At what point do we become responsible for talking against leaders like Trump?

[FireDragon76]

Supporting Trump, and defending his cruel, lawless, and boorish behavior, is a terrible witness for Christians.

 

[Fantine]

Supporting Trump, and defending his cruel, lawless, and boorish behavior, is a terrible witness for Christians.

And for their children.
Bullying is not acceptable.
Meanness and viciousness is not acceptable.
Hurting those who need help most is not acceptable.

Mother gets called to principals office about child's behavior, who says "Trump does it, why can't I?"
And she realizes in her poor judgment she's created a monster.

 

[FireDragon76]

And for their children.
Bullying is not acceptable.
Meanness and viciousness is not acceptable.
Hurting those who need help most is not acceptable.

Mother gets called to principals office about child's behavior, who says "Trump does it, why can't I?"
And she realizes in her poor judgment she's created a monster.

The deeper issue is that the moral authority and cultural salience of Evangelicals, and Christians more broadly, was declining long before Trump. However, supporting Trump is the wrong answer to the right questions, and will only accelerate the decline.

 

[Yarddog]

Is that an opinion or a fact? Brainmanager, which estimates people's IQ predicts that his IQ at about 145.

I don't put much confidence in Brainmanager. They had my IQ far higher than my real scores.

That makes him in the unique realm of genius.

Have you taken their test? You'd probably score extremely high, as well.

This makes you and I look like senile and old coots. LOL

Not me, I kicked his butt.

 

[1Tonne]

President Trump says his administration is actively exploring a proposal to detain U.S. citizens and send them to prisons in El Salvador. Speaking Monday, minutes before a press briefing alongside El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, Trump could be heard embracing the concept.
https://www.npr.org/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366178/trump-deport-jail-u-s-citizens-homegrowns-el-salvador

Let’s explore this idea a little more carefully.

Trump has proposed sending certain violent offenders—murderers, rapists, and others guilty of heinous crimes—to serve their sentences in prisons abroad, such as in El Salvador. These individuals have stripped every civil liberty from their victims, often permanently. Yet some still insist on defending them and preserving their comforts, as if they were deserving of the same rights they so brutally denied others.

Many of these criminals will spend their lives in prison, becoming a massive and ongoing burden on the American taxpayer. The cost of keeping a single inmate in the U.S. can exceed $60,000 a year—a figure that could be slashed dramatically if incarceration were outsourced. The potential savings to the nation are enormous—tens of billions annually, which could translate into meaningful relief for American families.

Potential Advantages​

1. Lower Operational Costs

• Wages for guards, staff, and maintenance in El Salvador are significantly lower.
• Facilities are cheaper to build and operate due to reduced material and labor costs.

2. Economic Boost for El Salvador

• Thousands of jobs would be created in security, healthcare, and construction.
• It could stimulate El Salvador’s economy through foreign investment and long-term contracts.

3. Major U.S. Taxpayer Savings

• If inmate costs drop from $60,000 to, say, $10,000 annually, the savings would be in the tens of billions each year.

4. Deterrence Effect

• The prospect of being sent to a tougher, foreign prison may act as a deterrent to repeat offenders, especially for those who have long relied on a lenient system.

5. Strategic Partnerships

• A program like this could foster stronger diplomatic or economic ties with partner nations.

Common Objections—and Responses

1. Human Rights Concerns
Yes, El Salvador's prisons are harsh—but we’re talking about people who violated every human right of their victims, often in the most violent and irreversible ways. Why should society continue to protect the comfort of those who destroyed lives?

2. Violation of Constitutional Rights
Over time, we've watered down the original intent of constitutional protections. In the late 1700s, murderers were often executed—their rights considered forfeited by the magnitude of their crime. Justice was retributive and swift. Today, we too often preserve the rights of the guilty while the victims are long forgotten. In that light, being sent to a prison in El Salvador could be seen as leniency compared to what justice once demanded.

3. Loss of Family Contact and Rehabilitation
Families of murder victims will never again see their loved ones—no visits, no letters, no calls. If the guilty lose visitation rights by being incarcerated abroad, it’s a consequence that mirrors the finality they imposed on others.

4. Public Outrage
Yes, there would be an outcry—especially from the left. But over time, outrage fades and financial benefit endures. As the nation grows economically stronger from reduced incarceration costs, even the most vocal critics may soften when they see lower taxes, improved infrastructure, or better-funded schools.

In short, this proposal challenges our comfort zone—but it also forces us to rethink justice. Are we more committed to protecting the rights of the violent... or honoring the memory and dignity of their victims?

Overall, to me, it seems like a really out-of-the-box idea (That is what you often get with Trump. He's a real thinker). It's a great idea.

 

[Fantine]

Let’s explore this idea a little more carefully.

Trump has proposed sending certain violent offenders—murderers, rapists, and others guilty of heinous crimes—to serve their sentences in prisons abroad, such as in El Salvador. These individuals have stripped every civil liberty from their victims, often permanently. Yet some still insist on defending them and preserving their comforts, as if they were deserving of the same rights they so brutally denied others.

Many of these criminals will spend their lives in prison, becoming a massive and ongoing burden on the American taxpayer. The cost of keeping a single inmate in the U.S. can exceed $60,000 a year—a figure that could be slashed dramatically if incarceration were outsourced. The potential savings to the nation are enormous—tens of billions annually, which could translate into meaningful relief for American families.

Potential Advantages​

1. Lower Operational Costs

• Wages for guards, staff, and maintenance in El Salvador are significantly lower.
• Facilities are cheaper to build and operate due to reduced material and labor costs.

2. Economic Boost for El Salvador

• Thousands of jobs would be created in security, healthcare, and construction.
• It could stimulate El Salvador’s economy through foreign investment and long-term contracts.

3. Major U.S. Taxpayer Savings

• If inmate costs drop from $60,000 to, say, $10,000 annually, the savings would be in the tens of billions each year.

4. Deterrence Effect

• The prospect of being sent to a tougher, foreign prison may act as a deterrent to repeat offenders, especially for those who have long relied on a lenient system.

5. Strategic Partnerships

• A program like this could foster stronger diplomatic or economic ties with partner nations.

Common Objections—and Responses

1. Human Rights Concerns
Yes, El Salvador's prisons are harsh—but we’re talking about people who violated every human right of their victims, often in the most violent and irreversible ways. Why should society continue to protect the comfort of those who destroyed lives?

2. Violation of Constitutional Rights
Over time, we've watered down the original intent of constitutional protections. In the late 1700s, murderers were often executed—their rights considered forfeited by the magnitude of their crime. Justice was retributive and swift. Today, we too often preserve the rights of the guilty while the victims are long forgotten. In that light, being sent to a prison in El Salvador could be seen as leniency compared to what justice once demanded.

3. Loss of Family Contact and Rehabilitation
Families of murder victims will never again see their loved ones—no visits, no letters, no calls. If the guilty lose visitation rights by being incarcerated abroad, it’s a consequence that mirrors the finality they imposed on others.

4. Public Outrage
Yes, there would be an outcry—especially from the left. But over time, outrage fades and financial benefit endures. As the nation grows economically stronger from reduced incarceration costs, even the most vocal critics may soften when they see lower taxes, improved infrastructure, or better-funded schools.

In short, this proposal challenges our comfort zone—but it also forces us to rethink justice. Are we more committed to protecting the rights of the violent... or honoring the memory and dignity of their victims?

Overall, to me, it seems like a really out-of-the-box idea (That is what you often get with Trump. He's a real thinker). It's a great idea.

If Salvadorans are smart they will charge a tariff for every prisoner they take in. $50K a year would surely help their economy.

 

[The Barbarian]

Trump has proposed sending certain violent offenders—murderers, rapists, and others guilty of heinous crimes—to serve their sentences in prisons abroad, such as in El Salvador. These individuals have stripped every civil liberty from their victims, often permanently. Yet some still insist on defending them and preserving their comforts, as if they were deserving of the same rights they so brutally denied others.

Turns out, due process is a right every American has. Even criminals. For which Trump should be grateful. As a convicted criminal felon,, he could otherwise have been shipped off to be imprisoned in El Salvador. Remember, the door swings both ways.

The first step in toward a fascist state is the determination that those considered criminals don't deserve basic human rights.

And no, saving money is not a valid reason to set the Constitution aside.

 

[The Barbarian]

What a brilliant idea. Get rid of all the criminals in your country.

That would remove Donald Trump, wouldn't it?

That would be great. I would love to have a country that stands against thieves, murderers and rapists.

That would be another justification for shipping Trump off to a Salvadoran prison. A court has already found that he committed sexual assault. You sure you want him gone?

Have you ever hated someone?

No, can't say I have. No one every did anything to me that would have corrupted me to that level. I see some people as despicable, but I pray for them. I hope Trump repents and asks God for forgiveness, even though he says he never does so. I even hope that Hitler repented before he died.

Get rid of the scum from your country and put them in another place.

There's that pesky Bill of Rights that interferes with your wishes. But Trump says he's working on a way around that.

 

[1Tonne]

That would remove Donald Trump, wouldn't it?

I normally don't interact with these types of threads because most people who interact on these threads have pretty extreme views. But because I was the original poster, I have stayed, and I have found that many people tend to let their imaginations run away. Not just a little, but their thought patterns exaggerate a lot. This amazes me because I would have thought that Christians would keep things in better perspective.
Going off your thought patterns, a J walker would go to jail.
So please keep things in perspective.

That would be another justification for shipping Trump off to a Salvadoran prison. A court has already found that he committed sexual assault. You sure you want him gone?

The Democrats have been making at least 1 new charge against Trump every day to get Trump in prison. That is ridiculous. They even tried to say he was in cahoots with Russia at one stage. LOL. And with the media there to help exaggerate things, it is no wonder everyone believes these things.
Many people do not believe this charge, as the democrats have tried every way under the sun to get him in prison.
If the Democrats weren't trying time and time again to get him in prison, then it may have been believable. But the circumstances behind the charge are highly doubtful to many. For example, the assault was back in 1995-96 in a shop changing room. Why did she not bring this up sooner? She could have made millions and had a very nice life. But she chose to stay silent until the time of his running for president, when the Democrats were making up all sorts of charges against him. This seems like a possible setup. Also, throughout Trump's entire life, the media have hounded him, but you are telling me he was still able to do this in a shop changing room.
The evidence that she had was that 2 friends recalled her telling them about it at the time. This is very, very weak evidence.

The case was a civil lawsuit, not a criminal prosecution, so the standard was “preponderance of evidence”, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” And she had 2 friends willing to testify. So, it was Trump's word against 3 people. So, she had the stronger case. If the case was "beyond a reasonable doubt" and not based on people's testimony from decades ago, then it would have more credibility.

I bet you that tomorrow, he will have another court case against him. Then the following day will be another.

 

[Fantine]

I normally don't interact with these types of threads because most people who interact on these threads have pretty extreme views. But because I was the original poster, I have stayed, and I have found that many people tend to let their imaginations run away. Not just a little, but their thought patterns exaggerate a lot. This amazes me because I would have thought that Christians would keep things in better perspective.
Going off your thought patterns, a J walker would go to jail.
So please keep things in perspective.

The Democrats have been making at least 1 new charge against Trump every day to get Trump in prison. That is ridiculous. They even tried to say he was in cahoots with Russia at one stage. LOL. And with the media there to help exaggerate things, it is no wonder everyone believes these things.
Many people do not believe this charge, as the democrats have tried every way under the sun to get him in prison.
If the Democrats weren't trying time and time again to get him in prison, then it may have been believable. But the circumstances behind the charge are highly doubtful to many. For example, the assault was back in 1995-96 in a shop changing room. Why did she not bring this up sooner? She could have made millions and had a very nice life. But she chose to stay silent until the time of his running for president, when the Democrats were making up all sorts of charges against him. This seems like a possible setup. Also, throughout Trump's entire life, the media have hounded him, but you are telling me he was still able to do this in a shop changing room.
The evidence that she had was that 2 friends recalled her telling them about it at the time. This is very, very weak evidence.

The case was a civil lawsuit, not a criminal prosecution, so the standard was “preponderance of evidence”, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” And she had 2 friends willing to testify. So, it was Trump's word against 3 people. So, she had the stronger case. If the case was "beyond a reasonable doubt" and not based on people's testimony from decades ago, then it would have more credibility.

I bet you that tomorrow, he will have anot,her court case against him. Then the following day will be another.

It seems obvious that you are in denial about the numerous crimes and tax fraud committed by the president. Immunity does not mean "innocence." As a matter of fact, when he is no longer president, because the charges were dismissed without prejudice, the cases can be reintroduced. Of course, considering the first 100 days, there will be numerous other more recent crimes that he could be charged with in 2029.

It is never ridiculous to enforce U.S. law. Someone who should command the public's trust (how poorly that speaks of the 49.9% of Americans who--despite boatloads of evidence to the contrary--believe he is trustworthy) should be even more accountable for his crimes.

For example, stories of pedophile priests invoke shock and even apostasy and yet as an older adult I have had a number of friends share stories of molestation by relatives when they were children, and most of the time the victim is left to deal with the emotional scars as an adult.

In this analogy the "wannabe Pope" plays the role of the priest. We should be able to trust that the country is his first priority and that the Constitution be upheld. We should be able to trust him as much as, or more than, our relatives.

Since you have not accepted the reality of the president's convictions and $500 million in tax fraud judgments being just and fair, we really have no more to discuss.

 

[The Barbarian]

1Tonne said:
What a brilliant idea. Get rid of all the criminals in your country.

That would remove Donald Trump, wouldn't it? He's a convicted criminal and has been found by a court to have sexually assaulted a woman.

I normally don't interact with these types of threads because most people who interact on these threads have pretty extreme views.

Someone even advocated deporting American citizens without due process. Usually that's what we see from Russian trolls, but also others from time to time.

This amazes me because I would have thought that Christians would keep things in better perspective.

Christians usually consider fraud, theft, and sexual assault to be despicable things. But maybe not every one of them.

The Democrats have been making at least 1 new charge against Trump every day to get Trump in prison.

Comes down to evidence. Two different courts have found that he committed sexual assault, and one has found that he committed fraud.

The case was a civil lawsuit, not a criminal prosecution, so the standard was “preponderance of evidence”, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The fact that he was caught on an microphone he thought was dead, bragging about getting away with sexual assault probably made it hard to believe his later denials.

I bet you that tomorrow, he will have another court case against him. Then the following day will be another.

For example, the black men he libeled by falsely accusing them of sexual assault are now suing him. He's going to lose that one, too.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I think the MSM seems more biased now because it's not as if we have a president who.is even remotely presidential. Former aide John Bolton was the one, I believe, who called him "the most dangerous man on the planet." The sad part is how many staunch Republicans have said similar things--and every single one is correct.
When Trump dominates the news cycle, any objective media would seem biased, but they are just doing their jobs.

Why are you taking Neocon death worshippers like John Bolton seriously?

 

[High Fidelity]

Why wouldn’t we criticise politicians for wrongdoing?

I support some of the things Trump has done or encouraged, but I’m critical of others. That, in my opinion, is simply a balanced and consistent approach.

No one is perfect, especially politicians.

 

[1Tonne]

It seems obvious that you are in denial about the numerous crimes and tax fraud committed by the president.

No, I am not in denial. I just do not know what to believe. So far, within his first 100 days of office, he has had over 200 lawsuits. With this many people attacking, there have to be many that are false. And some of those false ones may get through. Especially when the decision is made on a preponderance of evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt. Such as the sexual assault case.
So, I prefer not to say someone is guilty of those crimes, especially when the evidence is not solid at all. And this is what this thread is about.
Do we go around saying these bad things about politicians when there is no solid evidence, or the media has exaggerated it?

That would remove Donald Trump, wouldn't it? He's a convicted criminal and has been found by a court to have sexually assaulted a woman.

Sorry. I was using hyperbolic speech. Something many people seem not to understand. So, he would get rid of all long-term prisoners. Murders, rapists etc.

Someone even advocated deporting American citizens without due process. Usually that's what we see from Russian trolls, but also others from time to time.

And some even endorse giving murders and rapist rights. They even allow them to have nice air-conditioned rooms, with TV's in them and access to fully kitted out gyms and many other luxuries. All this while the victim gets nothing.

Christians usually consider fraud, theft, and sexual assault to be despicable things. But maybe not every one of them.

I perfer to use discernment and not accept everything that is said. Many of you people commenting would have said silly stuff like "Trump is going to blow up the world", "He is going to cause WW3". If I believed these comments, then I would have made myself a bunker by now. But I know that there are extremists on both sides.

Why wouldn’t we criticise politicians for wrongdoing?

We can criticise with wisdom. But we need to be careful that what we are saying is true and not simply an exaggeration put out by the media or the opposition.

I support some of the things Trump has done or encouraged, but I’m critical of others. That, in my opinion, is simply a balanced and consistent approach.

No one is perfect, especially politicians.

And that is exactly my point. We need to be balanced. Though this is hard considering everything that the Democrats are throwing at him. Not to mention all the comments by people with "Trump Derangement Syndrome". So, what is true and what is not? Often, I prefer to stay on the fence.
Personally, I prefer to watch the Press Briefings to get information. Then once I have seen that, I go to other outlets.

 

[The Barbarian]

No, I am not in denial. I just do not know what to believe.

He went on trial and a court found him guilty of numerous felonies. He settled out of court on a lawsuit for defrauding people in his fake "Trump University" scam. He boasted about getting away with sexual assault, and a court found that he did it. Takes a lot of denial to dodge that.

That would remove Donald Trump, wouldn't it? He's a convicted criminal and has been found by a court to have sexually assaulted a woman.

Sorry. I was using hyperbolic speech.

We're talking about the real world. Deporting criminals and rapists would require Trump to be deported.

And some even endorse giving murders and rapist rights.

It's that Bill of Rights again. Even criminals have certain rights. Trump, for example, can appeal his conviction or the court finding that he committed sexual assault, although it would be unlikely to succeed. And we can't just deport him. At least not legally.

I perfer to use discernment and not accept everything that is said.

That's what due process is for. Trump got due process. He's a convicted criminal. But he still has rights. Trump now proposes to take that from people he doesn't like.

Not to mention all the comments by people with "Trump Derangement Syndrome".

Trump does sometime seem out of touch with reality, but "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is not a real diagnosis. Some on the extreme right have tried to invert the meaning and use it as a synonym for "people who don't like Donald Trump."

 

[1Tonne]

Deporting criminals and rapists would require Trump to be deported.

Exactly the type of comments I mean. People need to put a filter on their mouths if they do not know what they are talking about. Trump just won a defamation case against ABC news for making such statements.

As believers we need to be responsible for what comes out.

It's that Bill of Rights again. Even criminals have certain rights.

They didn't have rights when the Constitution was written. But over time, people have watered this down. So, Trump is simply reinstating what the forefathers understood.

That's what due process is for. Trump got due process. He's a convicted criminal. But he still has rights. Trump now proposes to take that from people he doesn't like.

Once again, it is not just about the justice system. It is about people saying silly stuff like he is going to blow the world up or create WW3

Trump does sometime seem out of touch with reality, but "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is not a real diagnosis. Some on the extreme right have tried to invert the meaning and use it as a synonym for "people who don't like Donald Trump."

Seems pretty evident on this thread.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

So here’s the heart of the matter for me:
1. When does it become our responsibility to discern truth for ourselves and stop blindly trusting what we’re told,- whether that message is for or against a leader?
2. And if the media we're listening to is constantly negative about a leader, at what point do we become responsible for spreading lies, slander or gossip?

If you can do the same thing towards Democrats that you do towards Republicans, that's at least consistent and not hypocritical.

Keeping a level head and asking the hard questions like "why do I act differently when I don't like the leaders?" is really important, and a game changer.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Exactly the type of comments I mean. People need to put a filter on their mouths if they do not know what they are talking about.

Ideally yea. But he is the role model for filterless nonsense. But that is the age we live in: post truth.
And few people care. We can find some source that supports our wildest beliefs.

Few people have the humility to admit they are wrong. Instead we double down.
But who can blame us? Sometimes it is very difficult to find the truth.

 

[jacks]

And that is exactly my point. We need to be balanced.

Agreed, but as I think you're finding out having a rational discussion about Trump is as difficult as a camel going through the eye of a needle.

 

[The Barbarian]

Deporting criminals and rapists would require Trump to be deported.

Exactly the type of comments I mean.

Yep. He's remarkably dense about how those things reflect on him. But as you know, he doesn't think much. He claims that windmills cause cancer, for example.

People need to put a filter on their mouths if they do not know what they are talking about.

He seems incapable of controlling his mouth. He also throws tantrums when the courts tell him that people he hates still have rights.

It's that Bill of Rights again. Even criminals like Trump have certain rights.

They didn't have rights when the Constitution was written.

The Constitution was ratified with the agreement that a bill of rights would be added.
Why did the Constitutional Convention agree to a Bill of Rights?
Jefferson Sees Bill of Rights as Curb on Executive and Legislative Branches of Government. Thomas Jefferson was a strong supporter of supplementing the Constitution with a bill of rights. Jefferson thought they would give an independent judiciary the means to curb any “tyranny” of the executive or legislative branches.


They probably don't teach that in Russia.

So, Trump is simply reinstating what the forefathers understood.

And now you know better. That's what due process is for. Trump got due process. He's a convicted criminal. But he still has rights. Trump now proposes to take that from people he doesn't like.

Once again, it is not just about the justice system.

It's exactly about the justice system. Constitution, due process.

Trump does sometime seem out of touch with reality, but "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is not a real diagnosis.

Seems pretty evident on this thread.

Maybe so. That windmills thing is far from the only bizarre fixation he has.