I take the stance that a man has NO reason to marry a girl (or bed her) prior to her legal age. Do you disagree with this statement?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
January 20th 2025 - Donald Trump is BACK!
- Thread starter Man_in_the_Middle
- Start date
I take the stance that a man has NO reason to marry a girl (or bed her) prior to her legal age. Do you disagree with this statement?
Nobody on this forum should be listening to the utterly stupid recommendations or musings about using any other considerations. Consult the legal codes in your country.
Epstein real job:
theamericansun.substack.com
Epstein was a money guy
Jeffrey Epstein’s job was not primarily as a procurer of young women or blackmailer of the rich and powerful.
theamericansun.substack.com
Well golly gee, that perfectly explains the Island….or not.Epstein real job:
Epstein was a money guy
Jeffrey Epstein’s job was not primarily as a procurer of young women or blackmailer of the rich and powerful.
Poop doesn’t make a good white-wash.
Today was perhaps one of the most important news shows I've ever done, and certainly one of the most important events - if it includes the necessary follow-through - in American history:
For the first time ever, a sitting US President, with the assurance of ample documentation, rightfully accused a former president of Treason.
No, BIg Family brother won't let me post the link. Some folks really are more equal than others.
But you can find it on Hebrew Nation Radio, today.
And there are a "lot of dots to connect."
For the first time ever, a sitting US President, with the assurance of ample documentation, rightfully accused a former president of Treason.
No, BIg Family brother won't let me post the link. Some folks really are more equal than others.
But you can find it on Hebrew Nation Radio, today.
And there are a "lot of dots to connect."
Serious stuff here but methinks Obama will be granted many of the same immunity privileges as Trump received since Obummer was still legally president at the time.
However, if Trump is found to be in any way participatory in the Epstein shenanigans, he could be subject to criminal or civil courts after he leaves office. If that’s true, he may go scorched earth and start opening up the floodgates on all the dirty underbelly of the system and bring it all down with him.
Just my humble musings.
However, if Trump is found to be in any way participatory in the Epstein shenanigans, he could be subject to criminal or civil courts after he leaves office. If that’s true, he may go scorched earth and start opening up the floodgates on all the dirty underbelly of the system and bring it all down with him.
Just my humble musings.
I seriously doubt there is any such thing left in AmeriKa as actual "justice," but we must not lose sight of the actual facts (this was the point of the news show and commentary):
There IS no statute of limitations on Treason. And presidential 'immunity' cannot extend to "making war" on the States and the people. If a president can kill, usurp, or destroy any successor, then there is no Rule of Law left - only Dictatorship for Life.
"Immunity" does not include Treason, and the fact that other traitors failed to do their duty (and that includes seating a senile fraud, and covering up the genuine conspiracy, is no excuse.
The underlings would likely suffer the wrath. BHO would likely take the Clinton line of defense and argue the definition of is.
He’ll claim that he was misconstrued and in the interest of national security, he called his top spooks in to double check their intelligence information to help secure voting integrity. He was acting as CIC and doing his dutiful diligence. Others took it too far.
I personally think Trump knows it’ll go nowhere but is using it as a weapon in his arsenal to shield himself or broker deals that will keep him safe post presidency.
Again, just my musings.
I don't really doubt any of that. BUT - if Obama is not tried for Treason, along with the rest of the IC traitors (and election thieves, etc) - the nation is utterly dead, stick a fork in it.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable."
-- Cicero
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable."
-- Cicero
I’m torn. I would appreciate justice, but at what expense? Do we really want the cycle of impeaching and/or putting previous presidents on trial?
Send Rice, Comey, Brennan, all of them up the creek. Unless there’s a smoking gun that ordered specific instructions, the presidency needs shielding. What I’ve heard so far, Obummer could easily explain away his culpability.
Send Rice, Comey, Brennan, all of them up the creek. Unless there’s a smoking gun that ordered specific instructions, the presidency needs shielding. What I’ve heard so far, Obummer could easily explain away his culpability.
The "presidency" has already been gang-raped. Former presidents already 'put on [show] trial.' Raided at gunpoint with deadly force orders to steal damning information the traitors wanted kept secret forever.
Some 'presidents' (including the senile) are clearly more equal than others.
Either we have a Rule of Law, or a Fuhrer.
Some 'presidents' (including the senile) are clearly more equal than others.
Either we have a Rule of Law, or a Fuhrer.
PS>
except, of course, for what happens if we DON'T get one.
We had a taste of that. It won't be over unless the guilty actually are tried, convicted, and hung.
I have long said that a 'civil war' would be the Worst Thing That Could Possibly Happen,
except, of course, for what happens if we DON'T get one.
We had a taste of that. It won't be over unless the guilty actually are tried, convicted, and hung.
Correct
And if Trump repays in kind, and orders the feds to raid Obama’s residence to find files that ultimately don’t prove anything, then we call it a day. Two former presidents humiliated and exposed, but to no further punishment.
Call it a day, and may it never happen again.
Even if not all true, the public explanation for Nixon resigning, and Ford pardoning was for the sake of sparing the nation.
What weighs heavier on the scale, justice or peace? I think there’s a great argument for both.
I tend to lean more towards peace.
What immediately came to mind is “Peace at any price”.
No.
If an example is not made of the people who perpetrated this situation it will continue forever and we will never have peace.
Yah required justice from rulers, but forgiveness from individuals. Don’t confuse the two.