Photo: AP

Since Donald Trump began his overtly racial attacks on the judge overseeing the Trump University lawsuit, leading Democrats and Republicans have rightly denounced the presidential nominee’s comments as wrong and bad.

This weekend, however, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales emerged from his enhanced interrogation basement to offer a compelling counterargument: If Trump were instead questioning Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s impartiality for legitimate reasons, it would actually be totally fine.

On Saturday, Gonzales defended the criticisms of an imagined, non-bigoted version of Trump under the carefully-worded headline “Trump has a right to ask if Judge Gonzalo Curiel is fair.” From The Washington Post (emphasis added):

Certainly, Curiel’s Mexican heritage alone would not be enough to raise a question of bias (for all we know, the judge supports Trump’s pledge to better secure our borders and enforce the rule of law). As someone whose own ancestors came to the United States from Mexico, I know ethnicity alone cannot pose a conflict of interest.

But there may be other factors to consider in determining whether Trump’s concerns about getting an impartial trial are reasonable. Curiel is, reportedly, a member of a group called La Raza Lawyers of San Diego. Trump’s aides, meanwhile, have indicated that they believe Curiel is a member of the National Council of La Raza, a vocal advocacy organization that has vigorously condemned Trump and his views on immigration. The two groups are unaffiliated, and Curiel is not a member of NCLR.

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Gonzales repeated his largely hypothetical argument, earning pushback from Fox & Friends host Tucker Carlson.

“Why would Trump even bring up the country of origin of this man’s parents? Aren’t what your parents do or where they were born, isn’t that by definition irrelevant?” said Carlson.

“Exactly,” agreed Gonzales, making a less than convincing case for the relevance of his own neat thought experiment.