Michele Bachmann: We May ‘Never See a More Godly, Biblical President’ Than Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victoria33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They read from the Bible in the WH, they have Bible Studies, they pray, they open up meetings with prayer. That’s what I understand.

If just that fits Godly and Biblical. Then, it may well fit the description.

I looked up definitions:

“devoutly religious; pious.”

Now, I wouldn’t take the first definition one sees as being the end all of what “Godly” means but it points us in a certain direction.

Recognizing Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel, well, that happened a long time ago but we finally moved the embassy to there.

Being pro-life.

Restoring some religious liberty. This has occurred. I don’t know all off the top of my head but it’s been in the news.
 
It isn’t possible for a thoughtful or honorable person to espouse killing children, even unborn ones. What it does require is denial of their humanity or, alternatively, an anti-human attitude. Probably the citizens of ancient Carthage convinced themselves that somehow they would prosper if they burned their children alive, too. Quite possibly they had better manners than Trump as well, as they were very sophisticated people.

Since your last paragraph appears to be aimed at Trump, I don’t think Trump denies having committed adultery, like Kennedy, FDR, Carter (in his mind), St. Augustine, and many others. But it has to be admitted, his having done so did not prevent him from letting the Little Sisters off the conscientious hook Obama put them on. And, unlike the DNC and Hillary Clinton, he’s clearly not anti-Catholic. That means more to me than whether he insults some puffed-up pundit.

And if Mueller could have charged him with “obstruction of justice” he would have. It wasn’t there.
 
Lest Catholics be deceived again. Here’s Apb Chaput, one of America’s foremost moralists.
We should not doubt Abp Chaput or that the Dem party is profoundly anti-Catholic. Remember, Podesta was the head of the DNC at the time this was said.

"Sandy Newman, president of Voices for Progress, emailed John Podesta, now the head of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, to ask about whether “the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage” could be the tinder for a revolution. “There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages [sic]dictatorship,” Newman writes.
Of course, Newman added, “This idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the Catholic Church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and priests who count on it for their maintenance.” Still, he wondered, how would one “plant the seeds of a revolution”? John Podesta replied, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this … likewise Catholics United” (emphasis added).

wjla.com

Dershowitz: Mueller got the law 'all wrong' on obstruction of justice

Constitutional lawyer and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said the special counsel had a legally flawed approach to investigating alleged obstruction of justice by President Donald Trump. "What jumps out at me is that the Mueller people got the law all wrong on obstruction of justice,"...
wjla.com wjla.com

Both Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good are dissident “Catholic” organizations that support homosexual marriage, abortion and other dissident Dem causes.
 
Ridgerunner said:
"Sandy Newman, president of Voices for Progress, emailed John Podesta, now the head of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, to ask about whether “the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage” could be the tinder for a revolution. “There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages [sic]dictatorship,” Newman writes.
Of course, Newman added, “This idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the Catholic Church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and priests who count on it for their maintenance.” Still, he wondered, how would one “plant the seeds of a revolution”? John Podesta replied, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this … likewise Catholics United” (emphasis added).
Click to expand...
I am not sure how in the world you think that this old passage supports the claims that you make about the Democratic party being anti-Catholic or supporting organization trying to undermine the Catholic Church.?
  1. This email is a personal exchange between a non-Cathoic activist and John Podesta, a Catholic in 2012 - a time at which Podesta was neither employed by the DNC nor working as Head of HRC’s campaign. His words are the words of one Democrat, not in any way those of the Democratic party.
  2. Podesta noted in that same e-mail that any efforts for reform in the Catholic church would have to be grass roots.
  3. When he says “we” created various organizations looking for reform, he is evidently talking about grass-roots efforts among Catholics of whom he is one.
  4. While some reformers may aim to undermine the church, that cannot be said to be true in general. don’t think that bishops assembled at Vatican II were aiming to undermine the church - notwithstanding the conspiracy theories about that Council.
  5. The named organization do not have a record of aiming to undermine the Catholic Church.
Overall, the charges made are not supported by the evidence.
 
Last edited:
How can any President who’s had fewer wives than Solomon and fought fewer wars than David, be called “Biblical”?
 
dvdjs said:
The report makes it clear that Mueller constrained against indicting a sitting President.
The reportclearly does not conclude that"it wasn’t there".
Click to expand...
“The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign].”

They found nothing at all.

It’s meaningless, if the report indicates Mueller was constrained in indicting a sitting president. The report does not represent a Court of Law. It was only an investigation. It’s meaningless to conjecture on some of this because it is not the law itself. It might not have even held up in a court of law.

You have no guilty verdicts, you have nothing at all.
 
It’s the Mueller Report. I believe it is posted in numerous places on the web.
 
Washington Examiner, quotes in article by Byron York. I only have tbe printed version. There are about 7 quotes like that.
 
Victoria33 said:
Washington Examiner, quotes in article by Byron York. I only have tbe printed version. There are about 7 quotes like that.
Click to expand...
Is this the link?

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Donald Trump

Get the latest news on the 47th president of the United States. Read about the second Trump administration, MAGA, his America First agenda, and more.
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com

Is the the quote?
  1. “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
Click to expand...
This quote is different from yours (it is about establishing, not identifying evidence) but it is inaccurate. Others versions that took this from Barr’s report and faithfully rendered the quote as "[T]he investigation… ". This bracketing indicates that there was more to the sentence than Barr was giving. Are you aware of what Barr left out?

The seventh quote is probably what you were referring to.
  1. “The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign].”
Click to expand...
Brackets again.
From the report.
The Internet Research Agency (IRA) carried out the earliest Russian interference operations identified by the investigation—a social media campaign designed to provoke and amplify political and social discord in the United States. The IRA was based in St. Petersburg, Russia, and received funding from Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin and companies he controlled. Prigozhin is widely reported to have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, [redacted, “Harm to Ongoing Matter”]
Click to expand...
The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed “information warfare.” The campaign evolved from a generalized program designed in 2014 and 2015 to undermine the U.S. electoral system, to a targeted operation that by early 2016 favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton. The IRA’s operation also included the purchase of political advertisements on social media in the names of U.S. persons and entities, as well as the staging of political rallies inside the United States. The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the IRA. Section II of this report details the Office’s investigation of the Russian social media campaign.
Click to expand...
Please note that the quote is not a general exoneration but a statement about the lack of evidence about one part of the investigation - the IRA interference. Notably, despite denials of interference even from Trump himself, there is no question about the interference, or its aim to hurt Clinton and to help Trump. The report moreover that Trump and company were not unaware of the Russian intent and work, and did not report it. York cherry-picks quotes.

I think that this is an important takeaway from this sordid affair: mandatory reporting of efforts of foreign powers to interfere in our elections, with hefty penalties for failure to report.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
Are you aware of what Barr left out?
Click to expand...
From the report:
“As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel’s investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents. The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, …
Click to expand...
 
In our topsy-turvy world, in which up is down and bad is good, Michele Bachmann may have a valid point. One thing is certain though: SHE never seems to change.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top