[–] hiphopafrica 2 points -1 points 1 point (+1|-2) ago
Right but, my point is that the reason this is getting so blown out of proportion is that Trump failed to say anything about prior rulings or affiliations of the judge. He was asked to clarify if he meant that simply because the judge was of Mexican descent, that he would be impartial because of Trump's platform. Trump doubled down, and followed with a triple down when asked about a muslim. No mention of ties to La Raza or any prior cases. I'm not arguing that it wouldn't make him impartial, I'm saying Trump framed it poorly in the interview I heard and this type of response from the media is to be expected.
[–] Pawn ago
funny that a mc_carthy is trying to promote mccarthyism on voat. "he has mexican background so that's enough to cast suspicion."
[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
McCarthy was about fishing out ideological subversives who were loyal to an enemy, foreign state. Curiel is much more straightforward. He is a member of a group with a high propensity of hostility toward Trump that is repeatedly issuing hostile rulings in a case involving Trump. Interestingly, of all foreign countries polled in this race it is Mexico that is most anti-Trump.
Of course on top of that we now know Curiel has connections to groups hostile to the policies Trump supports.
I don't think it would be unreasonable for Curiel to step aside to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
[–] Pawn ago
Trump is just trying to bully Curiel out of being the judge for his lawsuit, essentially swinging any victory he can find.