The Clinton campaign and the mainstream media actively misrepresented statements by Donald Trump not too long ago about activist judge Gonzalo Curiel. They said Trump called him unfit to hear a case involving Trump University because the judge was Mexican. This is far from the truth.
But even as the Left insists on the validity of their cherry-picked and manipulated depiction of what Trump said about Curiel, evidence is emerging that proves Curiel is, in fact, as activist as the misrepresentations of the Left have protested. Judge Curiel’s wife has popped up in, of all places, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails, exposed by Wikileaks. It seems Mrs. Curiel is an avid Progressive and a huge fan of Podesta and the Center for American Progress.
That Judge Curiel’s wife would be so involved in political activism – and at such a high level – casts a dark shadow over the judge himself. It certainly sheds a spotlight on the question of Judge Curiel’s political activism.
Curiel was appointed to the US District Court in the Southern District of California in 2011 by President Barack Obama. He was one of many Progressive appointments to the federal bench rubber stamped by the Republican controlled Congress.
In the email exposed by Wikileaks, Knox College President Teresa Amott is evidenced writing to John Podesta, “Carolyn Curiel was just here with a group of Purdue students that visited the debate site. She and I exchanged raves about the two of you.”
Carolyn Cruiel serves as the Executive Director of the Purdue Institute for Civic Communication. She is, in and of herself, a political activist and one that comes down far to the Left of center.
In the comments that Trump made about Judge Curiel, he argued that because Judge Curiel is an activist with interests in open borders and immigration, that he should be disqualified from sitting in judgement of any lawsuit involving a Trump entity because of his stance on border security and immigration. He was claiming a conflict of interest because of the judge’s activism (he is a member of the radical La Raza Lawyers Association).
Of course, the Clinton campaign and the mainstream media – disingenuous and in collusion as they are – spun this argument into a matter of racism. They claimed that Donald Trump objected to Curiel sitting in judgement of the lawsuit against Trump University because he was “Mexican.”
The disingenuousness of the Clinton claim aside, it would appear that – with the exposing of Mrs. Curiel’s affinity for Progressivism and John Podesta – there is validation for Donald Trump’s claim of bias toward Curiel. Even though the contact with the Clinton camp is through his wife, Curiel has a blatant conflict of interest and should recuse himself from any and all cases involving Donald Trump and/or related entities.
But, because Curiel is a Progressive – and an appointee of Barack Obama’s – the idea of recusal is nothing more than a pipe dream. In fact, should Clinton actually win the election, Curiel will probably be on the short-list for a Supreme Court nomination.