No kings ... including Jesus?

[Michie]

Did you see that a lot of people don’t want Donald Trump to be the king of America?

On October 18th, there were a lot of “No Kings” rallies around the country, decrying what the protesters say are authoritarian actions by President Trump, whom they claim acts more like a king than a president. One protester in San Francisco held a sign saying, “Hey Trump nobody paid us to be here. We all hate you for free.”

Nice. You can read the Babylon Bee’s list of things accomplished by people like that in the No Kings demonstrations here.

The vast majority of protesters were democrats and leftists (I do believe there is a distinction between the two), and, of course, there were jabs from the right about the rallies, with some calling it “democrat sulk day.” Naturally, those supporting the “No Kings” rallies deny that and say they are simply against the despotic actions of any president who crosses the line of democracy.

Am I the only one calling baloney on that?

Continued below.

No kings ... including Jesus?

Did you see that a lot of people don t want Donald Trump to be the king of America

www.christianpost.com

 

[Clare73]

Did you see that a lot of people don’t want Donald Trump to be the king of America?
On October 18th, there were a lot of “No Kings” rallies around the country, decrying what the protesters say are authoritarian actions by President Trump, whom they claim acts more like a king than a president. One protester in San Francisco held a sign saying, “Hey Trump nobody paid us to be here. We all hate you for free.”
Nice. You can read the Babylon Bee’s list of things accomplished by people like that in the No Kings demonstrations here.

The vast majority of protesters were democrats and leftists (I do believe there is a distinction between the two), and, of course, there were jabs from the right about the rallies, with some calling it “democrat sulk day.” Naturally, those supporting the “No Kings” rallies deny that and say they are simply against the despotic actions of any president who crosses the line of democracy.

Am I the only one calling baloney on that?

They're all sounding brass and tinkling cymbal. . .just noise.
Since the plurality of the voters did not agree with them, all they can do is try to obstruct.
They don't really care what the plurality of the voters want.
They just want power for themselves.

If what Trump is doing is illegal, they can take him to Court.
That they do not, or that they don't prevail in Court is the proof of their fake pudding.
They've simply met more than their match. . .are having a juvenile tantrum about it in the public square. . .and are too blind to see that their disagreement with the plurality of voters is simply exiling them to the wilderness.

 

[rebornfree]

Looking from across the Pond, it seems that Trump is behaving like an autocrat, so I have some sympathy with the protesters. I find it a bit ironic that you threw off our king (not that I blame you for rejecting colonialism) to end up with a President who has much more power than any current monarch in a Western democracy. I'm not sure how much the protesters are resenting authority because of a sinful nature. I think it is more likely that they are protesting about what they see as an abuse of power in a democracy.

That is a very different issue from refusing to live under the Kingship of Christ. When we accept Jesus as our Saviour we do so with our free will. We are born again into a loving relationship with Him and have the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as well as hope of Eternal Life. I would not compare that to earthly political situations, as the author has done, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

“Under three things the earth trembles, under four it cannot bear up:
a servant who becomes king, a godless fool who gets plenty to eat,
a contemptible woman who gets married, and a servant who displaces her mistress.
(Proverbs 30:21-23)

If a wise person goes to court with a fool, the fool rages and scoffs, and there is no peace.
(Proverbs 29:9)

 

[Vambram]

Looking from across the Pond, it seems that Trump is behaving like an autocrat, so I have some sympathy with the protesters. I find it a bit ironic that you threw off our king (not that I blame you for rejecting colonialism) to end up with a President who has much more power than any current monarch in a Western democracy. I'm not sure how much the protesters are resenting authority because of a sinful nature. I think it is more likely that they are protesting about what they see as an abuse of power in a democracy.

That is a very different issue from refusing to live under the Kingship of Christ. When we accept Jesus as our Saviour we do so with our free will. We are born again into a loving relationship with Him and have the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as well as hope of Eternal Life. I would not compare that to earthly political situations, as the author has done, but maybe I'm wrong.

President Trump is nowhere close to being a king or an autocratic president.

 

[Yarddog]

They're all sounding brass and tinkling cymbal. . .just noise.
Since the plurality of the voters did not agree with them, all they can do is try to obstruct.
They don't really care what the plurality of the voters want.
They just want power for themselves.

If what Trump is doing is illegal, they can take him to Court.
That they do not, or that they don't prevail in Court is the proof of their fake pudding.
They've simply met more than their match. . .are having a juvenile tantrum about it in the public square. . .and are too blind to see that their disagreement with the plurality of voters is simply exiling them to the wilderness.

Some have taken Trump to court and won. He only got some dropped because he won the election. Some will start up after he is out of office.

 

[Yarddog]

President Trump is nowhere close to being a king or an autocratic president.

No yet, but he's working on it.

 

[Vambram]

No yet, but he's working on it.

No. He is not.

 

[Yarddog]

No. He is not.

Most Americans disagree.

 

[Clare73]

Most Americans disagree.

It's not about most Americans, it's about the law.

 

[Yarddog]

It's not about most Americans, it's about the law.

True but the law is showing that he does not follow the law very well. His actions show that he believes that he is his own law. He shows disdain for Congress and the Courts. He acts as he wants to be an autocrat.

 

[Clare73]

True but the law is showing that he does not follow the law very well. His actions show that he believes that he is his own law. He shows disdain for Congress and the Courts. He acts as he wants to be an autocrat.

We have a remedy for law breakers. . .take them to Court, convict them of law breaking, and administer punishment.

Where are the convictions of these law breakers?

The inaction of the objectors shows their claims to be nothing more than sounding brass and tinkling cymbal; i.e., noise.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I read the article several times but still couldn't grasp the author's point.

I am a born-again Christian, and Jesus is my only king—the King of kings, one day every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess to him. However, I don't expect Jesus to be an earthly king, as expecting that would be un-biblical.

Based on my observations over the past few days following the “no king” protest, it appears that individuals on the right have frequently used or referenced the phrase “Jesus is the King.” This phrase does not seem to be directed at sharing the Gospel or bring others to Christ; rather, it appears that the term “Jesus is King” is being invoked to make a political statement.

Christians should use their faith in daily life, but it should honor God rather than serve as a political statement.

 

[Yarddog]

We have a remedy for law breakers. . .take them to Court, convict them of law breaking, and administer punishment.

We can't do that with President. Courts have stopped or tried to stop some of his illegal policies but they can't prosecute him.

Where are the convictions of these law breakers?

A few had to end because he was elected before they ended. He was convicted of 34 crimes and found guilty of sexual abuse.

The inaction of the objectors shows their claims to be nothing more than sounding brass and tinkling cymbal; i.e., noise.

Not quite. The no kings protests sound like a beautiful symphony.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Looking from across the Pond, it seems that Trump is behaving like an autocrat, so I have some sympathy with the protesters. I find it a bit ironic that you threw off our king (not that I blame you for rejecting colonialism) to end up with a President who has much more power than any current monarch in a Western democracy. I'm not sure how much the protesters are resenting authority because of a sinful nature. I think it is more likely that they are protesting about what they see as an abuse of power in a democracy.

That is a very different issue from refusing to live under the Kingship of Christ. When we accept Jesus as our Saviour we do so with our free will. We are born again into a loving relationship with Him and have the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as well as hope of Eternal Life. I would not compare that to earthly political situations, as the author has done, but maybe I'm wrong.

To date, President Trump has not been proven to break any US laws in court in last 10 months. His deployment of the National Guard is under scrutiny, but the Supreme Court's decision is pending.

However, he has departed from many norms that have traditionally been valued by Americans. His tweet suggesting who should be prosecuted by the DOJ does not violate any laws, but it differs notably from the actions of previous American presidents. His insistence that American businesses share some profits with the government is also not illegal, yet it represents a significant shift in policy direction. He tends to pursue approaches that have not been taken by his predecessors.

President Trump often uses provocative language deliberately, and even some of his most dedicated supporters wish he would focus more on implementing policy than expressing opinions on social media.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

No yet, but he's working on it.

He may be considering breaking the law, but until he does, he is innocent and he's fulfilling his duties as an elected official.

If he breaks the law and Democrats regain Congress, they could impeach him. Otherwise, this speculation is purely theoretical.

 

[Clare73]

We can't do that with President. Courts have stopped or tried to stop some of his illegal policies but they can't prosecute him.

Courts are able to rule on all law breaking.

Where are the Court rulings of such law breaking?

A few had to end because he was elected before they ended. He was convicted of 34 crimes and found guilty of sexual abuse.

It seems the voters had the last word on that unconvincing lawfare.

Don't you just love democracy?

 

[FreeinChrist]

Did you see that a lot of people don’t want Donald Trump to be the king of America?

On October 18th, there were a lot of “No Kings” rallies around the country, decrying what the protesters say are authoritarian actions by President Trump, whom they claim acts more like a king than a president. One protester in San Francisco held a sign saying, “Hey Trump nobody paid us to be here. We all hate you for free.”

Nice. You can read the Babylon Bee’s list of things accomplished by people like that in the No Kings demonstrate

Did you see that a lot of people don’t want Donald Trump to be the king of America?

On October 18th, there were a lot of “No Kings” rallies around the country, decrying what the protesters say are authoritarian actions by President Trump, whom they claim acts more like a king than a president. One protester in San Francisco held a sign saying, “Hey Trump nobody paid us to be here. We all hate you for free.”

Nice. You can read the Babylon Bee’s list of things accomplished by people like that in the No Kings demonstrations here.

The vast majority of protesters were democrats and leftists (I do believe there is a distinction between the two), and, of course, there were jabs from the right about the rallies, with some calling it “democrat sulk day.” Naturally, those supporting the “No Kings” rallies deny that and say they are simply against the despotic actions of any president who crosses the line of democracy.

Am I the only one calling baloney on that?

Continued below.

No kings ... including Jesus?

Did you see that a lot of people don t want Donald Trump to be the king of America

www.christianpost.com

The article is yet another example of why The Christian Post is not worth reading. I mean really - did you even see this line: "You can read the Babylon Bee’s list of things accomplished by people like that...." This site does not allow Babylon Bee articles as they are so often flaming, and are just parody. Yet this author finds it okay?


It is insulting to imply that just because one is a participant of a No Kings protest that they don't want Jesus as King either. As a committed Christian of 60+ years, it is sad that other Christians have to insult others. @Michie, do you read what you are posting? Is it okay to flame?


There is a long list of autocratic behavior by Trump. The behaviors came like a blitzkrieg (for lack of a better word) and the courts are moving slowly. For instance, Trump's federalization of the DC Metropolitan Police Department and his deployment of the National Guard to the nation’s capital and LA and Chicago is unprecedented. The only other times the National Guard has been called in is for widespread riots.

Trump is also picking people for jobs based on loyalty rather than capiblility. Hegepeth is an example of that. Most of his cabinet is inept from what I see. They serve the propaganda over the facts.

Then there is Trump's tariffs which is unilaterally doing. From AI:
Congressional authority and delegation

• Constitutional power:
  The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" and to regulate foreign commerce.
  
  
• Delegation to the President:
  Congress has passed laws that delegate some tariff-imposing authority to the President under specific conditions.
  
  
• Limitations:
  Legal experts emphasize that any presidential authority to impose tariffs is a delegation from Congress and not an inherent power of the presidency.

But Trump behaves like is an all powerful ruler in regards to tariffs, which is why it is creating financial stress in the US and elsewhere.

Another example of his autocratic behavior is demanding money from universities and colleges or demanding changes that he himself wants in order to get their funding. Universities are fighting back From:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/16/us/trump-universities-compact-funding

The battle for academic freedom and institutional sovereignty in higher education continues to play out as another university has rejected a White House offer for expanded access to federal funding in return for agreeing to a series of demands.​

​

On Monday, the University of Arizona declined an offer by the Trump administration to join a compact that would potentially give preferential funding in exchange for a list of changes to school policy, including no longer considering sex and ethnicity in admissions and capping international enrollment. The letter was sent to nine universities at the beginning of the month, and seven schools have rejected the offer so far.​

​

Brown university and Harvard are resisting Trump. There are examples of authoritarians forcing changes at universities as the autocrats power grew. Folks would be upset if I gave some specific examples.

Another example is how Trump is destroying the East wing and building a huge ballroom. When Roosevelt added the East Wing to the WH, he had congressional approval.
Did Trump bother? NOPE. Like a dictator, as if the WH is his personal property, he is proceeding with his plans. Did he get approval in any way for the changes? Nope.

Interesting fact AI: " Adolf Hitler had a large, extravagant ballroom added to the Old Reich Chancellery in Berlin in 1936."
Not saying that Trump is Hitler but it is interesting.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Courts are able to rule on all law breaking.

Where are the Court rulings of such law breaking?

It seems the voters gave their verdict on that unconvincing lawfare.

Don't you just love democracy?

per AI;

• Freezing federal grants:
  • In February, a federal judge blocked an executive order that froze nearly all federal grants, ruling that the President lacked the authority to withhold congressionally appropriated funds.
  • In March, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against the administration's plan to cap the indirect costs on National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, ensuring continued research funding.
• Terminating federal workers:
  • A federal judge blocked mass layoffs of probationary federal employees in February.
  • In October, a federal court extended a preliminary injunction preventing reductions-in-force (RIFs) for thousands of federal employees, citing "political retribution".
• 
  
• Birthright citizenship: A federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in February blocking an executive order that attempted to end birthright citizenship for children of non-citizens. The judge ruled the order was likely unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.
• 
  
• Targeting law firms: In March, a federal judge ruled that an executive order terminating government contracts with the Perkins Coie law firm was unlawful.

You might find this site useful -

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/projects-series/trials-of-the-trump-administration/tracking-trump-administration-litigation

This site is useful too:

Tracking the Lawsuits Against Trump’s Agenda

Follow the lawsuits and rulings that are challenging President Trump's executive orders.

www.nytimes.com

Trump has actually been stopped in many actions as time has gone on. Courts are rather slow.

 

[Michie]

I read what I posted @FreeinChrist. And as I’ve stated before, I don’t always agree with what I post from news sites. If readers take an opinion piece as an insult or flame then I think they are becoming a tad too sensitive. It’s the writer’s opinion. These topics are for discussion pro or con. Nothing more. I’ve read enough from poster’s own fingertips to know what an actual flame is. Along with the ridiculous tribalism that takes place in politics. You can call any particular source you do not like out. I’ve seen many sources posted here that were nothing but school yard bullying. Things are going to land different with different people. I’ve posted a lot of good articles from CP as well that have become good conversations but we all have our biases I guess. But yes, I read and take responsibility for what I post and you can handle it as you see fit. I’ve seen a lot worse.