Yeah, Paul Rosenzweig and his liberal pals at the Heritage Foundation.
Marisa Maleck and those socialists at the Federalist Society.
Yes, yes, yes, but are their lips glued to Trump's shoes? No? Well then they are obviously liberals!!!!
Upvote
0
Yeah, Paul Rosenzweig and his liberal pals at the Heritage Foundation.
Marisa Maleck and those socialists at the Federalist Society.
When I say the Russia thing turned out to be a dud doesn't mean to say that I believe Russia or other countries in the world don't seek to influence a U.S. election. It's meant to say what Muller said that he concluded there was no evidence to press charges against the President.
I guess if there was no good explanation for who the facts at hand don't implicate Donald, might as well try making up some stuff about the source of them.While the whistle blower has ties to one of the Demo candidates.
That's great, except the Mueller report never said that.It's meant to say what Muller said that he concluded there was no evidence to press charges against the President.
{snip}Again a charge with no REAL proof to back that up. You even admitted later on in your post, "Yes, we don't know the heart of Trump."
This is legit a terrific post but I mean I think for a lot of Trump supporters the only standard for deciding that somebody is a conservative is if he / she has unwavering devotion & sycophancy to Donald Trump. That's it.
Hold it now. You've just basically revealed what the scripture says about ALL who are outside of the Lord, meaning the real status of those not born again. That would include every person of every other political party. None of this means that such individuals don't have a capacity to have right motives and intentions in anything they do.According to scripture, we can know what is in the heart of a man.
"You will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:16).
"Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matthew 12:34).
A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of" (Lk. 6:45).
From out of the abundance of his heart, Trump speaks and the vile spews out of his mouth like an overflowing river: slandering people, insulting people, mocking people, using profanity, taking God's name in vain, bearing false witness, and a lying tongue. He is known by the fruits he bears, like hatred, discord, jealousy, FITS OF RAGE, and selfish ambition (Galatians 5:19-21). Do the Fruits of the Spirit describe the kind of person he is? Does he demonstrate love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control in his life or does he demonstrate the works of the flesh?
Id say if these writers were "true conservatives" they would know and appreciate that the country has been through the ringer the last few years hearing of Russia! Russia! and it all turned out to be dud.
1) In a July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine – a summary of which has been released by the White House – the president requested “a favor” in the context of a discussion of Ukrainian security matters. Specifically, immediately after President Zelensky thanked the president “in the area of defense” and indicated a readiness to buy additional armaments consistent with a U.S. defense proposal, President Trump asked for “a favor.” The favor was to investigate a baseless theory relating to the 2016 investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. election. The U.S. president further requested that the Ukrainian president coordinate the requested investigation with both his personal attorney and the Attorney General of the United States, presenting both a blurring of lines between personal legal representation and official U.S. government business, and, the appearance of inappropriate politicization of the Office of the Attorney General. He then requested, additionally, that the Ukrainian government look into allegations relating to his Democratic presidential opponent, Joe Biden, saying “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.”
In their own words.
Mission Statement - Checks and Balances
Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.”
We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.
This is legit a terrific post but I mean I think for a lot of Trump supporters the only standard for deciding that somebody is a conservative is if he / she has unwavering devotion & sycophancy to Donald Trump.
Tell me, how was the Mueller investigation a failure and how was it the Dem's? That investigation, initiated by a Republican DOJ with a Republican in charge found that Russia clearly did interfere with our 2016 election in favor of Donald.What's clearly obvious is the Dems were desperate in trying to push every button and pull ever lever to cover up their great failure
I'd say there's different ways of defining if one is truly a conservative. When one sees the reality on the ground is there are no conservatives who'll be candidates for the next Presidential election and they allow the election to be taken away by a total non-conservative than conservative values truly wouldn't have meant too much to them. Many pondered in the early days how Trump would govern...say what one will many may not like his style but he has at least went along the direction of conservative values when it's come to policies and he's attempted to keep his promises.
In their own words.
Mission Statement - Checks and Balances
Mission Statement
We are a group of attorneys who would traditionally be considered conservative or libertarian. We believe in the rule of law, the power of truth, the independence of the criminal justice system, the imperative of individual rights, and the necessity of civil discourse. We believe these principles apply regardless of the party or persons in power. We believe in “a government of laws, not of men.”
We believe in the Constitution. We believe in free speech, a free press, separation of powers, and limited government. We have faith in the resiliency of the American experiment. We seek to provide a voice and a network for like-minded attorneys to discuss these ideas, and we hope that they will join with us to stand up for these principles.
He's just using the same definitions Trump uses
Anyone who supports Trump: good, the best, conservative, maga
Anyone who is opposed to Trump: enemy of the people, fake, librul, traitor, impeach,
I'd say there's different ways of defining if one is truly a conservative. When one sees the reality on the ground is there are no conservatives who'll be candidates for the next Presidential election and they allow the election to be taken away by a total non-conservative than conservative values truly wouldn't have meant too much to them. Many pondered in the early days how Trump would govern...say what one will many may not like his style but he has at least went along the direction of conservative values when it's come to policies and he's attempted to keep his promises.
Oh sure, but it seems that many of them don't believe that. They still think they're hewing to some traditional notion of conservatism.
Really? It's become clear he did what he did for personal political objectives? Just a load of hogwash. There's nothing that could be said to be clear about such at all.
The writers of this can't consider there's more reasons than one to go a certain direction? How about getting to the bottom of what happened in 2016 which has nothing to do with 2020?
Or that's the sole responsibility of the DOJ? Really? And what of Presidents or leaders of any kind that would demand the request come from the actual leader himself?
So a leader like Trump the President doesn't even have a place in investigating how are foreign entities may have worked in cahoots with Americans to compromise the electoral process of the United States?
Point: Wanting to ensure the electoral process is safe is just as sound a reason for Trump to do what he did as it could be he did it for personal reasons.
Seeing these writers DON'T KNOW the heart and motives of a man regardless of their claims that they do the President rightly deserves the benefit of the doubt. They can't just make declarations certain things are facts.
Sure, there’s more to be discovered, but there are some facts known to us or available to us. Trump could have abused his power and position as President but to determine that requires an investigation. If it is shown there is no factual basis to reasonably believe the Biden’s committed a crime and facts develop to show Trump was seeking dirt on a potential opponent or tarnish him with the prospect of an investigation, and used military funding as leverage to that end whereas Congress had already appropriated the money, then he needs to go.
The link below provides a decent view of the president’s power to investigate and its possible abuses.
Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? - POLITICO Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival? — POLITICO
I think the Politico article misses two issues.
Yes, eventually the investigation likely would involve Ukraine, such as how Hunter Biden was hired by Burisma -- but that would logically come after investigating things I mentioned above, the finances of both Bidens, etc -- investigations done in the US. And we have the treaty to get those investigations done without the president being involved and needing to ask a "favor" of a foreign government.
One last point, the timing also makes it suspect. The alleged corruption being investigated was from 2016. The video that is being used to claim Biden fired the prosecutor for personal reasons was from January, 2018. So why, over a year later and only after Biden is a front runner to be the Democratic front runner, is this issue important enough for a US President to ask a favor? If this was really a concern, shouldn't this have been done at last a year previously?
Granted, we'll see what the investigation finds and if the President ever cooperates. At the same time, to me, there are clear signs of abuse of power with how Trump seemingly was wanting to keep this as a "private" (personal) investigation and not one done by the US government.
First, that President Trump, in asking the Ukraine to investigate Biden, never had a DoJ investigation started. While he did talk about Barr calling to follow up, Trump then never asked Barr to call, much less to open an investigation into the Bidens. Now, I've seen it argued that Trump "forgot" but that ignores the fact he "remembered" to talk to Giuliani and have him in Ukraine doing an investigation privately, not connected to the US government -- and not being sent as a US government envoy (Giuliani is on record stating he was there as a "private citizen." This would appear to provide evidence that Trump was doing this for personal (campaign) reasons and not as an actual investigation if Biden was corrupt.
Next, there is the fact that many of the facts that Trump wanted require a US investigation, not one in the Ukraine. For example, the defense of Biden is clearly that he was acting in his role as VP, as an envoy of the US government, when he fired the prosecutor, that it was not being done for personal reasons. As such, the evidence for that would be found in various government documents about the loan, and any conditions the government wanted for that loan.
The potential corruption Trump is obsessed with occurred in Ukraine. Hence, it makes sense he would ask Ukrainian authorities to investigate and would also explain why Barr was never told or opened such an investigation. Trump not advising Barr he asked Ukraine authorities to investigate possible corruption involving or committed by the Biden’s in Ukraine, which involved the termination of a prosecutor, doesn’t show Trump’s request was for personal, political reasons. Trump limited his request to those authorities with immediate jurisdiction of the alleged corruption, Ukrainian authorities.
Well, I do not know how many facts of corruption Trump asked Ukrainian authorities to investigate in Ukraine, require a U.S. investigation, and your post certainly doesn’t put forth any effort showing the plethora of facts are state side. Some of your facts, though, aren’t facts.
Biden didn’t fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. He pressured Ukraine to terminate Shokin by withholding aid. He was physically present Ukraine when he delivered his ultimatum. Second, Trump is alleging Biden demanded Shokin’s termination because the company, Burisma, a company located in Ukraine, was under investigation by Shokin and Hunter Biden sat on its board. Understanbly, facts are going to exist and be found in Ukraine, although I’m not sure how many or how little, but your post doesn’t establish where “many” of them exist at all.
None of what I’ve said should be understood as a defense of Trump. If these facts paint a picture of abuse of power, then he should be impeached and convicted by the Senate.