Christianity Today editor calls for Trump to be removed from office

[fascinating123 38]

14 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Actually yes. If the Yemeni govt had taken him out I would have been just as giddy

 

No. I mean if the Yemeni government decided to take out someone convicted in America by an American court who was living in the US. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

4 minutes ago, fascinating123 said:

 

No. I mean if the Yemeni government decided to take out someone convicted in America by an American court who was living in the US. 

A dead terrorist is a good terrorist, regardless of who pulls the trigger.

[fascinating123 38]

11 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Clearly Congress cares less and less about the Constitution. The abuse we're seeing happening via FISA courts, which should've never spawned to begin with, demonstrates precisely why we have certain protections and government limitations -- we have to have a government that makes informed choices that can be checked rather than secretive/knee-jerk ones beyond public scrutiny. We seem to forget this every time a bad situation happens, ceding more authority to the government, which winds up making its way mostly to the executive, and mostly the new-fangled fourth branch which is the investigative/intelligence bureaus (USIC) that now believe (through their actions) they are the ones that craft foreign policy and decide who wins the Presidency. 

 

Yup. And then the response to this is always turned around as if we're "defending" the terrorists. Yeah, Anwar Awlaki was a bad guy and no one cries for him (nor should they). The inertia is what I'm worried about, and it's what many of the anti-war folks are worried about. Power corrupts, and any power taken today in the name of fighting evil will one day be used for nefarious purposes. It's how these things work. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

1 hour ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Not only that but the premise of this topic is the identity of the person as a cause for validating views rather than evidence for said views (as in, Trump has done something necessitating impeachment, particularly on the Ukraine matter). Unfortunately a lot of people are focusing on the "Christians", but there's no reason for this discussion, that's not the point of it, the point is "here's a Christian who hates Trump therefore my TDS is valid".

The whole Trump is an evangelical poster child thing has always baffled me ? I am guessing the editor does not like Trump because, he does not buy the whole Christian Trump BS 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

1 hour ago, fascinating123 said:

 

No. I mean if the Yemeni government decided to take out someone convicted in America by an American court who was living in the US. 

If that person had caused the death and torture of 10's of 100s and the american court had ordered him brought in dead or alive, then we are cool. I am sure the Govt of the country it was done in knew we were there . 

[fascinating123 38]

25 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

If that person had caused the death and torture of 10's of 100s and the american court had ordered him brought in dead or alive, then we are cool. I am sure the Govt of the country it was done in knew we were there . 

 

At least you're consistent. Kudos for that. 

 

On the flip side though, the Constitution does not give the president permission to order troops into a country we are not at war with. It shouldn't be too much to ask that the formal process be followed and if not, require that the elected official in question be removed from office since he obviously doesn't understand his legal authority, or refuses to abide by it. 

 

In case anyone is wondering, I said the same thing about Obama. It was a little more egregious in his case since he was a Constitutional scholar prior to holding elected office and thus should have known better. 

[Boiler 45,486]

Well there are US Troops in Canada and I do not think the US has declared war on Canada since 1812.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

1 minute ago, fascinating123 said:

 

At least you're consistent. Kudos for that. 

 

On the flip side though, the Constitution does not give the president permission to order troops into a country we are not at war with. It shouldn't be too much to ask that the formal process be followed and if not, require that the elected official in question be removed from office since he obviously doesn't understand his legal authority, or refuses to abide by it. 

 

In case anyone is wondering, I said the same thing about Obama. It was a little more egregious in his case since he was a Constitutional scholar prior to holding elected office and thus should have known better. 

You will learn I am very consistent in my beliefs no matter the politics. My co posters call me the middle of the road guy

 

agree. For someone who got the Nobel peace prize, he sure caused a lot of deaths around the world. 

 

P.s.  as commander in Chief the President has a pretty large margin to deploy the military in Operations around the world. 

Just now, Boiler said:

Well there are US Troops in Canada and I do not think the US has declared war on Canada since 1812.

much to my dismay 

[Boiler 45,486]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

You will learn I am very consistent in my beliefs no matter the politics. My co posters call me the middle of the road guy

 

agree. For someone who got the Nobel peace prize, he sure caused a lot of deaths around the world. 

 

P.s.  as commander in Chief the President has a pretty large margin to deploy the military in Operations around the world. 

much to my dismay 

Well 1812 did not go very well.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_president_of_the_United_States

 

Article II of the Constitution expressly designates the president as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States"[1] – since 1947, this has been understood to mean all U.S. Armed Forces. As commander-in-chief, the president exercises supreme operational command over the military; which includes the power to launch, direct and supervise military operations, order or authorize the deployment of troops (in foreign countries), and form military policy with the Department of Defense and Homeland Security. However, the constitutional ability to declare war is vested only in Congress.[2]

[fascinating123 38]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

You will learn I am very consistent in my beliefs no matter the politics. My co posters call me the middle of the road guy

 

agree. For someone who got the Nobel peace prize, he sure caused a lot of deaths around the world. 

 

P.s.  as commander in Chief the President has a pretty large margin to deploy the military in Operations around the world. 

much to my dismay 

 

Presidents have claimed such power, but it such claims are out of sync with the text of the Constitution and the founders own feelings on even having a standing army (which were frequently used to terrorize civilians in 18th century Europe). If the Constitution is to mean anything, then the limits placed on the government in its text need to be enforced. 

[fascinating123 38]

6 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Well there are US Troops in Canada and I do not think the US has declared war on Canada since 1812.

 

And I'd question the legality of that as well. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

Just now, fascinating123 said:

 

Presidents have claimed such power, but it such claims are out of sync with the text of the Constitution and the founders own feelings on even having a standing army (which were frequently used to terrorize civilians in 18th century Europe). If the Constitution is to mean anything, then the limits placed on the government in its text need to be enforced. 

so you are against any form of gun control ?

[fascinating123 38]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_president_of_the_United_States

 

Article II of the Constitution expressly designates the president as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States"[1] – since 1947, this has been understood to mean all U.S. Armed Forces. As commander-in-chief, the president exercises supreme operational command over the military; which includes the power to launch, direct and supervise military operations, order or authorize the deployment of troops (in foreign countries), and form military policy with the Department of Defense and Homeland Security. However, the constitutional ability to declare war is vested only in Congress.[2]

 

Ah yes, since 1947 when the US began to take the reigns from the British empire as the world's preeminent colonial empire. Constitution and limited government be damned. 

1 minute ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

so you are against any form of gun control ?

 

Yes. Very much so. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

Just now, fascinating123 said:

 

Ah yes, since 1947 when the US began to take the reigns from the British empire as the world's preeminent colonial empire. Constitution and limited government be damned. 

 

Yes. Very much so. 

well you are constant to my friend. I think I mistook you for a militant islamist, but I think you may be a strict constitutionalist