materials. He was given a two-year probationary period and a fine of $100,000." "on April 23, 2015, 

Nixon, whose crimes Hillary monitored as a staff lawyer for the House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee during Watergate, had 18 minutes gap of missing information on his White House analog tapes (about 20 pages of double space typed pages missing).
 
That puny 18 minutes gap became "the smoking gun" that sent Nixon packing from the White House.

Hillary has self admitted wiping out clean from her private server 30,000 plus digital files (containing far, far more volumes of information than contained in 18 minutes gap on an analog tape)!
 
She had decided that what she wiped clean off her server, the 30,000 plus files, was personal.  Alas, Nixon couldn't do same for the 18 minutes gap on his analog tape!

By the way, David Kopel wrote in the Washington Post on June 14, 2014, describing the Nixon gap as “incident of evidence destruction by a presidential administration.”
 
Nixon left office in 1974, after a landslide victory in the 1972 presidential elections..  Hillary is the presumptive democrat nominee for 2016.  And President Obama has endorsed her.

Face to face with Hillary's failings, Trump University shouldn't matter, unless you are leftist or an anti-Trump Republican who is offended more by the vaunted Trump coarseness.

But is Trump the only coarseness in this political season?

Knowingly siding with shoppers of activist judges to bring down Trump; rooting for anti-Trump mobs at rallies; burning the American flag or seeking to replace it with the Mexican; supporting transgender access to public school washrooms while your teen daughters attend private schools.

And these positions are not coarse?

Then call ISIS Islamic terrorism a peaceful revolution because Islam is a religion of peace.

There are far more coarse ideas and policy positions coming out of the Democrat's side than any that has come out of Trumps mouth.

But watch, the Obama Justice Department will not indict Hillary for her email fraud because she is the only chance he has to carry on his legacy,

Maybe you secretly wish so too.

E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Publisher www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC, June 10, 2016.
Permission to publish: Please feel free to publish or reproduce, with credits, unedited. If posted at a website, email a copy of the web page to publisher@ghanadot.com . Or don't publish at all.