Posted on 03/29/2018 10:08:18 AM PDT by yesthatjallen
A CNN host on Wednesday confronted evangelical leader Jerry Falwell Jr., questioning where he would draw the line on his unwavering support for President Trump.
"It doesn't give you any pause when you think about these women having the same stories and saying these things about the president, about his behavior?" CNN host Erin Burnett asked Falwell Jr., raising questions about adult-film star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, both of whom claim they had affairs with Trump.
"And I really do believe that. I think he's had a change of heart. I think he's changed in the positive way," Falwell Jr. said. "I don't think there's any chance of anything like this happening in the White House, like Bill Clinton was accused of."
Burnett responded: "Would that be a line for you, if it did, if word of it came out that it did? Is that what would change it for you?"
Ect.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
To find the talking point they can use that will work to convince Christians to abandon Trump.
See this article for example:
CNN host confronts pro-Trump evangelical
This is why they're interviewing Christian leaders and individuals.
* These interviews amount to polling for the Democratic party *
The plan is to use Saul Alinskys' "Rules for Radicals" #4:
'Force your enemy to live up to their own impossible standards.'
If they can find the limit of tolerance for Christians supporting Trump they believe they can then craft their narrative to take down Trump.
No one asked Obama’s groupies where the line was.
Worked like a charm in the Roy Moore race in Alabama.
Geez, don’t you know anything? Obammy was SCANDAL FREE. I have heard that many times so it must be true.
There is none.The evil of the Deep State is the highest and must/will be destroyed at all costs. Hey liberals it is a God thing and you are on the judgment list.
I guess that’s CNN’s “Theme for the Week’ - Have their atheistic “news” readers lecture Christian religious leaders about theology as a way to attack the president.
Erin Burnett is clueless - Michael Schwartz explained to her how an NDA works and she still wouldn’t understand.
That its a like a settlement with prejudice, duh. People agree not to go to court to save time, money, tear and wear and possible harm to their reputation.
Then again, this is CNN we’re talking about, after all.
Was it a line for the democrats when a drunk Ted Kennedy took a woman home who wasn’t his wife, crashed the car into the drink, left the scene of the accident, let the woman drown, and didn’t report it to the next morning? Also that he shamelessly paraded around in a neck brace for the next couple of days?
After FOUR Presidents in a row who sided with illegal aliens and their employers, because this one sides with the citizens and the rule of law, that is all that matters.
Falwell should’ve said, “Well Erin, what’s YOUR view on Clinton/Monica, Kennedy/Kopechne, Obama/Sinclair???”
If she wants to have group sex with syph-ridden male & female porn stars, that's her business.
“..where he would draw the line on his unwavering support for President Trump...”
Only a stone idiot thinks politics (OR CONSERVATISM) is that simple.
Actually-it’s the reason SO many stupid people are Liberals... there’s nothing thinking involved.
Remember when Slick Willie ran in 1992. While Her Heinous was frantically trying to control the bimbo eruptions the mantra among the Clinton supporters was “I’m voting for a President NOT the Pope.” I had a friendly discussion with a co-worker who voted for Clinton. He said, as far as his messing around who cares, AS LONG AS HE KEEPS HIS PANTS UP IN THE OVAL OFFICE. HA!
Why would any of these guys/women even go on the likes of MSNBC? They have to know it’s gotcha journalism at best, and a complete set up at worst!!
I’d tell em- go pound!
Funny you’re not hearing a peep from the media about the film Chappaquiddick. Can’t bash their heroes!
A few points to consider:
1. We elect a president, a Commander in Chief, not a pastor in Chief, not a minister.
2. The alternative to Trump in 2016, and likely in 2020, is an irreligious liberal, who is counter to virtually everything people of faith consider important.
3. People of faith do not have some zero tolerance litmus tests in decisions about who to support.
If he pulled a ‘Ted Kennedy”, that would be one line.
Evil is relentless and countering it requires eternal vigilance - too bad that our side has a bit of a problem sustaining it’s efforts while the evil side keeps the fires stoked.
I would draw the line if a video of Trump doing the dirty with Hitlery on election night were to be released.
ummmmm . . .
On second thought, he kind of did that.
On the other hand, the "other" candidate for that office in 2016, herself, declared millions of citizens as "unredeemable" simply because their consciences motivated them to vote for her opponent. Fortunately, the Creator of the universe never declared that redemption was unavailable for any of His creatures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.