DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump warns evangelicals of 'violence' if GOP loses in the midterms

lololololol omg....

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/28/politics/trump-evangelicals-midterms/index.html

President Donald Trump, facing scrutiny for hush money payments to a porn star and a former Playboy model, pleaded with evangelical leaders for political help during closed-door remarks on Monday, warning of dire consequences to their congregations should Republicans lose in November's midterm elections.

"This November 6 election is very much a referendum on not only me, it's a referendum on your religion, it's a referendum on free speech and the First Amendment. It's a referendum on so much," Trump told the assemblage of pastors and other Christian leaders gathered in the State Dining Room, according to a recording from people in the room.
"It's not a question of like or dislike, it's a question that they will overturn everything that we've done and they will do it quickly and violently. And violently. There is violence," Trump said, describing what would happen should his voters fail to cast ballots. "The level of hatred, the level of anger is very unbelievable."

Evangelicals have provided a solid block of support for Trump, even amid the scandals involving alleged sexual affairs. After news of those purported encounters emerged, his standing among white evangelicals did not slip. But inviting the leaders to the White House only days after the President was newly implicated by his longtime personal lawyer's guilty plea underscored the degree to which Trump is trying to keep his supporters on his side.
"You have to hopefully get out and get people to support us," Trump said. "If you don't, that will be the beginning of ending everything that you've gotten."
Trump will need to maintain that support if he hopes to help Republicans stay in power on Capitol Hill or win re-election himself in 2020. On Monday, he touted the steps he's taken to promote religious liberty, such as loosening restrictions on political speech from the pulpit, which previously could jeopardize religious institutions' tax-exempt status.
The remarks from an attendee's recording offered a more dire view of the upcoming vote than Trump has projected in public. He often trumpets an upcoming "red wave" of Republican victories, downplaying suggestions that Democrats are poised to exploit his divisiveness and retake the House or Senate.
Trump didn't mention a "red wave" on Monday, instead acknowledging that midterms often present new presidents with a turnout challenge.
"The polls might be good, but a lot of them say they are going to vote in 2020, but they're not going to vote if I'm not on a ballot," he said. "I think we're doing well, I think we're popular, but there's a real question as to whether people are going to vote if I'm not on the ballot. And I'm not on the ballot."
That's a problem Trump said the evangelical leaders could help solve by galvanizing their congregations and followers to vote.
"I just ask you to go out and make sure all of your people vote. Because if they don't -- it's November 6 -- if they don't vote, we're going to have a miserable two years and we're going to have, frankly, a very hard period of time," he said.
"You're one election away from losing everything that you've gotten," he added. "Little thing: Merry Christmas, right? You couldn't say 'Merry Christmas.' "

___________________

So a couple things:

1. i dont want to ever hear one conservative complain about ANYBODY playing identity politics. cause this right here is straight out the book on how to play identity politics.

2. i don't know what's worse; the fact that donald trump actually tried this, or the sad reality that the evangelicals actually believe him and will do as requested.

overall, this is a sad, sad situation. its so sad that all i can do is laugh.

all i know is this: as i said, and continue to say, we have way too many part time christians in this country. you're only christian when it suits your needs.

and by the way, i've never heard a president claim that violence will happen if his party loses.

thats new.

What would you have the Evangelicals do Swish? Vote for Pocahonas, Biden,Bernie the commie,Holder? The Libs have no agenda except they HATE TRUMP.

I wish we had a president that has a clue. What an ass.

Find their damn morality!

With the way liberals love to hate on Christians or religion in general(except muslims) Trump aint far from the truth. Then again even Trump can't stop the end of days that is destined to come.

Once again, he’s not really wrong he’s just a jerkoff. The hard left has been increasingly violent since Trump took office. This isn’t news.

I've stayed a little bit away from the evangelical debate But I can't do that anymore.

If Evangelicals are going to try to sway the elections one way or the other, then they need to lose their tax exempt status.

it's no longer about religion or god, it's about control...

some of the responses in this thread is hands down pathetic.

They pray at the alter of the almighty Trump. I’m no religious scholar but I’m pretty sure that’s a mortal sin for Christians. Enjoy!

‘Worst Year Yet’: The Top 50 Countries Where It’s Hardest to Be a Christian

Islamic extremism now has a rival, according to 2017 World Watch List.

Approximately 215 million Christians experience high, very high, or extreme persecution.

North Korea remains the most dangerous place to be a Christian (for 14 straight years).
Islamic extremism remains the global dominant driver of persecution, responsible for initiating oppression and conflict in 35 out of the 50 countries on the 2017 list.
Ethnic nationalism is fast becoming a major driver of persecution. “While this took an anti-establishment form in the West, in Asia it took an anti-minorities form, fueled by dramatic religious nationalism and government insecurity. It is common—and easy—for tottering governments to gain quick support by scapegoating Christians.”
The total number of persecution incidents in the top 50 most dangerous countries increased, revealing the persecution of Christians worldwide as a rising trend.

The most violent: Pakistan, which rose to No. 4 on the list for a level of violence “exceeding even northern Nigeria.”
The killings of Christians in Nigeria saw an increase of more than 62 percent.

The killings of Christians were more geographically dispersed than in most time periods studied. “Hitting closer to home, 23 Christian leaders in Mexico and four in Colombia were killed specifically for their faith,” said Open Doors of the “rare” event.

The worst increase: Mali, which moved up the most places on the list from No. 44 to No. 32.

Asia is a new center of concern, with persecution rising sharply in Bangladesh, Laos, and Bhutan, and Sri Lanka joining the list for the first time.​

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2...watch-list.html


(Christianity Today magazine is an evangelical Christian periodical that was founded in 1956 and is based in Carol Stream, Illinois. The Washington Post calls Christianity Today, "evangelicalism's flagship magazine", The New York Times describes it as a "mainstream evangelical magazine".)
-Wikipedia

I’m wondering how many of those Christian persecutions were carried out by Catholic priests.

J/C

So you have guys on this very board saying Antifa etc need to fight fire with fire - and violence is the answer, then when trump warns of the violence - someone that's alien concept ?

So I am litening to a repeat from this morning of NPR with Robert Jeffress, a pastor who was at the WH for the rally. And he is trying to explain the difference for the evangelicals now with an extremely tainted person like Trump and how they try to explain their support for trump and their disdain for Bill Clinton- aa man who they said when Clinton was president that they cannot have their children emulate a man who cheats on his wife. They said then that you can't compartmentalize morality, but now its ok
But he tries to explain that Hillary also had moral issues and this is not about Trump and his shortcomings-

they don't support the behavior, but as long as he keeps promoting Christian values and cutting on muslims and Mormons being the parisis of hell and cults they are ok.

Jeffress and the rest of the friggin hypocrites need to remember that there is no free lunch for their spiritual amnesia and that all principals are not negotiable at the right price

Loaded question without a Link .. not playing.

Yet I haven't heard of them killing people by running them over with cars. You know, some of those "good people".

Trump tried a new distraction attempt by claiming it was the Chinese who hacked Hillary.

Religion has had a strong influence on politics for thousands of years now. You're just becoming aware of it? Most people have varying degrees of faith but even those that don't usually have respect for the higher moral standard it requires to practice.

Also, while the organization might be tax free, the priests and all the people are not. Churches gained tax free exemption because most of them have a very strong and positive influence on the community since they are usually the first to help the needy and the poor. Other organizations that do the same kind of work get the same tax exempt status too and I for one think its great.

These places will ALWAYS have a strong influence on politics because their communities care a lot about preserving them and making sure they are around to continue their good works. Those churches that don't provide good works tend to wither up and die off so there is no real need to worry about dealing with them.

Religious people have the same right to be heard as everyone else. We have the same right to influence our representatives too because it's their JOB to represent the values and desires of the people who voted for them.

tax the pedo churches!!

No those you can just burn down for all I care.

I'm not going to say that Trump doesn't have support within this handpicked group or within the Christian community in general.. but I know 8-10 pastors and not a single one voted for, likes, or would vote for in the future... Donald Trump.

Some of them may vote for Republicans, I don't know, but whether they do or don't, it won't be because Trump told them to.. or some veiled threat of violence if they lose...

That great but do those 8-10 pastors have the level of influence that the guys who show up to trumps meetings all the time do?

The answer is most likely no.

Trump clarifies remarks about violence if Dems win midterms

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-war...--politics.html

Check out what some of those Christian leaders are trying to spin.

Once again, the straight shooter needs a bunch of people to explain what trump ‘really’ meant.

Even though we all knew exactly what he meant.

By that logic, Planned Parenthood should lose their tax exempt status too...and I will pre-emptively say that "separation of church and state" does not mean that people can't vote according to their religious convictions. It means that govennment can't establish a state religion or denomination or prohibit people from exercising religious liberty...period

Not sure how you equate Planned Parenthood with evangelicals which are religious orgainzations.

And I don't think I brought up the term Church and State. I didn't make that connection.

I was trying to think of the last time I saw planned parenthood run an ad or support one candidate over the other..

Could be that some individuals with PPH did, but not as an organization,, not that I can find.

Evangelicals are pouring it to the airwaves using their TV shows..

J/C

Some of the responses on this board are downright PATHETIC for sure

This is the type of violence Trump is inciting.

Encino man charged with threatening to shoot Boston Globe employees.....

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/0...y7RL/story.html

Encino man charged with threatening to shoot Boston Globe employees.....



'bout right.
One would have to be a Neanderthal to be influenced by that mental midget.

Trump allies fret over West Wing vacancies as threats loom

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-allies-fret-over-west-004233069.html

Increasingly convinced that the West Wing is wholly unprepared to handle the expected assault from Democrats if they win the House in November, President Donald Trump's aides and allies are privately raising alarm as his circle of legal and communications advisers continues to shrink.

With vacancies abounding in the White House and more departures on the horizon, there is growing concern among Trump allies that the brain drain at the center of the administration could hardly come at a more perilous time. Special counsel Robert Mueller's swirling probe of Russian election interference and potential obstruction of justice by Trump has reached ever closer to the Oval Office, and the upcoming midterm elections could grant his political adversaries the power of subpoena or, more worryingly, the votes to attempt impeachment.

Nine current and former White House staffers and administration allies expressed concerns Thursday that the West Wing is simply unprepared for the potential troubles ahead. They spoke on the condition of anonymity over concerns about estranging colleagues.

Attrition, job changes and firings have taken their toll across the White House, but their impact has been felt particularly in the communications and legal shops — two departments crucial to Trump staving off the looming threats. The upcoming departure of White House counsel Don McGahn has highlighted the challenges in an office that has shrunk by a third since last year.

McGahn's deputy and chief of staff, Annie Donaldson, is also expected to leave soon after McGahn departs, two staffers said. Similarly, the White House press office is down to four press secretaries working on day-to-day White House matters, including Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and the regional and Cabinet affairs media teams in the communications office have been hollowed out.

The staffing shortage and struggles to recruit top-flight talent have left the White House ill-prepared to handle the legal onslaught that may come when Mueller issues an expected report summarizing his findings and the flood of congressional investigations that could follow a Democratic takeover of the House.

Former Fox News executive Bill Shine, who joined the White House earlier this summer as communications director and deputy chief of staff, is looking to rebuild a shrunken media affairs team in anticipation of the challenges ahead.

Shine is said to be looking for seasoned communications professionals to handle both Mueller-related questions and congressional oversight requests.

"He's doing a lot of thinking about how to properly structure everything, not only for a Trump White House but for what the next couple of years will be like," said former White House press secretary Sean Spicer.

But like other White House departments, the effort to fill jobs is proving difficult. Qualified candidates are steering clear of the volatile West Wing, ignoring pleas from Shine and others to join the administration over fears to their reputation and even potential legal exposure, according to current and former officials and one candidate approached by the White House. Those people and others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations and conversations.

Others are wary of joining the team to defend the president, knowing full well he will often ignore their advice or could turn on them by tweet.

A White House official disputed that the administration has had difficulty filling positions with talented people.

Trump allies have long boasted that he was his own political consultant during the 2016 campaign and serves as his own communications director inside the White House, but they are increasingly cautioning him that he can't be his own attorney as well.

Indeed, his outside legal team reached out to some of Washington's most prominent attorneys, including Supreme Court litigator Ted Olson, before former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani — a longtime friend of the president whose erratic television interviews have defined his tenure — joined the team in April. Since then, Giuliani has been the primary public face of the defense team, along with Jay Sekulow, a lawyer specializing in constitutional law and religious liberties. A husband-wife duo, Martin and Jane Raskin, was also added to work behind the scenes.

At the same time, the president is more volatile than ever, creating new challenges for both his communication and legal teams.

Trump built his professional empire on a foundation of secrecy, enforced by fixers, lawyers, hush payments and non-disclosure agreements. Seeing that world collapse around him in recent weeks has yielded intense frustration in the president, who has angrily told confidants that he feels betrayed by a number of former allies, including attorney Michael Cohen and National Enquirer head David Pecker.

Trump has denounced the "sweetheart deal" received by Cohen, fumed about the overzealous prosecution of former campaign chair Paul Manafort and seethed over the pressure on Pecker to agree to an immunity deal, according to two Republicans close to the White House but not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations.

Trump signaled Thursday that he has settled on a successor for McGahn. "I am very excited about the person who will be taking the place of Don McGahn as White House Councel!" Trump tweeted Thursday. He sent a later tweet that spelled "counsel" correctly.

Trump also took a shot at reports that McGahn had threatened to resign last year if the president continued to press for Mueller's removal.

"I liked Don, but he was NOT responsible for me not firing Bob Mueller or Jeff Sessions. So much Fake Reporting and Fake News!" Trump said, referring as well to his attorney general, who recused himself from the investigation, much to the president's annoyance.

The widely expected pick to replace McGahn is White House is attorney Emmet Flood, who joined Trump's White House in May as in-house counsel for the Mueller probe and has McGahn's support in taking the role.

Praise for Flood, a veteran attorney who defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment process and represented George W. Bush in executive-privilege disputes with Congress, poured in Thursday.

"His reputation is stellar and he brings the requisite skillset and pretty much unmatched experience, having been in both the Bush and Clinton White Houses and now serving in President Trump's counsel's office," said Mark Corallo, a former spokesman for the president's outside legal team. "You couldn't ask for a more qualified and better-prepared attorney."

"I think Flood of all people seems to have clearly the experience that would be required if indeed it's needed," said Spicer.

If the Democrats win, Trump is expected to face not only possible impeachment hearings, but a bombardment of Congressional subpoenas, inquires and hearings that Democrats hope will hobble his administration, giving it little room to do much else.

"At that point," said Corallo, "the president's going to need some very skilled attorneys" — Constitutional scholars who are familiar with the past impeachments of Clinton and former President Andrew Johnson, have dozens of Supreme Court arguments under their belt, are highly respected and understand the mechanics and the politics of impeachment hearings.

But others were less concerned.

"Everybody wants to make sure he gets the best advice," former campaign adviser Barry Bennett said of the president. "But battling is something he's very good at, so he's got some home turf advantage."

Trump, too, dismissed the chatter in an interview Thursday with Bloomberg News.

"I don't think they can impeach somebody that's doing a great job," he said.

Planned parenthood gets money from the government, is a tax exempt organization, and backs liberal candidates and causes financially, while receiving money from the government and having tax exempt status.


Planned parenthood was just an example. I used them because they are a tax exempt organization. The point is, why are other tax exempt organization allowed to get involved in and influence politics but not evangelicals, according to you?

SO are you saying that tax exempt organizations should never be allowed to run ads in support of a candidate? Don't you think some of the money liberals get from Planned Parenthood goes toward ads

I see double standards...

BTW, these posts are not meant to endorse Trump or any candidates person or policies. I only care about the statement you made about evangelicals

Trump having so much support from evangelicals states your comment is a bold face lie.

This says it all- weak grammar and everything else.
"Um, yes, Mr. President... even if you were doing a great job, you can still be investigated for possibly being a criminal. (you ignorant, ignorant man...)"

Dude cannot differentiate between an actual legal proceeding and a subjective job performance review.

Still pizzed at Sessions because Beauregard knew the law and held himself to it. "Sessions won't protect me. Obama had Holder to protect him..." It's been explained to him COUNTLESS times that the AG represents the Justice Dept and White House Counsel represents The Office of the Presidency, not the person sitting in the chair.

He still doesn't get it. Moreover, he's still trying to tantrum/bully/manipulate circumstances to get his way, even if that way is insane, illegal, unethical and- impossible.




"Only the best."



The stupidest thing he ever did was insist on running for POTUS. As Public Official Number One, he'd be subject to the deepest, most microscopic scrutiny of anyone on the planet. In other words: he asked for this. Or at the very least, he should have known it was coming (did no one try to tell him?).

So when he and his supporters shout "witch hunt," it rings very hollow to me. Why? because we all have known how he's handled his biz for 30-40 years now. These investigations were a lead-pipe cinch to find all the skeevy [censored] he's done, which is why the Southern District of New York is now working overtime on all the stank Mueller uncovered on his way to Russia with love. Even the dumbest low-level Don in Little Italy knows to stay his shady ass in the shadows.

And then Asterisk was doofy enough (or hubris-filled enough) to think he could run 1600 Penn the same way? Good luck with that, champ.

What POtUS in American history has publicly called a former aide a 'RAT' (in all caps)? Is this a scene from Goodfellas?

It's not a matter of 'if.'


But the saddest thing is this: to date, there are STILL no members of the GOP who will stand up regarding this fool on the hill. They will soon learn that inaction is the same as enabling- and that type of behavior comes with consequences. That lesson will be severe and painful. It's not even partisan politics that prompt me to say this. It's maturity and 6 decades of observing how Life really works.

No, it confirms what I said. We don't "compartmentalize", ie we don't seperate our faith from the other aspects of our life, like voting and supporting a candidate. In other words, there is not one compartment for our Christianity and other compartments for other things. Our Christianity should influence and condition every other aspect of our lives. At least, in Biblical Christianity anyways.

But back to the relevant point... Damanshot Planned Parenthood does run political ads supporting candidates.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pres...-clinton-ad-buy

And if you say it's not Planned Parenthood that makes the ads, it is the arms of Planned parenthood, the same distinction AND ALLOWANCE can be made for Evangelicals. I don't know of CHURCHES that run ads, I think it's more PARACHURCH organizations. IE the arms of Evangelics.

Damanshot Planned Parenthood does run political ads supporting candidates.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pres...-clinton-ad-buy

And if you say it's not Planned Parenthood that makes the ads, it is the arms of Planned parenthood, the same distinction AND ALLOWANCE can be made for Evangelicals. I don't know of CHURCHES that run ads, I think it's more PARACHURCH organizations. IE the arms of Evangelicals.

So your argument ammounts to a double standard if you think it's OK for Libs to do it but not conservative evangelicals.

Postscript...I am not endorsing the person or policies of Trump. Just replying to the statement about Evangelicals

Well we certainly aren't going to the support radical liberals

Trump with all of his flaws is better than the alternative was. Hillary Clinton would have been infinitely worse.

Disclaimer...I didn't vote for any of the candidates.

but thats exactly what christians did. this is an absolute fact.

you can not sit there and tell me that christian values = Trump. because you are, than either Trump is a reflection of American christians today, or christians absolutely "compartmentalize" their beliefs when they voted for Trump.

i could only imagine what conservative christians today would have said about Obama if he had 5 kids by three different women, and cheated on his third wife with a playboy model and pornstar.

the bible verses and holy scripture nonsense wouldve been posted non stop on this board. Fox news would've been am to pm non stop. since these same christians also believes that obama was a foreign born muslims, could you imagine the segments?

"Obama and his clan: secret muslim cult?"

i dont want to hear it bro. right now you're selling straight BS.

unless of course you're telling me that:

adultery
deceit
lies
gluttony
deception
betrayal
not honoring agreements,
and racism are all part of christian faith and what it means to have christian values. Then maybe thats why christians voted for Trump. he's a reflection of who they are as evangelicals.

with your multi-millionaire, mega-mansion pastors and all.

oh, and the pedo's all up in down christianity. thats some real family values kinda stuff right there.

No Christian is supporting Trump because of his Christian values. They are supporting him because he is the lesser of two evils. He is also the first president in a while that is openly trying to protect religious freedom instead of oppressing it like Obama did.

Also Christians are not perfect or any better than anyone else. They screw up and make mistakes in their lives. Their just human after all. Romans 3:10: :As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" We are humans who try and sometimes fail.

The major difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that when we screw up we are sorry about it and try to do better next time because we know God will forgive us for our mistakes, so long as, we repent and try to change. Very few people can live as a saint. I promise you that I am not perfect or a saint myself. I just try to live the best I can the way I know God wants me to.

Trump is not perfect by any means but at least he is working his but off for the country and getting great results for his efforts. His trade reforms will benefit our country for many years to come. I don't like everything he is doing but on that issue and his efforts to restore religious freedom is why he has support that is growing and growing.

Some Christians voted for Trump probably to save America from another 4-8 years of Liberal decay. Americans got sick of Liberals ruining the country and took action.

The Democratic party has gotten so liberal and has gotten so intolerant of those who disagree with them, that it is impossible to vote for their candidates.

The damage of Liberal policies is far worse than the damage of Trump's past indescretions. I also agree heartily with what Razorthorne said.

Your statement about mega preachers, as if all Christians supported them is an example of gross stereotyping.

you just posted yet another example of christians "compartmentalizing".

good job, you completely contradicted all the stuff you posted.