Trump will NOT be impeached.

[Bobber]

Do yourself a favor, and next time an election comes around try to see who ALL of the candidates are. Honest, and moral, people like Darrell Castle, or Evan McMullin.

Your claim that another is more honest and moral is just that YOUR claim. And lets add intelligent and wise. Castle wanted to pull out of NATO. Trump got roasted for merely suggesting NATO had to pay their share. What do you think the mainstream media would have done to his campaign if he even slightly began to surge. Evan McMullin didn't even enter the race until August 2016 giving all the appearance of being a spoiler against Trump to throw the election to Hillary. Not an honest assessment? I'm not sure you can guarantee me what honesty is.

 

[Old Trapper]

Your claim that another is more honest and moral is just that YOUR claim. And lets add intelligent and wise. Castle wanted to pull out of NATO. Trump got roasted for merely suggesting NATO had to pay their share. What do you think the mainstream media would have done to his campaign if he even slightly began to surge. Evan McMullin didn't even enter the race until August 2016 giving all the appearance of being a spoiler against Trump to throw the election to Hillary. Not an honest assessment? I'm not sure you can guarantee me what honesty is.

Considering your actions so far I am not sure you know the meaning of "honesty". You seem to think that one has to agree with the positions of ones political views 100% of the time, and in the meantime you can ignore the character of the individual. Trump is a serial adulterer, pathological liar, thief, coward, etc., and all you can do is find excuses not to vote for one that actually honors God, and served their country.

The point is there were alternatives aside from voting for one of the two most corrupt candidates in recent history. And yet you chose on of them.

 

[Bobber]

You do realize that there is a distinction between God's efficacious/predictive will and His permissive will, don't you? The question would be why would God promote a person whose character represents that which is so contrary to "Christianity"?

Well how about from a policy standpoint he or she or whoever they are might be more in line with the directions or how God would want other nations set up for his purpose? United States does have a great influence on world affairs. For example what will the Middle East look like 3,5 or 10 years down the road? On economics...if God indeed wanted to bless a nation or bring in more prosperity perhaps it might take a certain individual with a certain mindset to make that happen? Most importantly at least Trump has spoken well and shown respect in wanting to see religious liberty where his people can share the good news (the gospel) without hindrance. Also God would raise up if you study the Bible certain world leaders and they likewise maybe didn't have a character lined maybe at the time with great morality. Also GOD knows the hearts AND....he's the only one who does. No mainstream media talking head regardless of how much they might pride themselves of just knowing what a person is all about can claim such perception into people. ONLY GOD CAN.

 

[Bobber]

The point is there were alternatives aside from voting for one of the two most corrupt candidates in recent history. And yet you chose on of them.

I don't want to come on board to your list of what you think all Trump's wrong doings have been. I'm not God and I certainly don't trust what the mainstream media say ABOUT ANYTHING. But if I did come into agreement with you and voted (I'm not an American but if I was) voted for these unknowns who had virtually minimal support across the nation the election would have been given to the Dems or to the other candidate which you even claim wouldn't have been good. A choice between two things and again not an American but yeah I think my choice would still have been Trump.

 

[Jamsie]

I don't want to come on board to your list of what you think all Trump's wrong doings have been. I'm not God and I certainly don't trust what the mainstream media say ABOUT ANYTHING.

Please understand that the assessment of trump's character is based on his actions, various speeches, tweets, and documented history... to accuse the media of being untrustworthy is simply to deny verifiable facts. Why do Christians strain so hard to deny Matt. 7:16?

 

[Bobber]

Please understand that the assessment of trump's character is based on his actions, various speeches, tweets, and documented history... to accuse the media of being untrustworthy is simply to deny verifiable facts. Why do Christians strain so hard to deny Matt. 7:16?

No certain actions of Trump I myself don't see eye to eye with I'm not a fan of any President using Twitter but having said that NO...the media can STILL be deemed as untrustworthy in what they claim his tweets and speeches mean. As in his inauguration speech....left wing media slammed it as dark. Such can't be claimed to be fact regardless of talking heads insisting claims to the contrary. Media's opinions of speeches don't qualify as verifiable facts.

 

[Jamsie]

No certain actions of Trump I myself don't see eye to eye with I'm not a fan of any President using Twitter but having said that NO...the media can STILL be deemed as untrustworthy in what they claim his tweets and speeches mean. As in his inauguration speech....left wing media slammed it as dark. Such can't be claimed to be fact regardless of talking heads insisting claims to the contrary. Media's opinions of speeches don't qualify as verifiable facts.

I don't believe anyone would deny that pundits have a bias spin, some to the left some to the right. However, it is simply a fact that Trump lies exponentially more than any politician in recent history, that isn't spin that is simply a truth. When trump makes unequivocal claims it is not a matter of interpretation...

 

[Albion]

President Trump can only be impeached and removed from office if Mueller comes back with the proverbial 'smoking gun' of a finding. From all that anyone can tell, that is very unlikely.

There is very little of a 'gray area' in this whole thing.

However, he probably will be impeached if the democrats win big in the House of Representatives this November, even if he is NOT found to have done anything wrong.

Unfortunately for our country, that will make every president hereafter liable to impeachment every time that the opposition party has control of the House.

 

[Jamsie]

President Trump can only be impeached and removed from office if Mueller comes back with the proverbial 'smoking gun' of a finding. From all that anyone can tell, that is very unlikely.

There is very little of a 'gray area' in this whole thing.

However, he probably will be impeached if the democrats win big in the House of Representatives this November, even if he is NOT found to have done anything wrong.

Unfortunately for our country, that will make every president hereafter liable to impeachment every time that the opposition party has control of the House.

No, contrary to the attempts to question and demonize Mueller's integrity his report will be an objective and accurate assessment. It appears at present that there certainly was considerable entanglements between Russia and trump's campaign. However, if it is shown that Trump was not directly involved then doubtful impeachment will follow based on Mueller.

 

[Albion]

No, contrary to the attempts to question and demonize Mueller's integrity his report will be an objective and accurate assessment..

Well, you can always hope, but none of that has anything to do with what I wrote in my post above.

 

[Jamsie]

Well, you can always hope, but none of that has anything to do with what I wrote in my post above.

Oh, your post didn't reference Mueller? My only point is that if Mueller finds trump not directly involved then that point of contention for impeachment will be moot. I doubt any impeachment would proceed unless irrefutable violation of his oath was involved.

 

[Albion]

Oh, your post didn't reference Mueller?

That's about all it did.

The rest of your post was an editorial comment about someone else's opinion that you do not care for. I did not say any of that.

 

[1stcenturylady]

People keep asking this asinine question never understanding, or being able to grasp, the knowledge that there were more then two, or even four, choices to choose from. They are so ill-informed that they seem to think others are in the same position of ignorance. And no matter how often it is explained to them they lack the intellect to see the truth.

Do yourself a favor, and next time an election comes around try to see who ALL of the candidates are. Honest, and moral, people like Darrell Castle, or Evan McMullin.

BTW, when was the last time your "church" shunned one who supports abortions?

Right. Just throw away your vote on a 10th party.

 

[1stcenturylady]

People keep asking this asinine question never understanding, or being able to grasp, the knowledge that there were more then two, or even four, choices to choose from. They are so ill-informed that they seem to think others are in the same position of ignorance. And no matter how often it is explained to them they lack the intellect to see the truth.

Do yourself a favor, and next time an election comes around try to see who ALL of the candidates are. Honest, and moral, people like Darrell Castle, or Evan McMullin.

BTW, when was the last time your "church" shunned one who supports abortions?

Do Darrell Castle or Evan McMullin shun abortionists?

 

[Jamsie]

That's about all it did.

The rest of your post was an editorial comment about someone else's opinion that you do not care for. I did not say any of that.

Fair enough...

 

[Albion]

Do Darrell Castle or Evan McMullin shun abortionists?

Yes, actually both are on the record as being pro-life, but your point about the value of voting for a minor party is valid.

While there is the matter of being true to ones conscience, it is also the case that everyone knows that the minor party candidate will not win, so voting for them can, in the short run, only be a matter of conscience or of intending to deprive the candidate you would otherwise have voted for of your support.

 

[Old Trapper]

I don't want to come on board to your list of what you think all Trump's wrong doings have been. I'm not God and I certainly don't trust what the mainstream media say ABOUT ANYTHING. But if I did come into agreement with you and voted (I'm not an American but if I was) voted for these unknowns who had virtually minimal support across the nation the election would have been given to the Dems or to the other candidate which you even claim wouldn't have been good. A choice between two things and again not an American but yeah I think my choice would still have been Trump.

Again you are missing the point as most seem to do. Trump won because of the support he received from the so-called "christian" community. How different matters might have been if that community had trusted in God, followed Gods word, and supported someone other then Trump, or Clinton. Is hat so hard for you to grasp?

 

[Old Trapper]

Do Darrell Castle or Evan McMullin shun abortionists?

Don't know, don't care. They oppose abortion. Question is how strongly do you oppose abortion?

 

[Old Trapper]

Yes, actually both are on the record as being pro-life, but your point about the value of voting for a minor party is valid.

While there is the matter of being true to ones conscience, it is also the case that everyone knows that the minor party candidate will not win, so voting for them can, in the short run, only be a matter of conscience or of intending to deprive the candidate you would otherwise have voted for of your support.

How does a minor party become a major party is everyone adopts your kind of ignorant attitude, and continues to vote for only the two parties?

Then too, why would anyone vote their conscience, or vote with integrity. The so-called "christians" certainly don't.

 

[MoneyGuy]

God put Trump in office to just see him impeached? Not a chance!

God doesn't make mistakes.

Trump is is whopper mistake.

Therefore, your supposition is flawed.