Posts

Miller: Apparently Murkowski Would Rather Have A Hillary Clinton Presidency

Anchorage, Alaska. October 11, 2016 — Joe Miller reacted on Tuesday to Lisa Murkowski’s decision not to back Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and her forced resignation from the Alaska Republican Party State Central Committee.

On Friday, Murkowski stated, “I cannot and will not support Donald Trump for president. He has forfeited the right to be our party’s nominee.”

“Presumably Murkowski’s proclamation that she will not support Trump means she would prefer to see Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office,” said Miller.

“Though it’s now official, the truth is Lisa Murkowski left the Republican Party a long time ago,” he added.

She has now lost her right to vote in the Alaska Republican Party, and is officially a Republican-In-Name-Only.

In 2010, Murkowski reneged on her word and enlisted the help of Democrats to run against the Republican Party nominee for U.S. Senate.

She was the most liberal “Republican” up for re-election then, and she is once again now.

She voted 72 percent of the time with Obama during the last Congress, while touting in campaign ads that she’s “The Conservative Voice for Alaska” in Washington, D.C.

Her votes have earned her an “F” rating from the Conservative Review, FreedomWorks, and Heritage Action.

Even disgraced New York Democrat Congressman Charlie Rangel earned a higher score with Conservative Review.

“A Hillary Clinton presidency would be a disaster for the country, keeping us on Barack Obama’s road to ruin. If she wins, the Supreme Court will be lost for a generation,” said Miller.

Joe Miller is a limited government Constitutionalist who believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them away. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the Constitutional right to life, the 2nd Amendment, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.

Donald Trump Claims ‘the Shackles’ Have Now Been Taken off His Campaign

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is now celebrating his freedom from the GOP establishment, tweeting out a message on Tuesday declaring it’s “so nice” to be unchained.

Over the past few days, several Republicans have withdrawn their endorsement of the presidential nominee after a 2005 hot mic tape surfaced which showed him bragging about touching and kissing women without their consent. Trump later apologized in a video, calling it “locker room” banter.

House Speaker Paul Ryan said he would no longer defend Trump, which has sparked a battle the two. Trump accused the nation’s top elected Republican of being a “very weak and ineffective leader.”

Ryan has not formally rescinded his endorsement of Trump, but his recent comments indicate he believes Republican members of the House are better off going their own way as they run for re-election.

“The speaker is going to spend the next month focused entirely on protecting our congressional majorities,” Ryan’s spokeswoman, AshLee Strong, said in a statement Monday.

“Paul Ryan is focusing the next month on defeating Democrats, and all Republicans running for office should probably do the same,” another Ryan spokesperson added Tuesday.

Throughout Tuesday morning, Trump continued to tweet out attacks aimed at the political establishment.

Some Republican leaders have indicated they wanted Trump to step aside so that his running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, can lead the ticket. But Pence said in a CNN interview Monday that he plans on staying loyal to Trump.

“As Trump’s numbers crater, many House and Senate Republicans will find themselves on the wrong side of polling trends,” said Joshua Huder, a senior fellow at the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University in Washington. “They can only distance themselves so much.” (For more from the author of “Donald Trump Claims ‘the Shackles’ Have Now Been Taken off His Campaign” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why I Serve on the Catholic Advisory Committee of the Trump/Pence Campaign

In the first presidential debate, Hilary Clinton paraphrased words attributed to the great French writer Alexis de Tocqueville: “America is great because America is good. If America ever stops being good, it will stop being great.” Those words were probably not written by him. Nor were these words,

I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers — and it was not there. … in her fertile fields and bound less forests — and it was not there … in her rich mines and her vast world commerce — and it was not there. … In her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution — and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.

I accepted the invitation to the Catholic Advisory group to Trump/Pence 2016 campaign because I believe these words are true, no matter who wrote them.

The American Founding

Our age is reeling under what Pope Benedict XVI called a “dictatorship of relativism.” Relativism says there are no objective truths. The American founders were not relativists. They declared independence with the bold words “We Hold These Truths.”

They affirmed that fundamental human rights were endowed by the Creator. The Catholic Church affirms these truths. But it just doesn’t affirm them in theory. It demands that we work to promote and defend them. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (numbers 2239, 2240) says very clearly that we citizens have the duty to work for “the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom” as an act of gratitude for what we have been given. Then it says:

Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community. Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country.

As a Catholic clergyman, I take this duty seriously. I am grateful to my country and love the United States, and very concerned for her future. This election matters. It also matters to the Republican Party that it hear the Catholic voice strongly.

The Right to Life and Religious Freedom

First among the truths our nation’s founders declared is the Right to Life. This is not a right our nation now fully recognizes. Abortion is legal in the United States. Innocent children in the womb are being killed by surgical instruments, chemical weapons or suction, at any time and for any reason. Every procured abortion is a violation of the Natural Law Right to Life.

We have no excuse. We know these children are our brothers and sisters. We offer surgery to them. We prosecute someone who takes their lives in the commission of another crime. We take 4D and 3D images of these children and send them to friends. We know what we are doing and are culpable as a Nation.

The next president could name four Justices to the United States Supreme Court. Those appointments will determine if this horrible practice continues. Even just two could shift the balance and change the law for generations. Donald Trump affirms the Right to Life and Hilary Clinton denies it.

The Constitution protects religious freedom. It requires the government to accommodate religious faith, but now we find it increasingly treated with hostility. I don’t need to go over the examples.

Just think of the baker who can’t bake a cake celebrating a same-sex “marriage” because of her deeply held religious conviction about marriage being persecuted and fined. Or the Little Sisters of the Poor. Or the growing effort to compel Christian institutions to deny sexual difference and conform to the radical gender identity agenda. There are many more examples, and the number is growing.

Our founding fathers understood that the nation they’d created couldn’t survive without a strong religious people. In 1798 John Adams proclaimed, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. … Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Our founders understood that the free exercise of religion goes beyond the freedom to worship within church buildings. They knew it included bakers baking cakes and nuns caring for the poor. Donald Trump affirms religious freedom. He will correct the abuses unleashed by the Johnson Amendment which gags the speech of the Church and support the First Amendment Defense Act. Hilary Clinton opposes both and is hostile toward the Church and religious freedom.

Marriage and Family and School Choice

The rights of children and the common good are best secured by recognizing the uniqueness of faithful monogamous marriage above all other relationships. The family is the first society, first economy, first school, first civilizing and mediating institution and first government, and the first place for the formation of virtue and character in children. This is both common sense and my Church’s teaching.

In rejecting marriage, the United States Supreme Court in its Obergefell opinion erred. In the dissent of Chief Justice Roberts, he noted “the majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent.” He was correct.

Donald Trump will protect the rights of the Church to advocate for marriage and the family free from governmental coercion and persecution. Hilary Clinton will not.

The founders also understood the parents right and duty to direct their children’s education. So does the Catholic Church. The Catechism calls the right of parents to choose a school for their children “fundamental” and says that the government has “the duty of guaranteeing this parental right and of ensuring the concrete conditions for its exercise” (number #2229).

Donald Trump supports school choice. Hilary Clinton is opposed to it.

Good Government and Economic Freedom

Finally, two other areas guided my choice to join the Catholic Advisory Group. They are matters of prudential judgement, meaning that people who hold the same principles may have different ideas about how to act upon those principles. In many cases of prudential judgment, I find myself in agreement with the Trump/Pence campaign and opposed to the Clinton/Kaine campaign.

First, I affirm the principle of subsidiarity. Governing should first occur at the lowest level and any other governing entity should defer and assist the smallest governing unit, not usurp their role.

Donald Trump will devolve government back to the state and local levels. He will recognize the necessity of supporting mediating associations, those groups like the family and churches that stand between the individual and the state, that make up what we call “civil society.” Hillary Clinton advocates increased centralization of power at the federal level and letting government over-ride mediating institutions.

Second, I believe in a truly free economy. By that I mean one that should not be controlled by either a federal bureaucracy or a corporatist class. The free economy will expand participation while promoting enterprise and awarding initiative. After reviewing the economic policies of Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, I determined Trump promotes economic freedom.

Conclusion

I accepted the invitation to the Catholic Advisory Group to the campaign of Donald J. Trump to offer the kind of policy analysis I have expressed in this essay to the campaign. (For more from the author of “Why I Serve on the Catholic Advisory Committee of the Trump/Pence Campaign” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

GOP Women Stand by Donald Trump, Blast Those Jumping Ship Over ‘Antique Locker-Room Talk’

Elected female members of the Republican Party’s national governing body, joined by state lawmakers and county-level party officials, are rallying to Donald Trump’s side.

“I am still solidly behind Mr. Trump,” said Minnesota state Sen. Carrie L. Rudd, a Republican. “Why are we even talking about locker-room comments from 11 years ago when there are so many important issues at hand? The people who supported Trump still do.”

The Republican women began to circle the wagons around their party’s presidential nominee after a string of big names loudly parted company with Mr. Trump in the wake of a press-led attack involving leaked live-microphone sexual comments by him about women.

“Those that are jumping ship are establishment GOP that never supported him in the first place,” Mrs. Rudd said.

Some female lawmakers and party officials said Mr. Trump’s lewd comments managed to alienate more women, but those who remained on his side spelled out what he needed to do to recover in the town hall debate Sunday night in St. Louis with Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. (Read more from “GOP Women Stand by Donald Trump, Blast Those Jumping Ship Over ‘Antique Locker-Room Talk'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Leaked Memo Shows Democrats Targeting Trump Before He Was a Candidate, Manipulating Election

Donald Trump was a political target of the Democratic National Committee two months before he officially joined the 2016 presidential race, according to an email released by WikiLeaks on Monday.

The April 7, 2015, email from Hillary Clinton’s campaign to the DNC is designed to help make anyone nominated by the Republican Party “unpalatable” to the voters. It states that the goals of the Clinton campaign and the DNC are “one and the same.”

The email labels as “Pied Piper” candidates three men who, the campaign believes, would move the GOP in a direction that would make it hard for Clinton to lose the presidential race. The memo lists the eventual GOP nominee as well as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson as “Pied Pipers.” At that point, only Cruz had publicly said he was running for the White House.

“[W]e don’t want to marginalize the candidates, but make them more ‘Pied Piper’ candidates who actually represent the mainstream Republican Party,” the memo says.

It says Democrats should work with the media to boost such candidates.

“We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously,” the memo reads.

The memo also suggests three overall approaches to protect Clinton. They are:

1) Force all Republican candidates to lock themselves into extreme conservative positions that will hurt them in a general election;
2) Undermine any credibility/trust Republican presidential candidates have to make inroads to our coalition or independents;
3) Muddy the waters on any potential attack lodged against HRC.

The memo suggests that Democrats should “use the [Republican primary] field as a whole to inflict damage on itself similar to what happened to Mitt Romney in 2012. The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right.”

After suggesting starting points to “undermine” the more establishment candidates the DNC expected to be running, the memo called for the start of a wide-ranging development of material to use against the GOP’s candidates.

“As we all know, the right wing attack machine has been building its opposition research on Hillary Clinton for decades,” the memo reads.

“The RNC et al has been telegraphing they are ready to attack and do so with reckless abandon. One way we can respond to these attacks is to show how they boomerang onto the Republican presidential field. The goal, then, is to have a dossier on the GOP candidates on the likely attacks HRC will face.”

Those areas were “transparency & disclosure; donors & associations; and management & business dealings.”

The DNC memo says, in essence, that all dirt was good dirt.

“In this regard, any information on scandals or ethical lapses on the GOP candidates would serve well. We won’t be picky. Again, we think our goals mirror those of the DNC,” the memo adds. (For more from the author of “Leaked Memo Shows Democrats Targeting Trump Before He Was a Candidate, Manipulating Election” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ryan Tells Republicans He Will Focus on House Races, Won’t Help Trump

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., told fellow Republicans on Monday that he has washed his hands of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and will focus on maintaining the Republican majority in the House.

“The speaker is going to spend the next month focused entirely on protecting our congressional majorities,” said AshLee Strong, Ryan’s spokeswoman.

According to those involved with the call, Ryan said he will not defend Trump or in any way support the billionaire’s campaign. He also said that he will not publicly withdraw his endorsement of Trump.

Ryan said he will devote “his entire energy making sure that Hillary Clinton does not get a blank check with a Democrat-controlled Congress,” the Associated Press reported, taking Ryan’s means to words he does not believe Trump can defeat Clinton in November.

As for other members of the House, Ryan told them “to do what’s best for you in your district,” the Associated Press reported.

Republicans currently hold the majority in both houses of Congress. Throughout the campaign, Republican leaders have worried whether a lackluster showing on Election Day for Trump could put those majorities at risk.

The Republican National Committee is also having a conference call with its members on Monday.

Ryan issued a statement Friday condemning Trump’s conduct in a leaked 2005 video in which Trump spoke graphically about his pursuits of women.

“Women are to be championed and revered, not objectified,” Ryan said Friday. “I hope Mr. Trump treats this situation with the seriousness it deserves and works to demonstrate to the country that he has greater respect for women than this clip suggests.”

Since that video was leaked, many Republicans have withdrawn their support for Trump.

CNN reported that during the call, Ryan’s decision to back away from Trump was met with disapproval by some congressmen. Ryan then made it clear that although he would keep his distance from the presidential campaign, he would not publicly break with his party’s nominee.

Earlier Monday, Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s campaign manager, told CBS This Morning that she hoped Ryan would stand by Trump. She also said that Republicans abandoning Trump may have a political price to pay, noting that Ryan was booed by Trump supporters over the weekend after disinviting Trump from an event in the wake of the controversial video’s release. (For more from the author of “Ryan Tells Republicans He Will Focus on House Races, Won’t Help Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why All the Fuss Over the Trump Sex-Comments Tape?

I’m not writing this to defend Donald Trump or to minimize the despicable nature of his comments captured on video in 2005. Not a chance.

Nor am I writing this to convince NeverTrumpers to vote for him.

My own wife, Nancy, has told me repeatedly that she could not vote for him, despite the possibility of Hillary getting elected. (Of course, she will not vote for Hillary either.)

Instead, I’m writing this to ask those who once supported Trump, like my highly esteemed, Christian brother Wayne Grudem, a fellow-professor and theologian, why the video tape changed things.

Prof. Grudem wrote, “There is no morally good presidential candidate in this election. I previously called Donald Trump a ‘good candidate with flaws’ and a ‘flawed candidate’ but I now regret that I did not more strongly condemn his moral character. I cannot commend Trump’s moral character, and I strongly urge him to withdraw from the election.”

Certainly, I commend Prof. Grudem for his integrity and for acknowledging what he now feels was an erroneous endorsement of Trump. In fact, just a few days ago, I wrote a piece questioning whether I will endorse another candidate in the future, having previously endorsed Sen. Cruz.

But my issue is simply this: Why the surprise now? Did anyone really think the tape misrepresented who he was in 2005 and who he likely continued to be.? Did any of us think that he didn’t sexualize women, that he didn’t lean into his star power, that he didn’t boast about his many (alleged) sexual trysts? Why the outrage and shock now?

Even if Trump changed in certain ways since 2005 — perhaps he has been more faithful to Melania and more involved with their kids — the character he displayed throughout the election process indicated some very deep, moral flaws, making him the least likely poster boy for the evangelical right.

During the primaries, I issued numerous words of warning and concern about Donald Trump, in writing, on radio, and on video, also making clear that these warnings were in the context of the primaries, when we had other, more viable candidates for president. (Obviously, this was simply my opinion.)

Once it came to Trump vs. Hillary, my posture has been that I cannot vote for Hillary but that Trump could earn my vote, and that remains my position until today.

I would like to be able to vote for him, and I do hope that he will heed the godly advice that is being given to him and learn to humble himself before God and people. But his failings and flaws are such that I still have concerns about helping to elect him as president, despite the dire possibility of a Hillary presidency.

But these are just my personal opinions, and I do not write this to persuade or to influence. My purpose in writing is to ask those who once backed Trump but do so no longer: Why the surprise at his past conduct? Weren’t his weaknesses and flaws shouting aloud to the nation over the last year via tweet and spoken word?

I never for a moment bought into the “Saint Donald” rhetoric, questioning other Christian leaders who embraced him as such. (I don’t mean to deny that he has helped people privately and has a compassionate, caring side. I simply mean that to present him as a wonderfully Christian man is to be self-deceived.)

And I understand the convictions of the NeverTrumpers, although I have never identified with this group. (I once used the hashtag in a tweet but decided not to do so again.)

My issue is with the political leaders and Christian leaders who endorsed Donald Trump and who worked to help elect him but are now distancing themselves from him in shock and dismay. Who did you think you were dealing with?

I know he can be gracious and humble in person, and there are surely many positive qualities about him.

But if you’re going to endorse him, do so with your eyes wide open, or don’t endorse him at all.

The man who once boasted about his adulterous encounters with famous women and who opened a casino with a massive strip club inside but felt he didn’t need to ask God for forgiveness is the man you endorsed for president.

Had he renounced with shame his past life, that would be one thing.

Had he not insulted and degraded his political opponents (and other perceived opponents) in the most vile and cruel ways, crushing them at any cost so that he could advance politically, that would be one thing as well.

But he did not renounce his past or change his public ways, because of which, the only issue with the 2005 tape should not have been the tape itself but rather how he responded to it today.

I have colleagues who believe that God is raising up Trump the way He raised up Cyrus, pointing out that Cyrus was used by the Lord although he was a pagan king who did not know the God of Israel (see Isaiah 45:1-6, and note carefully the phrase “although you do not know Me” in v. 5-6).

I have no problem with this concept at all. As the old saying goes, let God be God (in other words, let Him do what He chooses to do in His way and for His purposes). So be it. As I’ve written before, I personally hope it’s true.

But for those who are having cold feet about Trump now, I ask again: Wasn’t it clear from day one that this was the man you were endorsing?

For all of us, then, from here on in, the lesson is simple and clear: Whatever we do, let’s do it with our eyes wide open and with our trust in God alone. (For more from the author of “Why All the Fuss Over the Trump Sex-Comments Tape?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Fact-Check: Yes, Hillary Clinton Did Laugh After Successfully Defending a Child Rapist

During the second presidential debate, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said, “Hillary Clinton attacked them viciously,” referring to former president Bill Clinton’s female victims and a child rape victim whose attacker Clinton defended.

“One of them is a wonderful woman, [who] at 12 years old was raped. At twelve. Her client — she represented — got him off, laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl that was raped. Kathy Shelton, that young woman, is here with us tonight. So, don’t tell me about words,” Trump said . . .

In the mid-1980s, journalist Roy Reed interviewed Hillary Clinton, and a tape of that interview has been uploaded to YouTube and is available in the Special Collections Department of the University of Arkansas libraries.

“He took a lie detector test! I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” Clinton said about her client Thomas Alfred Taylor, who raped Shelton in 1975, laughing.

Clinton also laughed in the video about saving the child rapist from a “miscarriage of justice.” He served one year in county jail, with two months shaved off his sentence for the time he already served. Shelton’s injuries were so traumatic, she could never have children. (Read more from “Fact-Check: Yes, Hillary Clinton Did Laugh After Successfully Defending a Child Rapist” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What King David Could Teach Donald Trump

For many months now, critics of Donald Trump have asked his Christian supporters, “So, you heard about the latest scandal with your candidate? He’s a vulgar, immoral man. How can you possibly vote for him?” His supporters have responded: “Well, look at King David in the Bible. He committed adultery and murder, and God still used him. He was even called a man after God’s own heart! So, if God could use a man like David, he can certainly use Donald Trump.”

To be candid, comparing Trump to David is like comparing apples to Leer Jets — in other words, the two are so different that they’re not even in the same category — but that doesn’t mean that Trump could not learn a lot from David, especially at a time like this, when the Trump campaign is still reeling from the latest scandal, the video tape of Trump with Billy Bush.

But before I explain what David could teach Trump, let me emphasize how inapt the comparison is between them.

First, David was a man after God’s own heart, meaning, a man who loved the character of God and the ways of God and the Word of God, a man who sought to please God, a man who longed deeply for God. None of this, even faintly, can be said of Donald Trump — at least, to this point in his life.

Just consider these words of David, written in the Psalms and see if you can imagine Donald Trump speaking them sincerely, let alone writing them: “The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward” (Ps. 19:7-11).

Or how about these words? “Vindicate me, O LORD, for I have walked in my integrity, and I have trusted in the LORD without wavering. Prove me, O LORD, and try me; test my heart and my mind. For your steadfast love is before my eyes, and I walk in your faithfulness. I do not sit with men of falsehood, nor do I consort with hypocrites. I hate the assembly of evildoers, and I will not sit with the wicked. I wash my hands in innocence and go around your altar, O LORD, proclaiming thanksgiving aloud, and telling all your wondrous deeds” (Ps. 26:1-7).

Shall I quote hundreds of other verses like this, verses which Trump has likely not even read his entire life?

I join many others in praying that Donald Trump would become a man after God’s own heart, but to compare him to David is to miss the point badly.

Second, David’s sin with Bathsheba, committing adultery with this married woman and then having her husband, Uriah, killed, was an absolutely horrific act, one for which he paid dearly. In fact, you could argue that his life was never the same after his sin. But it was the exception to the rule of his life, which is why Scripture said that “. . . David did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and did not turn aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriah the Hittite” (1 Kings 15:5).

In the case of Trump, ungodly behavior has been the pattern of his life, the rule rather than the exception, something for which he was known and of which he was proud. Again, the comparison breaks down dramatically.

Third, when David was confronted with his sin, he pointed no fingers, offered no justification and did not seek to minimize his guilt. Instead, he confessed his sin in the most humble, broken and contrite terms, pleading for undeserved mercy.

And this is where King David could teach Donald Trump a valuable lesson.

When the video comments were released over the weekend, Trump immediately tweeted out an extremely tepid “apology,” minimizing his guilt, attacking Bill Clinton and apologizing “if anyone was offended.”

This was extremely disappointing, since what matters now is not what he said and did more than a decade ago — is anyone really surprised by that? — but rather how he responds today. That is ultimately how he be will judged and how his supporters will evaluate his character.

A few hours after his tweeted “apology,” he issued a more substantial apology on video, repudiating his 11-year-old comments but still pointing a finger at former president Bill Clinton.

I would encourage Mr. Trump to get on his knees, all alone, to take out his favorite Bible, and to read Psalm 51 out loud. (Remember: This is the man who said publicly that he didn’t feel the need to ask forgiveness.) Let him read these words of repentance written by David after he was confronted by the prophet Nathan about his adultery and murder.

David pointed the finger at himself alone, stating, “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight” (Ps. 51:4), and he didn’t minimize his sin: “For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me” (Ps. 51:3).

He also recognized how utterly polluting his sin was, pleading with God to cleanse him: “Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! . . . Hide your face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me” (Ps. 51:2, 9-10).

Americans are a forgiving people, also tending to side with the victim, and given the media’s frenzied attacks on Trump now, he could easily be perceived as the victim rather than as the womanizing victimizer of the past — but only if he humbles himself deeply.

So here’s what he must do (maybe even in the debate tonight?). With heartfelt contrition, he must restate how utterly ashamed he is of his past transgressions, which he does not minimize or deny, he must say that he has asked God to forgive him, asked his family to forgive him and asked his supporters to forgive him.

Then he must reaffirm that although that is the man he once was — and he is ashamed of it — that is not the man he now is, as his family and friends can attest. And because he has done wrong in the past, he is the ideal person to do what is right in the future, having learned from his errors. He can be the poster boy of reformed behavior!

And he must do this without comparing his sins to the even worse sins of Bill Clinton and without, for the moment, talking about the campaign.

There will still be several weeks to promote his campaign agenda and, when he is criticized, to expose the media’s hypocrisy, covering for Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton) while crucifying him. But now, let him act in the spirit of Psalm 51. Whether he wins the election or not, he will be a better man for it, and the nation will be the better for it as well.

And David would surely tell him, “Whatever you do, don’t let pride dictate your actions. In this case, it could be the difference between the White House and a failed campaign, if not between life and death.” (For more from the author of “What King David Could Teach Donald Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Christian Leaders React to Trump Video Scandal

Donald Trump’s newest scandal is causing some top Republicans to withdraw endorsements and call for him to step down as the party’s presidential nominee. The Republican National Committee appears to be stopping some of its election efforts on behalf of Trump, and both Trump’s wife and running mate have criticized comments made a decade ago by Trump about how he tried to have sex with a married woman, and how his fame allowed him to do largely whatever he wanted with and to women.

Others are noting that liberal and Democratic critics of Trump may not have a moral or legal leg to stand on:

So what are Christian leaders – many of whom backed Trump enthusiastically while others more grudgingly – saying? Below are more than a dozen statements, with credit to Sarah Bailey at The Washington Post for collating many of the Tweets, as well as other statements.

From Bailey:

Ralph Reed, a conservative Christian activist and the head of Trump’s religious advisory board, said that as the father of two daughters, he was disappointed by the “inappropriate” comments.

“But people of faith are voting on issues like who will protect unborn life, defend religious freedom, grow the economy, appoint conservative judges and oppose the Iran nuclear deal,” he said in an email.

He contrasted Trump with Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, saying that her “corrupt use of her office to raise funds from foreign governments and corporations and her reckless and irresponsible handling of classified material on her home-brewed email server, endangering US national security, that will drive the evangelical vote.”

“I think a 10-year-old tape of a private conversation with a TV talk show host ranks pretty low on their hierarchy of their concerns,” he said.

Franklin Graham:

The crude comments made by Donald J. Trump more than 11 years ago cannot be defended. But the godless progressive agenda of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton likewise cannot be defended. I am not endorsing any candidates in this election. I have said it throughout this presidential campaign, and I will say it again — both candidates are flawed. The only hope for the United States is God. Our nation’s many sins have permeated our society, leading us to where we are today. But as Christians we can’t back down from our responsibility to remain engaged in the politics of our nation. On November 8th we will all have a choice to make. The two candidates have very different visions for the future of America. The most important issue of this election is the Supreme Court. That impacts everything. There’s no question, Trump and Clinton scandals might be news for the moment, but who they appoint to the Supreme Court will remake the fabric of our society for our children and our grandchildren, for generations to come.

Tony Perkins:

“As a husband and father of three daughters, I find this behavior deeply offensive and degrading. As I have made clear, my support for Donald Trump in the general election was never based upon shared values rather it was built upon shared concerns. These concerns include the damage the Supreme Court would continue to do to this country through the appointment of activist justices, concerns over the security of our nation because of our government’s refusal to confront the growing threat of Islamic terrorism, and concerns over the prospects of continued attacks by our own government upon religious freedom.”

“At this point in the political process, because of our lack of engagement and involvement as Christians, not just in this election but in the government and culture as a whole, we are left with a choice of voting for the one who will do the least damage to our freedoms.”

“This is far from an ideal situation, but it is the reality in which we find ourselves and as difficult as it is, I refuse to find sanctuary on the sidelines and allow the country and culture to deteriorate even further by continuing the policies of the last 8 years,” concluded Perkins.

Via Reuters:

“Naturally I’m disappointed,” said Steve Scheffler, head of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition. “But, you know, the Bible tells me that we are all sinners saved by grace and I don’t think there’s probably a person alive that I know of that hasn’t made some mistakes in the past.” He said Clinton has peccadilloes of her own, most notably marital woes with her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

“So yes, I will vote for Donald Trump. I’m not excusing his behavior at all. It’s disgusting,” he said.

(For more from the author of “Christian Leaders React to Trump Video Scandal” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.