Jake Tapper nails Trump on "Mexican" judge comments in utterly mad interview

[susano]

To qualify for a refund, you had to request it within three days of signing up (not from the first day of the classes). If you signed up on Monday and course started on Friday and you decided after that first one it sucked, you could not get your money back. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...p-university-lawsuits-legal-battles/85238384/ A lot of people who requested refunds were told it was too late to get one.

10,000 out of 7,000 who took the classes gave 98% positive reviews. (yes, that is more than 100% of them).

Thanks. While it's not a lot of information it looks pretty scamy.

 

[Danke]

Thanks. While it's not a lot of information it looks pretty scamy.

That is standard with anything you purchase three days you can get a full refund. Not sure where Zippy is getting the numbers 10,000/7000 figure

 

[susano]

That is standard with anything you purchase three days you can get a full refund. Not sure where Zippy is getting the numbers 10,000/7000 figure

Yes, I thought that, too (three days to cancel a contract). Zippy's link didn't say anything about 10K/7K so I assume he made it up to make a point.

 

[twomp]

I think all of you Trump supporters are pretty stupid. If you all started mowing lawns,washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets, the immigrants will have no jobs. That alone will be more effective than building a stupid wall that you dumb Trump supporters won't even pay for yourselves. Go on, get working! Maybe you all should chip in and pay for the wall yourselves? Have any of you geniuses tried to do that? I'm sure you don't mind the government forcing me to take money out of my check to do it right? Use some of that government check that you get every month. If you don't have money, volunteer your labor and time to build it. Make America great again!!

 

[Zippyjuan]

That is standard with anything you purchase three days you can get a full refund. Not sure where Zippy is getting the numbers 10,000/7000 figure

http://time.com/4101290/what-the-legal-battle-over-trump-university-reveals-about-its-founder/

Those kinds of arguments lend themselves to a he said/she said debate. Accordingly, stories about the dispute have for the most part quoted those suing Trump and then Trump or his defenders citing the 98% satisfaction surveys.

But again the court record suggests that there are facts not in dispute that shed more light. When Trump’s director of operations Mark Covais filed a sworn affidavit with the San Diego court in 2013, he declared that the satisfaction percentages were taken from “about 10,000” surveys of Trump University customers. Yet in the same affidavit Covais said that there were 7,611 tickets sold to Trump University programs, while a total of 80,308 people had attended one or more of 2,000 free, 90-minute preview sessions.

How could Trump have 10,000 “rave” surveys from paying customers if there were only 7,611 paying customers? Doesn’t that mean that people who showed up for the free session must also have filled out questionnaires? Presumably those nonpaying attendees would have had little to complain about that related to the suits filed by customers who felt cheated out of their money.

Trump told me he was not familiar with the numbers but promised to have one of his lawyers get back to me. Trump in-house counsel Garten later told me that the answer must be that satisfied students filled out more than one survey but that “to the best of my knowledge” only paying customers were given questionnaires.

 

[susano]

I think all of you Trump supporters are pretty stupid. If you all started mowing lawns,washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets, the immigrants will have no jobs. That alone will be more effective than building a stupid wall that you dumb Trump supporters won't even pay for yourselves. Go on, get working! Maybe you all should chip in and pay for the wall yourselves? Have any of you geniuses tried to do that? Use some of that government check that you get every month. If you don't have money, volunteer your labor and time to build it. Make America great again!!

You said immigrants. The issue is illegals. Big difference.

We don't need a wall (though there are already sections of the border that have a wall or fence). Just cut off the welfare benefits to illegals.

What government check are you speaking of that you accuse people of getting?

 

[twomp]

You said immigrants. The issue is illegals. Big difference.

We don't need a wall (though there are already sections of the border that have a wall or fence). Just cut off the welfare benefits to illegals.

What government check are you speaking of that you accuse people of getting?

Newsflash! Illegals work too. Start mowing lawns, washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets and they will be out of jobs. Gather up your fellow idiot Trump supporters and stop depending on the government to take care of all your problems.

 

[susano]

Newsflash! Illegals work too. Start mowing lawns, washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets and they will be out of jobs. Gather up your fellow idiot Trump supporters and stop depending on the government to take care of all your problems.

Nobody said illegals don't work and that isn't the point (try as you may to obfuscate).

Are you under the impression that Americans or legal immigrants don't ever do the things you've insisted everyone should be doing?

Who is depending on the government to take care of them?

You seem to be having such an angry little hissy fit. Why is that?

 

[Zippyjuan]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for Federal benefits for the first five years they are in the country. Those in the country aren't eligible at all for federal benefits (they may qualify for some state programs). Who is depending on the government taking care of them?

 

[Danke]

I think all of you Trump supporters are pretty stupid. If you all started mowing lawns,washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets, the immigrants will have no jobs. That alone will be more effective than building a stupid wall that you dumb Trump supporters won't even pay for yourselves. Go on, get working! Maybe you all should chip in and pay for the wall yourselves? Have any of you geniuses tried to do that? I'm sure you don't mind the government forcing me to take money out of my check to do it right? Use some of that government check that you get every month. If you don't have money, volunteer your labor and time to build it. Make America great again!!

Well first of all, I think most the debunkers here are not his supporters. Do you remember Ron Paul was unjustly attacked in the MSM? Less taxation and more money in my pocket and I can pay for work I would rather not do, more.

Why should we give up now? Because you don't not like a particular politician?


As far as doing the dirty work jobs that nobody wants to do. I think we could find many people, teenagers especially to do those jobs without importing illegal immigrants.

I'll do them if I need the money. Eliminate EBT cards and welfare programs and we will all be better off.

 

[susano]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for Federal benefits for the first five years they are in the country. Those in the country aren't eligible at all for federal benefits (they may qualify for some state programs). Who is depending on the government taking care of them?

There are myriad programs and illegals can qualify for some of them. For instance:

Do I have to be a U.S. citizen to apply for public and subsidized housing?

No, you do not have to be a United States citizen to apply for public or subsidized housing. Lawful permanent residents and many other immigrants may apply for all types of government housing.

If your entire family is undocumented, you will not be eligible for certain federal programs. In addition, for certain federal housing programs, if some but not all of your household members are citizens or have certain types of recognized immigration status, your portion of the rent will be higher than it otherwise would be. This may result in a rent that you cannot afford and make it unwise for you to apply for those programs. See What is pro-rated assistance or pro-rated rent? and If some, but not all, household members are eligible due to immigration status, should I still apply?

Some housing programs do not require information about immigration status or citizenship at all. Other programs are allowed to ask you about your citizenship or immigration status.

http://www.masslegalhelp.org/housing/eligibility


ss. Noncitizen eligibility varies among the needs
-
based
housing programs administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(
HUD), such as Public Housing, Section 8 vouchers and project
-
based rental assistance, homeless
assistance programs, housing for the elderly (
§
202) and the disabled (
§
811), the HOME program,
and the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) program. Two
laws govern noncitizen
eligibility for housing programs: Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Welfare Reform) and Section 214 of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1980, as amended.
The Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA)
explicitly states that aliens, unless they are qualified aliens, are not eligible for “federal public
benefits,” a term defined in the law to include public and assisted housing. Unde
r the statute,
unauthorized (illegal) aliens do not meet the definition of qualified aliens, and as a result, they are
ineligible for “federal public benefits.” However, PRWORA did not make those who had been
receiving housing benefits before the date of e
nactment (August 22, 1996) ineligible for housing
benefits. Likewise, PRWORA exempts certain types of programs that are usually thought of as
emergency programs from the alien eligibility restrictions. HUD has not issued guidance
implementing the PRWORA pr
ovisions.
Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 states that only certain
categories of noncitizens are eligible for benefits under the housing programs covered by Section
214. Unauthorized aliens are not eligible for benefits und
er Section 214. The aliens eligible for
housing assistance under Section 214 are similar to those eligible for federal public benefits under
PRWORA, with some exceptions

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL31753.pdf

That's just a quick google on section 8. I'm sure I could find more on other types of assistance. There are centers all over the country that specialize in assisting immigrants, legal and illegal, in getting public benefits. Then there's schooling and hospital care, both of which illegals can get for free.

I want to make it clear that I don't blame any illegal for taking advantage of anything, nor would I want to see anyone in need sleeping on the street, denied medical care or a kid turned away from school. The point is that it puts puts tremendous financial pressure on whatever institution is providing the services. The US is importing poverty and will look like Mexico if it keeps up. Much of California already does. Never mind that a lot of leftists actually want the west/southwest to actually BE Mexico. Then you have the cultural Marxists using illegals to carry out their agenda and, sadly, they get these immigrants to go along with them. I recently read that in California schools more kids cannot speak any English than ever before. We're talking higher grades (middle and high school). How do you think that's gonna work out for everyone? This was done by the left pushing their language agenda in the classroom and it serves nobody but the elites who want anything but assimilation. Isolated populations are easier to control and they nearly all vote Democrat.

Why do you think some countries are strict about immigration law? Did it ever dawn on you that it's to protect their own culture and standard of living? Do you want cities in the US look like TJ?

I've know lots of Mexicans and some have been good friends. Also some central Americans. I have nothing but good feelings toward all of them. I don't want us to spiral down into becoming Mexico, though, and neither do many Mexican Americans. A sane immigration policy is a matter of self respect.

 

[RandallFan]

Who is Walter Jones?

Congressman from NC, who some local tea party tries to oust with Bill Kristol's friends.

 

[Jamesiv1]

I think all of you Trump supporters are pretty stupid. If you all started mowing lawns,washing dishes, picking crops, cleaning toilets, the immigrants will have no jobs. That alone will be more effective than building a stupid wall that you dumb Trump supporters won't even pay for yourselves. Go on, get working! Maybe you all should chip in and pay for the wall yourselves? Have any of you geniuses tried to do that? I'm sure you don't mind the government forcing me to take money out of my check to do it right? Use some of that government check that you get every month. If you don't have money, volunteer your labor and time to build it. Make America great again!!

You need to tear your a.ss to Canada.

 

[familydog]

Guys, I hate to break it to you...but the average person does not care about this. They only care about where there next paycheck comes from or how much it is going to be. Only the media and the anti-Trump forces care what he has to say about a judge.

 

[AZJoe]

As more information comes to light, it appears Judge Curiel has majorly screwed up. The information coming out now on Judge Curiel definitely establishes actual conflict of interest, and substantial enough bias that any judge would necessarily need to recuse himself. To protect the integrity of the judiciary a judge should recuse himself to avoid even the spectre of improper conflict of interest. The code of judicial conduct mandates that a judge should avoid even "the appearance of impropriety in all activities."

The judge was aware of his own associations their activities, including the HNBA's campaign for a public boycott of a party appearing before the judge. The judge should have immediately disclosed that he belongs to an organization advocating the boycott of a party that was appearing in an active litigation before the judge. It is not even a questionable call. The judge had an absolute duty of candor to disclose such affiliation to the parties immediately, and/or recuse himself at that point. The judge failing to do so impugns the integrity of the judiciary.

Now anything this judge does is tainted by associations such as belonging to an organization advocating a public boycott campaign since July 2015 against a party appearing before the Judge. The judge already committed a major serious Screw Up by "accidentally" releasing confidential court discovery on the case directly to the media and then "resealing" the records after the damage was already done and and its completely pointless to do so. Even if the plaintiff's case has the greatest merit and they win, this judge just tainted the entire litigation and virtually guarantees the defense a meritorious appeal.

The Hispanic National Bar Association that Curiel is active in published a press release on July 2nd 2015 which specifically stated their intention to target the “business interests” of Donald Trump: "calls for a boycott of all Trump business ventures including golf courses, hotels and restaurants." : http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=df9a27c10b6d6ba38ba001440&id=f8a4a02241&e=cd8fc1ccd9%0A

 

[CPUd]

Attack the judge!

 

[randomname]

He walked it back on Hannity: "I don't care where the judge is from"

LOL

 

[CPUd]

He walked it back on Hannity: "I don't care where the judge is from"

LOL

Priebus told him to, but word came to him via the donors.

 

[moostraks]

What do you mean "proof"? I asked you a question. I didn't make an accusation. Defensive much? YOU used the word "vitriol" in describing Trump making an issue of illegal immigration. It's logical that I would follow with asking if you are an open borders whatever. Are you in favor of open borers and, if so, why? Do you feel illegals living the US should be granted amnesty? I'm open about what I think and it's you responded with a defensive remark rather than reveal your beliefs.

It's been presented here several times; the judge is a member of La Raza (pro illegal alien & open borders) and another group that said they would target Trump's business interests. That's proof of of the judge's agenda and reason for suspicion about his ability to be unbiased.

The rest of your comment is downright nutty. I don't give a f#%k where you live and have no idea what you're talking about with paying anyone money. I also don't know what you're talking about regarding a social contract. Obviously, it all makes sense in the strange world inside your head but it's a mystery to me. I have no authority over your household nor do I want any, lol. More cray-cray from your internal world, I guess.

Then you go to say that Trump is my "flavor of dictator in chief" and my "wanna be emperor". Really? Where did I say that? I think is full of $#@! and an immature jerk on many levels. There are a couple of reasons I voted for him, anyway, in my primary and will in the general: I want to see US participation in globalization reversed; out of bad trade agreements; peace with Russia; control over immigration; no more wars of aggression; out of NATO; cancellation of any participation in the global warming scam. That's it. Will he issue executive orders if he's elected? Probably. ALL executive orders are diktats, AFAIC, so there's that. Will his be worse than all of the previous presidents whose agenda was the destruction of US sovereignty? Doubt it!

What a breathtaking display of braggadocio from someone who glorifies their own ignorance whilst reducing a two syllable word to a monosyllabic chant.

Proof, follow your own line of reasoning. He has complained since October 2014, but to date, none of Trump's excuses are relevant to the date of his initial ruling to which he continuously cries foul. So proof? Emotional appeals and hysteria are not proof. Racist innuendo is not proof. I didn't get my way, nope, still not proof.

Social contract:

Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision of a majority), in exchange for protection of their remaining rights.

...If you live in the United States, you are entered into the Social Contract from the moment you are born, without your voluntary consent, and if you refuse to acknowledge the social contract, force will be used against you. You are under duress.

You can’t enter into a legal contract with a new-born infant. Yet, you are entered into the Social Contract from birth, before you are considered “Competent” under the law.

Undue influence involves “one person taking advantage of a position of power over another person.” This one is obvious. Under the “Social Contract”, one of the parties employs legions of armed men, and possesses a seemingly endless amount of power and resources.

With no “Mutuality of Obligation,” there can be no contract. If the other side of the contract is not meeting their obligations, there must be recourse.

https://simplevoluntaryism.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/voluntaryism-in-simple-terms/

Pay to renounce citizenship:

Over the last two years, the U.S. has had a spike in expatriations. It isn’t exactly Ellis Island in reverse, but it’s more than a dribble. With global tax reporting and FATCA, the list of the individuals who renounced is up. For 2013, there was a 221% increase, with record numbers of Americans renouncing. The Treasury Department is required to publish a quarterly list, but these numbers are under-stated, some say considerably.

...Now, the State Department interim rule just raised the fee for renunciation of U.S. citizenship to $2,350 from $450. Critics note that it’s more than twenty times the average level in other high-income countries. The State Department says it’s about demand on their services and all the extra workload they have to process people who are on their way out.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertw...-to-renounce-citizenship-by-422/#5b689cb57c4a

Move to Somalia:

It seems like these days you’re not much of a libertarian unless you’ve been told to move to Somalia – there has been a conflation of the political situation in Somalia from 1991-2006 with “anarchy” and statelessness. In this essay, I will systematically dismantle the idea that conditions observed in Somalia have any relevance to market anarchism and show why suggesting that people who don’t like centralised states should move to Somalia is a completely intellectually empty rhetorical gesture.

https://societyrepair.liberty.me/move-to-somalia/

Yes, YOUR flavor of dictator in chief who has repeatedly stated a number of positions which he in singular, first person, claims will change or states whom he will go after to avenge himself from perceived slights. YES, YOU and your monosyllabic vocabulary friends who pimp the totalitarian state because you've been sold a fantasy by a carnival barker motivating you through fear, own the steaming pile of candidate to whom you have hitched your wagon.

His solutions are absurd. His rants steeped in hate. He has already altered public discourse in a deleterious manner. He and his virulent supporters are a toxic drain on society and their idea of the future seems largely predicated upon resurrecting the past.

 

[acptulsa]

You didn't answer my question, though. Do you think he's sincere about the issue that I listed?

I'd have to say he's in danger if the Republican establishment picks a VP. They'll shoot him and put in the VP. Pretty much what they tried to do with Bush 41 when he was VP. I think Hinkley was a mind controlled assassin. Anyway, it looks like no establishment politician wants to run with Trump so it will be interesting to see what unfolds.

Why on Earth would they bother shooting him? Did Cheney and the MIC bother with shooting Dubya?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...rump-Will-Outsource-Being-President-to-His-VP