NYTimes editorial attacks Trump plan for "ethnic cleansing" in the judicial system.

[kpete]

Let’s indulge Mr. Trump for a moment and consider what the court system would look like if litigants were permitted to wish away judges who had been born into immigrant families or families that practiced what the litigants regarded as the wrong faith.

Would exclusion be limited to first-generation Americans like Judge Curiel, who was born to Mexican immigrant parents, or would it be extended to his children, his grandchildren or even beyond? Would the exclusion of Muslims be limited to active practitioners of the faith or extended to descendants who were only vaguely religious or not religious at all? The answer, of course, is that once it started, the ethnic cleansing of the court system could be made to apply to any unpopular group at any time.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/07/opinion/the-judicial-system-according-to-donald-trump.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=1

[Gothmog]

1. Great editorial

[Hortensis]

12. Funny! Trump's best one-liners are great

for always being unintentional. Love his title too, "presumptive REPUBLICAN nominee." Have to admit it wouldn't be so funny if he were ours, but of course we wouldn't have him.

Republican leaders repudiated the remarks and hoped that the issue would disappear. But Mr. Trump went further on Sunday, when he said on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” that a Muslim judge might be similarly biased against him because he has proposed a ban on Muslim immigrants entering the United States.

When the interviewer, John Dickerson, reminded Mr. Trump that this country has a tradition of not judging people based on heritage, the presumptive Republican nominee responded, “I’m not talking about tradition, I’m talking about common sense.”

My favorite of all time is still James Watt, Reagan's SecInt. Like his classic while explaining the diversity of one of his commissions: “We have every kind of mix you can have. I have a black, I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple.”

[Dustlawyer]

2. It should be added to every report of this that Trump's own attorneys have not filed for recusal.

He has no legitimate grounds for it. Trump the victim, again!

[WolverineDG]

7. You have to file a recusal motion right out of the gate

His attorneys didn't, because at the time their nightmare client wasn't running for president, so he's SOL on that.

I'm thinking he's trying to muddy the waters so much that the judge decides to recuse himself.

[NewJeffCT]

10. I don't think he's that crafty

I think he's just saying what he feels and hopes to get his supporters riled up, angry and more likely to get out to vote.

[elljay]

14. I think he's just managing expectations

He may lose this trial during the campaign. He's now given his followers the reason why they should ignore the result- it was because of a biased Mexican judge. He'll then use the loss offensively as he attacks our "unfair legal system" and judicial selections and will tell supporters that he will fix everything for them. Considering how many Americans have been through the judicial system, which is rarely a positive experience, his argument will resonate. The man is very good at PR.

[skepticscott]

3. "Ethnic cleansing" is a very extreme term to apply here

It implies mass murder or the advocation of mass murder, and this falls far short of that. Virulent racism this certainly is, but the headline here inaccurately implies that Trump himself called for "ethnic cleansing" of the judiciary, when it was in fact the editorial writer(s) who (inappropriately) applied that label.

[Politicub]

5. NYT is using the term as a rhetorical device

Not as a literal comparison.

IMHO, this is the essence of the Trump drive to cast some ethnicities as less equal than others. Where will line of thinking go?

[Cheviteau]

8. I Disagree.

The editorial writers used the term in its proper context. It is "ethnic cleansing of the judiciary" pure and simple.

[Politicub]

9. Okay - why don't you write a letter to the editor

I don't work for the Times so your grievance falls on deaf ears.

[Skittles]

22. didn't Cheviteau just agree with you?

[Politicub]

23. Thank you for calling me on it - That was rude of me.

I need to slow down and not jump to a negative conclusion. I need to work on reading comprehension, clearly.

[Skittles]

25. I hear you

I have done that myself

[Politicub]

24. Sorry about the rude reply

I need to work on my reading comprehension, clearly .

[skepticscott]

11. Perhaps they were, but the fact remains that it was a poor choice of words

You can bet that the NYT would not use the word "holocaust" as a "rhetorical device" under any circumstances.

The way it is used in the title of the OP is also a rather dishonest implication, even leaving aside the fact that Donald Trump has no "plan" for anything.

[Politicub]

13. Take it up with them, not with me

[skepticscott]

16. I commented on the OP and the editorial

since you chose to comment on my post, I'll feel free to take up what YOU said with you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. It implies forced removal, not necessarily murder

though the threat of murder would be what provides the force.

[IronLionZion]

21. Ethnic cleansing can be firings from jobs, forced relocations/deportations, etc.

based on people's ethnicity. It is done by the powerful ethnic group against another group who has no power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing

I've already heard plenty of otherwise educated or even liberal people claim that the shortage of minorities in some professional fields is proof that they are less educated, hardworking, or successful. And if you do see a minority in a position, like judge, then it must have been an affirmative action hire to promote the illusion of diversity and not because the person is qualified.

This cleansing nonsense would be put into official policy by Trump's racist supporters.

[skepticscott]

28. Be honest

What's the first thing that springs to your mind when you hear the phrase "ethnic cleansing"? I'm betting it's not the image of a bunch of people getting pink slips.

Despite other dictionary definitions, the NYT and the OP both know that it's a phrase with very ugly associations to most people.

[IronLionZion]

31. Be honest

what's would the person you think of look like when you hear the word "American"? It's probably not the people who were forcibly relocated to reservations.

Our history does have mass firings based on race and religion. Including under the orders of popular Democratic leaders.

[skepticscott]

33. Nice try at deflection

From which I'll assume that you can't answer my question honestly and directly.

As far as your attempt at an analogy, "ethnic cleansing" is a very specific phrase, with very specific associations. "Americans" is nothing of the kind.

[IronLionZion]

34. Any kind of ethnic policy

is going to have a much more significant impact on ethnic minorities than the people who are in power and make the policies.

If a politician decided that people who look like you can not be trusted in your career and should be fired and blocked out, then you might understand.

[skepticscott]

35. Understanding that things like that go on is not the issue here

The issue here is what they are called and what Donald Trump called them.

You do get that, don't you? Or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

[Politicub]

4. Ethnic cleansing

Good on NY Times for calling out what Trump is really proposing.

[spanone]

6. K&R...

[alfredo]

15. Trump is of German Heritage; will he treat Jews fairly?

[OldHippieChick]

26. He has said he has an "African-American"

Perhaps he has a Jew as well?

[alfredo]

27. As accountants.

[OldHippieChick]

29. Or his personal tailor?

What a douche ...

[alfredo]

30. A douche made in China by children.

[IronLionZion]

32. 5 Cringeworthy Things Donald Trump Has Said About the Jews

http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/326020/5-cringeworthy-things-donald-trump-has-said-about-the-jews/

[world wide wally]

17. So, hypothetically, if I offended every nationality, gender, or sexual preference,

I could never be put on trial for anything without the judge being prejudiced against me.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. And presumably any judge with German or British heritage would be excluded from Trump cases

since, by his standard, they'd be biased in favour of him. What proportion of ancestry would you need? What happens in cases with multiple litigants or defendants? Pretty soon it'd be hard to find a judge who fits the criteria. And what is one side of teh case is a man, and the other a woman? How do you find a judge that isn't, in Trump's eyes, biased against one?

Or is it only overt racists and misgynists like Trump who'd get to choose their judge?

[mainstreetonce]

20. Wouldn't Trump be ethnically dusqualified

from being President?