As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Trump “Surprised” at Gingrich Criticism

Well, looks like Newt is off the VP list.

Donald Trump Monday morning said Newt Gingrich was “inappropriate” in his criticism of him for referring to the judge in the Trump University case as “Mexican.”

“I saw Newt and I was surprised at Newt. I thought it was inappropriate, what he said,” Trump said. “All I want to say is find out why am I being treated so unfairly by a judge?”

Gingrich Sunday had called Trump’s remarks “inexcusable.”

“This is one of the worst mistakes Trump has made. I think it’s inexcusable,” said Gingrich. “That judge is not a Mexican. He’s an American,” he said. “I hope it was sloppiness.”

Here’s some video of Trump — on the phone — mentioning Gingrich and defending Trump University.

“I’ll win the case very easily,” he said.

Here’s the group at Morning Joe commenting this morning on Trump’s remarks about the judge.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

25 Responses to Trump “Surprised” at Gingrich Criticism

  1. I am beginning to compile a Trump glossary–By “fairly” he means “on my side.” I guess he’s proud of his Scottish heritage, too–so he ships jobs to a Scottish golf course…Bear with me, I will figure it all out…

    • By the way, that Gingrich interview–I saw it. I have little use for Gingrich, either, but he said he talked to Trump pretty often but that Trump often did not take his advice. Guess not.

  2. So, let me see if I have this correct.

    Justice Sotomayor is a wise Latina woman, which means she’s going to be a predictable leftist justice because of her ethnicity.

    Justice Thomas is an Uncle Tom, or an Oreo, pick your slur, because he’s a black conservative, and thus not being a predictable leftist justice despite his ethnicity.

    The Left has equated ethnicity with judicial philosophy for how long? But now that their own rules are being used against them, they’re getting the vapors, along with some unfortunate support from the Right.

        • It’s not that. When it comes to the MSM, one side always gets vilified, while the other gets a free pass for doing the same thing.

          • But it’s not the same…They said she was a proud Latina woman–not that she would always, dedspite her oath, would vote to hurt anyone who was not benefiting Latina women.

          • She’s the one who always called herself a “wise Latina woman” – the following is a quote: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”

            Imagine if a white conservative said anything remotely similar.

    • There are clearly two sets of rules of justice. One for those who support Obama’s madcap justice, and another set of rules for those who ask, “What the heck is that nut in the White House doing with his Justice Department?” And MSM strictly follows the Obama guidelines because they are carefully trained lab mice, in Obama’s view. And he’s correct on this point.

  3. Gingrich (and his albino-ish-looking wife, (Lulu Belle?) would not help Trump in the slightest. Has he ever won a popularity contest?

    So sick of hearing Trump’s response: “…I’m building a wall!!” We get it Donald, you’re building a wall.
    Does that make everyone, myself included, who is against a wall…racist?

    Just last week it was reported that a Taliban guy, and a few others from the ME were caught after they tunneled UNDER the wall at the Mexican border. They were all subsequently released!

    And furthermore, there are 5000 Plaintiffs/students involved in this scam who invested up to $35K. “Is this all we get?”, they asked.

    Trump’s intent was to take advantage of those foolhardy enough to believe in the phony ‘get-rich’ schemes. Was he smart enough to include some sort of ‘caveat emptor’ in their contracts to stave off the lawsuits? Who knows.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432328/donald-trump-trump-university-lawsuits-are-headed-court

    • I recently picked up a new bike, and have had to re-learn the industry after years of getting by on the Metro. (Bear with me!) Part of that was getting an upgraded bike lock. What I was told about locks by the salesman, was that a dedicated professional thief that wants your bike badly enough, can defeat any lock on the market. A good lock will, however, keep joyriders, amateurs, and less competent thieves from attempting the steal. It’s a deterrent, not a guarantee that my bike will never be stolen.

      See what I’m getting at?

      • The wall is so, so…yesterday. The cartels have already figured out how to scale it, tunnel it, blow it up, whatever.

        The average illegals just need to get to the border patrol and demand ‘refugee or asylum’ status. The door opens magically as in ‘Open Sesame’.
        No questions asked!

        The problem lies with the non-existent enforcement of existing immigration laws. Not a wall.

        BTW, many well-heeled illegals are simply getting their fake docs and arrive in style at LAX or wherever.
        They have amigos in ‘high place’ just waiting to wave them through immigration checks.

        • Plus there are many hundreds of miles of wall now–in the high traffic places… These get circumvented. Actually Trump has already said his “wall” would not be the whole distance…this has already been walked back somewhat…as symbolic, etc. It’s just more red meat, a diversion, whatever…

        • You missed my point…deliberately, it would seem.

          Yes, dedicated scofflaws will find their way in. Yes, enforcement of existing laws is criminally lax. And yes, you’re not going to get illegal immigration down to zero.

          HOWEVER. It is NOT correct to conclude from those premises that since a perfect border fence is impossible, none should be built.

          The idea is to deter those who can be deterred. And with all due respect to those who work hard in that particular DMZ, ICE agents aren’t a sufficient deterrent. They can be intimidated, bribed, or God-forbid gunned down.

          And the point of a border fence is NOT to get illegal immigration down to zero. It is to get it down to a much lower, much more manageable level than it is right now.

          It can’t be perfect, because it’s a human project. Just to return briefly to the example I gave, no bike lock will stop a thief with enough persistence, and no border wall will stop a cartel member from tunneling under it.

          But “the professionals will find a way” is NOT a valid reason for me to leave my bike on a public rack without a lock on it. And “the illegals who want it enough to get here will find a way” is NOT a valid reason for leaving the border protected only by human beings with technology, fallible institutions both. A physical wall, while certainly no panacea, is at LEAST a highly visible deterrent…one which should get “casual” illegals to think twice before trying to sneak across. And THAT is what it SHOULD do.

  4. What a thin-skinned little girl!!! I haven’t heard anyone whining about fairness so much since Bumbles’ last campaign.
    I think it’s completely fair. Because Dawnie Frumples would have to get elected first before building this magical wall, and he couldn’t get elected if he were the only 13-year-old bitch tween girl on the planet.