As judge unseals Trump University docs, BOMBSHELL revealed…

Even as a federal judge rules against Donald Trump and today unsealed hundreds of documents related to the lawsuit against Trump University, a new bombshell in the case has just been revealed.

Turns out, one of the two law firms representing plaintiffs in this case against Trump — coincidentally, appointed by the judge overseeing the case whom Trump has (it appears rightly) accused of being “hater” and “very hostile” — have some ties to Hillary and Bill Clinton.

As in half a million dollars worth of ties.

As The American Spectator reports:

It comes to light from LawNewz that the law firm Robbins Geller appointed by Judge Gonzalo Curiel to represent a plaintiff in the Trump University class action suits has another connection to Hillary Clinton beyond a $2700 campaign contribution from firm chairman Darren Robbins. LawNewz did not mention the firm’s connection to the Trump University case. The information was apparently retrieved from a Washington Post data base with the Clinton financial filings on file. (The Post itself has not reported on this connection.)

It seems that Robbins Geller “paid the Clintons nearly half a million dollars in less than a year.” Why? Speeches of course.

That’s right. One of the law firms picked by the Judge in the Trump University case — the very Judge Donald Trump accuses by name of anti-Trump bias — awarded this firm the case after — say again after — Hillary and Bill Clinton had been paid a cool $450,000 for two speeches by the firm.

While one might have expected this connection to Trump’s presumed rival in the campaign to be called out as a potential conflict of interest, amazingly, this hasn’t happened — either in the courtroom or in the press.

And, of course, this isn’t the only connection in the case against Trump University that would raise eyebrows, at the very least, or lead one to wonder if this isn’t just a big charade — witch hunt — aimed at trashing the presumed GOP nominee.

As The American Spectator reports, several other key players in the lawsuit have some interesting ties to Democrats.

The judge Gonzalo Curiel himself, whose Hispanic heritage Trump has called out, is an Obama appointee and has been honored by “his leadership and support” to the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association, whose purpose is to advance the cause of equality, empowerment and justice for, not all attorneys of any race, but specifically Latino attorneys and the Latino community in San Diego County.

We’ll let you draw your own conclusions there about the judge’s involvement with the organization who uses “La Raza” — “The Race” in its title. (Still don’t understand how it’s OK for Latinos to do it but would be a career-ending controversy for a Caucasian to be involved in such an organization.)

Meanwhile, the senior partner in the other law firm Judge Curiel selected to represent the case against Trump — Zeldes Haeggquist & Eck LLP — was a multiple-time contributor to Barack Obama and also a one-time donor in 2004 to Of course, MoveOn has this to say about Donald Trump:

For as long as Donald Trump is a presidential candidate, MoveOn members will continue to call out and nonviolently protest his racist, bigoted, misogynistic, xenophobic, and violent behavior… Trump and those who peddle hate and incite violence have no place in our politics and most certainly do not belong in the White House.

And then there’s New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who filed a $40 million law suit against Trump University in 2013 charging fraud — but only after repeated campaign solicitations to Trump family members and business associates. As American Spectator writes — and detailed here three years ago — Attorney General Schneiderman’s solicitations were along the lines of “the Mafia Don who stops by to say “ya gotta nice little business going here, ya wouldn’t want anything to happen to it.”

Oh, and by the way, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has endorsed Hillary Clinton for president.

The Spectator sums it all up well:

What we have here is the case against Trump University being so riven with political conflicts of interest that it is clear Trump is not a defendant but the subject of a political witch hunt. A witch hunt fueled by everything from identity politics to campaign contributions.

To borrow a much used phrase from this election cycle? The case against Trump University appears to have been rigged right from the get-go.


Well, since the media won’t be getting word of this out, it’s up to us — and y’all!

[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

Notify of