He had an absurd ruling, after many AGs rejected the case--he has paper work from her praising the university ect. He said the judge MIGHT be biased, and gave REASONS for that bias (Both in the absurdity of the rulings and the judges actions). The judge belongs to a nationalist organization called "The Race", and has donated directly to illegal immigrants, and strongly opposes Trump politically.
I love this. Trump is portrayed as saying something that many people believe is racist... Let's look deeper, to make sure we have all the necessary information. Aha! The judge may or may not be part of a nationalistic group with strong opposition to Trump's policies! Plus, he's already made an absurd ruling! Also, if you look at Trump's actual words, he only said the judge
mightbe biased... and for reasons that have nothing to do with race! Ipso facto, Trump's comment wasn't racist at all, people are just seeing what they want to see because they are ideologues who need to portray Trump as the bad guy, even if they need to ignore context and reason to do so.
...Which is all great. It really is. I've got no problem with any of that, and I commend you on making an effort to educate yourself on the situation. And yet, in another situation (Edit:
multiplesituations, even!), one where someone is accused of lying and portrayed as such to a crowd of people more than happy to see what they want to see... Case closed! No need to consider context or the speaker's actual words at all. In fact, let's ridicule people who
domake the effort to understand the entire situation by considering context and reason.
Nice to know context only counts if it supports a pre-approved narrative.
"Don't fret, m'Trump! I'll defend you!"