Thread: Trump allies hurl the 'R' word right back

Trump allies hurl the 'R' word right back

As Republicans race to condemn their nominee, his surrogates say the critics are the real racists.
By NICK GASS
06/07/16 01:21 PM EDT


Donald Trump's allies battled the firestorm over their candidate's attacks on a federal judge Tuesday, with some echoing the marching orders by the Republican nominee himself: The critics are the real racists.

During a conference call with supporters on Monday, Trump exploded at journalists' questioning about his remarks casting doubt on the ability of federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel to preside over Trump University-related litigation because of his Mexican heritage, according to a Bloomberg report.


“The people asking the questions — those are the racists,” Trump said. “I would go at ’em.”

Jeff DeWit, the state treasurer of Arizona, disputed Bloomberg's account of the call, describing it as "very positive" and aimed at "really just get[ting] everyone on the same page.”
But on Tuesday, several top Trump surrogates appeared to be carrying out the plan, even as top Republicans furiously distanced themselves from their presumptive nominee's remarks.

First up was Jeffrey Lord, a former Reagan White House official who represents Trump regularly on CNN.

After House Speaker Paul Ryan said Tuesday morning that Trump's remark represented the "textbook definition of a racist comment," Lord accused the Wisconsin Republican of being a racist himself.

“Speaker Ryan has apparently switched positions and is now supporting identity politics, which is racist. I mean, I am astonished, astonished,” Lord said. “I am accusing anybody, anybody, who believes in identity politics, which he apparently now does, of playing the race card. The Republican establishment is playing this. Senator [Mitch] McConnell is playing this. These people have run and hid and borrowed the Democratic agenda of playing the race card.”

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), one of Trump's congressional backers, appeared later on CNN and said that while he disagreed with the candidate's remarks as a legal strategy, the backlash to his comments is particularly rich coming from Democrats — above all, President Barack Obama.

"So being a little racist or very racist is not OK, but, quite frankly, the agenda that I see and all the microtargeting to blacks and Hispanics from a policy standpoint, you know, that's more offensive to me, what I have seen through the years, than this one statement which I don't believe is a result of Donald Trump feeling like he is superior because he's white and not Mexican," Zeldin said.

Words only go so far to define a person, he suggested, remarking, "but you can easily argue that the president of the United States is a racist with his policies and his rhetoric."
But, Zeldin, whose district encompasses eastern Long Island, clarified, "my purpose here isn't to just go through the list and call everyone a racist. I'm saying that we all can up our game with rhetoric and policy because America, we are a nation of immigrants. We are a melting pot. I'm from New York. New York is a melting pot. We all can do so much better."
Next to defend Trump's comments was New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who — after voting for Trump in his state's primary Tuesday — told reporters at a news conference that the presumptive nominee "has the right" to express his opinions about civil lawsuits, as does every American. Trump, he said, "is not a racist" and "allegations that he is are absolutely contrary to every experience that I’ve had with him over the last 14 years."

Trump's comments were "part of what free speech is about," Christie said — and then he turned the discussion to Trump's opponent.

It "kind of bothers" him, Christie said, that Democrats are making a stink about Trump's accusations, and particularly Hillary Clinton, who he said is "taking this kind of high and mighty position of hers when Secretary Clinton’s had a lot to say over the course of her career as well regarding vast right-wing conspiracies that turned out not to exist in impugning the integrity of lots of other people."

Pat Buchanan, whose writings on race issues Trump once described as "sick" and "disgusting," defended Trump on Monday by writing, "Before the lynching of The Donald proceeds, what exactly was it he said about that Hispanic judge?"
"Apparently, it is now not only politically incorrect but, in Newt Gingrich’s term, 'inexcusable' to bring up the religious, racial or ethnic background of a judge, or suggest this might influence his actions on the bench," in reference to the former House Republican speaker's comments denouncing Trump on Sunday.

"But these things matter," Buchanan wrote, adding later, "To many liberals, all white Southern males are citizens under eternal suspicion of being racists. The most depressing thing about this episode is to see Republicans rushing to stomp on Trump, to show the left how well they have mastered their liberal catechism."
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...-racist-223997

"But these things matter," Buchanan wrote, adding later, "To many liberals, all white Southern males are citizens under eternal suspicion of being racists. The most depressing thing about this episode is to see Republicans rushing to stomp on Trump, to show the left how well they have mastered their liberal catechism."

It is sad especially when they blurt out BS against Trump when they didn't even take time to listen to what he actually said, what his point was, or learn the facts of the matter that fully justify Trump's statement in the context of which it was made.

And really, what this Judge has done is even far worse than what Trump has stated in the press. He just calls it unfair due to bias. It's actually outright corruption and prejudice against the defendant. What this Judge has done is approve a document dump of sealed records, dumped them for the Washington Post, didn't even take care to protect personal information that was supposed to be redacted, and the irresponsible Washington Post just dumps them onto the internet without protecting the personal information. Then he moves the trial date to after the election so there is no trial for the public to see or hear the evidence actually presented at trial in accordance with the Rules of Evidence, the public hears no testimony, no cross examination and no rebuttal about the evidence.

It's clear cause for a mistrial. You can't unring the bell, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. It's a wrong that can't be righted.

The great thing for Trump is that his supporters don't care, it won't impact their support of him, and I don't believe it will ultimately have a negative outcome in the General Election, but that doesn't change the fact that a federal judge in collaboration with the Trump-hating Washington Post, Trump-hating Hispanic National Bar Association and Trump-hating La Raza Lawyers tried to exploit our judiciary and justice system for political purposes.

It's disgusting. And what's just as disgusting is for R leadership in our Congress to attack Trump for telling it like it is and exposing what's going on.

It's outrageous what this Judge has done in cahoots with the Washington Post, the Democrats and La Raza to try to use this lawsuit to influence the outcome of a Presidential Election.