Wednesday, June 15, 2016

In Defense of Donald Trump

The real big problem with Donald Trump is that he talks in sound bytes. For that matter this is the same problem with the news media.
Trump lashed out against the US District Judge, Gonzalo Curiel concerning the lawsuit against Trump University. Trump said, "The judge is probably biased against me because of my previous comments about Mexican immigration."
Then what?
The media jumps on the quote to imply that Trump is racist. This action revealed their inherent dislike for Trump and by de-facto, pro-Clinton leanings. In reality, if Donald just took the time to explain his thinking, there would be a different conversation today.
Federalist Papers
Alexander Hamilton took up the cause for the original colonies to ratify the constitution. He, along with John Jay and I can't at this moment recall a third member of the revolution group, wrote a series of articles to promote the citizens to push their local government to back the new Republic.
Hamilton advocated the three equal branches of government. He goes on to say that judges in the Judiciary Branch, can be subjective and do what is best for the nation rather than serve self-interest. This sounds all well in theory, but humans are flawed. They cannot always be subjective in nature. I can recite numerous examples, and in my unpublished work, I do. Here I will use the two most important.
Dred Scott v. Sandford
Supreme Court Judge, Taney declared in 1857 that African-Americans are inferior. The man was pro-slavery among other things. He said, "Slaves are chattel."
Plessy v. Ferguson
The Supreme Court ruled that separate but equal is constitutional in 1896.
When the court overturned the above verdict in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the South almost revolted again. Southern senators outlined a plan to "pack" the court with right minded people. In detail, the book called, Southern Manifesto, devised a way to boycott schools rather than integrate.
Right there points to the problem. People have their own baggage. You can get any decision in the courts as long as you get to pick the judge. This is why the Republicans are holding up the nomination process at the moment.
Getting deeper, this is the real reason why there was a quick response to Trump's latest outburst. The powers-to-be do not want this aspect to get play, to become part of the conversation because the bedrock of the elites is really at stake.
Now, if Donald Trump just explained that this Hispanic-American judge has a very close affiliation to the San Diego based La Raza, which is pro-Mexican-American and pro-immigration of Mexicans, then, maybe there is some doubt about this judge's ability to be subjective. Clinton won't reveal this truth either.
If our nation is ever going to evolve our democracy, the third branch of our system needs to be overhauled(I have an answer in my work, but I can't reveal it here). As it stands now, the Judiciary Branch is a dictatorship within our democracy. Yes, I know that decisions could be amended, but the process is too difficult and lengthy, especially with so many day-to-day verdicts. The court creates law without legislation which violates the constitution. By the way, Jefferson and Madison are on my side if you care to look it up.