President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Events occurring and how they relate/affect Anabaptist faith and culture.

POLL: What do you think about the Trump presidency so far?

 
Total votes: 0

User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Josh »

Russia Russia Russia
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

hillperson wrote:All I'm asking Boot that you give room for those who like Trump and not paint them as horrible Christians...
As I said, I know very good Christians who voted for Trump. And from what I've seen here, I respect you as a Christian.

When I talk about Donald Trump, I am not talking about you. And I think it's really, really important that we not dissolve into angry political factions who hate and disrespect each other.
hillperson wrote:Trump has rough edges but if you could vote for someone like Clinton you need to have plenty of grace for those who support Trump because she has so many shady areas in her political career.
I don't think anyone had great choices in the last election. I don't judge people for voting for Trump.

But for what it's worth, "rough edges" is not what concerns me about Trump.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:And Trump is probably the first president in history to be under investigation by the CIA and the FBI on his first day of office because of things he did during his campaign.
And the other candidate was investigated by biased members of the FBI before the election.
The results of that investigation hurt her badly, and may well have tipped the election. They said she was extremely careless in her handling of classified information - and that's bad. But they did not find criminal wrongdoing.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
Donald Trump's response was to lead angry crowds to chant "lock her up!", promising to put her in jail. In a democracy, the rule of law is essential. A big part of that is respecting the courts, the FBI, the Department of Justice, etc. and letting them do their job. Are you paying attention to the Russian elections, where Putin can jail his political rival to get him out of the way and rule him ineligible to run for election? That's not what we want here.

That's the problem with Trump's attacks on judges, Mueller, and the Department of Justice, and his utter disrespect for all legal process. We absolutely need a fair process where the president cannot stop investigations into his own wrongdoing. We also need leaders who respect the rule of law and do not promise to jail their political opponents if they disagree with the findings of an investigation. The constitution does not allow the president to jail whoever he wants. The constitution does not prevent the president from being investigated.
Robert wrote:It really is time to drain the swamp.
Starting with the president himself. But that should be done in an orderly way too, through the investigations, and not angry mobs or trial by media. Over time, we will know.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

Josh wrote:Russia Russia Russia
The 2017 National Security Strategy sees Russia as a real threat to democracy.
A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation.
The 2017 National Defense Strategy says Russia is the second biggest threat:
Russia seeks veto authority over nations on its periphery in terms of their governmental,
economic, and diplomatic decisions, to shatter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and change European and Middle East security and economic structures to its favor. The use of emerging technologies to discredit and subvert democratic processes in Georgia, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine is concern enough, but when coupled with its expanding and modernizing nuclear arsenal the challenge is clear.
If that's true then we need to investigate carefully if it looks like they have been trying to influence American and Western European elections. Neither of these documents mentions American elections - they were both produced by the Trump Administration, after all - but everyone who has investigated so far says that they did a number of things to attempt to influence or discredit our elections too, and also elections in Western Europe. That's why Russia is important.

And Trump's relationship to Russian oligarchs and politicians is at least interesting enough to be investigated. He has many connections to Russian oligarchs who are close to Putin, he has consistently tried to cover up for them, denying that they interfered in the election at all despite what the CIA, FBI, Congress, members of his own administration, and foreign allies are telling him, his campaign staff attended a meeting at which the Russian ambassador promised to help them and denied doing so, after that Donald Trump publicly called for the Russians to hack Hillary Clinton's email days before the DNC hack, and there are apparently a number of suspicious financial transactions that may be relevant. I don't know if he is guilty or not, but I do think there's enough smoke that someone should look to see if there is a fire. After all, if the Russians are trying to use "emerging technologies to discredit and subvert democratic processes", and there's even a possibility that our own leaders conspired with the Russians to do so, wouldn't you want to know?

An investigation is just that, you don't have to prove that someone is guilty to investigate them, you start by investigating to see if there is something that should be brought to trial (or impeachment proceedings), then you have a trial. Clinton's emails deserved an investigation, and so does this.

We aren't doing that investigation, and we don't know what they know. Eventually, we will see reports that outline this information, at least the part that is not classified. But you don't hold investigations because you know that someone is guilty, you hold investigations when you know there is a crime and you want to know who was involved. Clearly, Russian interference in our elections is a serious threat to our democracy.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
haithabu
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 6:11 pm
Location: Calgary
Affiliation: Missionary Church

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by haithabu »

Boot I have some points of disagreement with your description of the situation but setting that aside, consider this:

Could the Russians do anything more to destabilize American democracy than to feed disinformation so as to create disorder and distrust in the American political system as is the case now?

Could it be that the Mueller investigation is not part of the cure but rather part of the sickness?
0 x
User avatar
Dan Z
Posts: 2651
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:20 am
Location: Central Minnesota
Affiliation: Conservative Menno

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Dan Z »

haithabu wrote:Boot I have some points of disagreement with your description of the situation but setting that aside, consider this:

Could the Russians do anything more to destabilize American democracy than to feed disinformation so as to create disorder and distrust in the American political system as is the case now?

Could it be that the Mueller investigation is not part of the cure but rather part of the sickness?
This is a good point. The Muller investigation hangs over this administration like a dark cloud - and it is both destabilizing and works against democratic progress (something I'm sure Russia is thrilled with).

It's a lot to ask for, but I think it would be best for the country if the investigation would wrap up quickly, and folks on both sides would accept the results - whatever they are.
  • If the president is exonerated, then so be it - move on and don't look back. Let him do is job as duly elected leader.
  • If the infractions are minor and insignificant on Trump's part - again, let's put this whole thing in the rear view mirror. Slap him on the wrist and go forward.
  • If it is proven that Trump has done serious wrong, let him step aside (or be removed if guilty) and let the country move forward under president Pence.
I don't think either prejudgment of the president or preemptive discrediting of the Muller investigation are helpful. Both are obviously disingenuous and partisan positioning at this point.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

haithabu wrote:Boot I have some points of disagreement with your description of the situation but setting that aside, consider this:

Could the Russians do anything more to destabilize American democracy than to feed disinformation so as to create disorder and distrust in the American political system as is the case now?

Could it be that the Mueller investigation is not part of the cure but rather part of the sickness?
Whenever someone is investigated, that's a danger. And remember that Republicans and Democrats agreed that Mueller was an excellent man for the job, go back and read what Republicans said about him then. Remember also that he was appointed after Trump fired Comey.

And Mueller can't fire the president, he can only do an investigation and write a report that will make a recommendation. From then on, it's up to Congress - and a Congress where both houses are run by the Republicans. They will have every chance to look at the evidence and challenge it, and I assume that Republicans will be motivated to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Let's take a look at the Constitution:
§ 2, Clause 5: The House of Representatives . . . have the sole Power of Impeachment.



§ 3, Clause 6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.



§ 3, Clause 7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
But Trump has been trying to shut down the investigation, threatening and bullying people like Comey, Rosenstein, and now Mueller, and insisting that he has the right to control it. For instance, he announced he could fire Mueller if he investigates his finances - how can anybody investigate this kind of thing without "following the money"? Money is one of the primary forms of evidence in any conspiracy investigation.

And for those of us who vividly remember Watergate, Nixon pretty much sealed his fate when he fired Archibald Cox.
Nixon ordered Richardson to fire Cox over the prosecutor’s subpoena of White House tapes. Richardson resigned rather than carry out the order. The next in line, William Ruckelshaus, refused to fire Cox and was himself fired.

That left Bork, whose main job was arguing in front of the Supreme Court and who also was the third-ranking Justice Department official. Bork says his initial inclination was to fire Cox and then resign so as not to be seen as a White House toady. He says Richardson and Ruckelshaus encouraged him to stay on for the good of the Justice Department.
One thing we didn't know back then:
Robert Bork says President Richard Nixon promised him the next Supreme Court vacancy after Bork complied with Nixon’s order to fire Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox in 1973.

Bork’s recollection of his role in the Saturday Night Massacre that culminated in Cox’s firing is at the center of his slim memoir, “Saving Justice,” that is being published posthumously by Encounter Books. Bork died in December at age 85.
So I don't think we should sit back and let Nixon fire Richardson, then Ruckelshaus, then Cox. The DOJ and FBI should be allowed to do their investigation and produce a report with their recommendations. After that, Congress gets to decide what to do with it.

We should not judge the outcome, but we should let the process work. We don't know if Trump is guilty, but we do know that he is under investigation, and if we want to drain the swamp, the person who is being investigated doesn't get to control the investigation.
Last edited by Bootstrap on Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

Dan Z wrote:This is a good point. The Muller investigation hangs over this administration like a dark cloud - and it is both destabilizing and works against democratic progress (something I'm sure Russia is thrilled with).

It's a lot to ask for, but I think it would be best for the country if the investigation would wrap up quickly, and folks on both sides would accept the results - whatever they are.
  • If the president is exonerated, then so be it - move on and don't look back. Let him do is job as duly elected leader.
  • If the infractions are minor and insignificant on Trump's part - again, let's put this whole thing in the rear view mirror. Slap him on the wrist and go forward.
  • If it is proven that Trump has done serious wrong, let him step aside (or be removed if guilty) and let the country move forward under president Pence.
I don't think either prejudgment of the president or preemptive discrediting of the Muller investigation are helpful. Both are obviously disingenuous and partisan positioning at this point.
Exactly. Very well said.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Josh »

Good grief. Bork?

Can you guys ever let anything go?
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: President Trump: A MennoNet Poll

Post by Bootstrap »

Josh wrote:Good grief. Bork?

Can you guys ever let anything go?
Josh, could you please stop this whole "you guys" thing? I supported Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court, I gather you did too. It sounds like Bork is an emotional issue for you, but I assume that's because his nomination was rejected. That's not what we are discussing in this thread. I feel like you keep responding by ignoring what I said, picking out some word or phrase, and using it as a red flag to tell people I am the wrong kind of person. I wish you would stop doing that. I don't demand that you reveal your voting record or paint you as a political extremist, and I try to respond to what you say, I wish you would return the favor.

I was writing about Nixon, who wanted to fire Archibald Cox when when Cox issued a subpoena of White House tapes. To me, that rhymes with Trump saying he would fire Mueller if Mueller investigated his finances in an investigation where financial transactions may well be the most important kind of evidence. Nixon used the same kind of power tactics to try to control the investigation that Trump is using now. The reason I used Bork's version of the story is that Bork was there and wrote a book telling us what happened. I trust Bork's account on this.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Post Reply