Baltimore, Md., Nov 9, 2018 / 01:34 am (CNA).- On Aug. 16, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo made U.S. Catholics a promise.
The cardinal, president of the U.S. bishops’ conference, wrote that a summer of scandal had revealed a spiritual crisis in the Church, through which “scores of beloved children of God were abandoned to face an abuse of power alone.”
“This is a moral catastrophe,” he wrote, while acknowledging that “one root cause is the failure of episcopal leadership.”
“We firmly resolve,” he wrote, “with the help of God’s grace, never to repeat it.”
As the bishops hold their first formal meeting since this summer’s scandal began to unfold, many Catholics are incredulous at the promise that episcopal failures of leadership will not happen again. Some Catholics remember that it was McCarrick who in 2002 promised that “we all look to end this, for the sake of the victims, for the sake of the church, the sake of our people.”
The U.S. bishops have never faced a crisis like this. It has been more than four months since allegations against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick were made public, and anger has still not abated.
Many Catholics wonder what will be different this time. And now the U.S. Attorney’s Office wonders as well: amid the cascade of allegations made against bishops, state attorneys general have opened investigations, as has the federal government.
Several bishops have told CNA that they sincerely don’t know what Catholics expect right now, or how to meet the expectations that seem to be placed on them. One bishop said he believes the Church should do everything possible to prevent sexual abuse and misconduct, but he feels as though Catholics now expect bishops to pass policies that will eradicate any possibility of sin. Such an expectation is impossible to fulfill.
Those bishops have a point worth considering. While Catholics have good reason to expect their bishops to lead, few seem to know what exactly they hope the bishops will do next, or what level of effort from the bishops will be judged acceptable.
At the same time, it has also become scandalously clear that at least some parts of the Church are marred by serious administrative dysfunction, by negligence, and by grave moral laxity, or worse, about sexual relationships involving priests and bishops.
The November meeting can’t solve all of those issues. But the bishops seem to hope their policy agenda will be accepted as a first step.
But will the practical policies up for consideration at next week’s Baltimore meeting do anything to foster real change in the Church’s culture? It’s worth looking carefully at what the bishops will discuss, and what’s already been decided.
Code of Conduct
To respond to complaints raised regarding sexual immorality or negligence on the part of bishops, the USCCB will discuss a proposed “Code of Conduct” for bishops.
The draft of this code is a seven-page document, by which bishops will pledge to support victims of sexual abuse, to respond to complaints about sexual abuse or harassment, to meet with neighboring bishops annually to discuss annual audits of safe environment policy compliance, and to avoid sexually harassing or having a sexual relationship with anyone.
Bishops who sign the code of conduct will promise not have a “double life” or “secret life.”
Of course, those with “double lives” or “secret lives” sustain them by lying. Signing a document that promises not lead a double live is unlikely to deter anyone who is actually living one. And the code of conduct, as a moral agreement, will not normatively bind the bishops to anything.
For those reasons, some Catholics are likely to view the code of conduct as a public relations move, not an actual commitment to change.
While there is merit to that view, there is one aspect of the conduct code that could catalyze cultural change among bishops– the conduct code attempts to encourage regular conversations among neighboring bishops about sexuality and sexual morality.
Those conversations could be perfunctory and formal, and in most cases are likely to be. But thoughtful metropolitan bishops- local archbishops-could seize on the opportunity those meetings present, turning them into an occasion at which bishops talk freely among themselves about the challenges of their own chastity, and the challenges of calling priests to chastity.
Those kinds of conversations- if they happen- could be authentic, fraternal, and valuable. And they could give metropolitans an idea of which bishops are not handling sexual misconduct issues well, long before issues in any diocese have the opportunity to spin out control.
Still, apart from that opportunity, few observers are likely to take solace in a seven-page document in which bishops promise to do things they’re mostly obliged already to do. The bishops run a risk that their code of conduct will seem insincere, and insufficient.
Reporting systems and investigative commissions
Two other measures are designed to complement and stregthen the bishops’ code of conduct: a reporting system and an investigative commission.
The first has already been set into motion.
On Sept. 19, the USCCB’s administrative committee announced that it had “approved the establishment of a third-party reporting system that will receive confidentially, by phone and online, complaints of sexual abuse of minors by a bishop and sexual harassment of or sexual misconduct with adults by a bishop.”
Those complaints, the conference said, would be directed to appropriate ecclesiastical authority- the apostolic nuncio- and in cases required by law, to law enforcement authorities.
This system is intended to respond to those Catholics who say that priests and Church employees have no secure way to report misconduct, with assurances their reports will be taken seriously, and with standard whistleblower protections.
The self-admitted failure of Cardinal Sean O’Malley to respond to letters about McCarrick from Fr. Boniface Ramsey seems to fit the bill, as does the situation of Siobhan O’Connor, former assistant to Buffalo’s Bishop Richard Malone, who felt she had no choice but to leak allegations of misconduct to the media.
But whether the reporting system is judged to be an effective step depends a great deal on whether Catholics trust the apostolic nuncio to act when he receives complaints of misconduct. In the aftermath of McCarrick, several recent nuncios of the United States have been criticized for failing to sufficiently act on reports about the archbishop.
Furthermore, retired nuncio Vigano has been criticized for his handling of an investigation into the conduct of Archbishop John Nienstedt, Vigano is alleged to have called the investigation to an end before it concluded, though he denies the charge. And the administration of the current nuncio, Archbishop Christophe Pierre, has been criticized for failing to assist a Minnesota diaconal candidate who claims to have been pressured by his bishop, Michael Hoeppner, into keeping silent about sexual abuse.
The third-party reporting system is likely to efficiently ferry complaints to the nuncio. What the nuncio does after complaints are received is a matter beyond the bishops’ control. But the credibility of this reform effort depends entirely on the credibility of the apostolic nuncio.
Recognizing that concern, the bishops will also vote on establishing a lay commission to receive and investigate complaints before they go to the nuncio. The commission will reportedly be called the “Special Commission for Review of Complaints Against Bishops for Violations of Episcopal Conduct.”
The idea is that if the nuncio is given a full report by an independent investigative body, the Vatican will be more likely to act on concerns about bishops.
Sources close to the USCCB have told CNA the commission would consist of six lay Catholics, two bishops, and one priest, some with expertise in criminal investigations, canon law, psychology, civil law, and other relevant fields. One lay member would be a survivor of sexual abuse.
The commission is almost certain to be approved by the full body of bishops, who are in no position to eschew the appearance of lay oversight or involvement in addressing sexual misconduct.
Draft statutes say the commission would be independent, funded by contributions from U.S. dioceses, and staffed by an executive director. While there is not yet clarity about how the lay members will be appointed, it seems likely that, like the USCCB’s National Review Board, members will be nominated by diocesan bishops and approved by the body of bishops.
Participation by bishops will be voluntary. In practice, most, if not all, bishops will agree to participate in funding the commission and commit to being open to any investigation it might make. The commission will publish an annual report of cooperating dioceses; even bishops who object will have very little choice but to participate.
But the commission will have no coercive authority; no subpoena power or statutory access to documents or personnel. The commission will have no way to know whether a bishop under investigation has responded honestly to its inquiries, whether relevant documents have been provided or instead hidden, whether facts have been reported fully or obscured.
In short, without the power to ensure it is being told the truth, there will be consistent questions about the value of the commission’s investigations, and the veracity of its conclusions. And even if the commission is largely accepted, the bishops know they cannot control what will happen when reports are filed with nuncio.
As they learned this summer, it is impossible for American bishops to pressure the Vatican, or the pope, to do anything, even if they publicly call on him to investigate an alleged serial predator in their midst.
Will they help?
Will the “Code of Conduct,” the third-party reporting system, and the independent commission make a change in the life of the Church? Only time will tell.
On the one hand, the changes could be seen to represent a commitment to cultural change; a reminder to all bishops that sexual immorality among clerics is, or should be, unacceptable. And they will give whistleblowers a pathway for raising important concerns, and a forum in which they can, at least possibly, be evaluated.
On the other hand, the measures the bishops are considering lack any force or authority. This is not the bishops’ fault- the episcopal conference, as an institution, is not empowered to make normative change, or to undertake authoritative investigations.
Still, norms and agreements emanating from the bishops’ conference can transform culture- but only slowly, and only to a certain, and limited, extent.
For that reason, some observers have suggested the changes most urgently needed right now must be made at the loci of real power- at the Holy See, and at the diocesan level.
Canonical changes
A point of repeated discussion among bishops and commentators this summer is the fact that canon law does not explicitly penalize sexual relationships between clerics and other adults, even those that involve coercion or force.
This leaves bishops unsure of what to do when a priest is involved in a homosexual or heterosexual relationship, and, for some bishops, this lacuna in the law seems to imply that sexual relationships involving clerics and other adults are not issues of major importance.
Bishops will not consistently penalize priests involved in homosexual or heterosexual relationships unless canon law explicitly forbids those relationships. And bishops who would like to do so do not have legal tools available that enable them to act. Nor do they have the guidance of the law directing them to address that kind of sexual misconduct as a penal matter.
Absent legal norms, bishops tend to treat most sexual misconduct as a sign of a psychological malady, rather than a moral failing. This approach, many canonists say, has had disastrous effects.
Similarly, the Holy See is unlikely to take seriously sexual immorality among bishops that does not constitute a delict, a canonical crime.
For that reason, many canonists have suggested that the U.S. bishops should petition for amendments to the Church’s penal law that established a system of graduated penalties for celibate priests and bishops involved in sexual relationships. They say that without that system, and those penalties, entire categories of serious sexual misconduct go too easily unaddressed, creating a climate in which sexual abuse is also more likely to occur.
It is uncertain whether the Holy See would amend penal law in that way. But some bishops have told CNA they feel the effort is a worthwhile one, if the Church intends to take seriously coercive sexual misconduct involving priests, bishops, seminarians, and other adults. It is is unlikely, but the bishops could petition for this change during their meeting next week.
Diocesan changes
There are two changes that bishops could easily make at the diocesan level, even as individuals, that many commentators say would significantly change the culture of the Church with regard to clerical sexual immorality and episcopal negligence.
The first would be to require that all allegations of clerical sexual immorality be evaluated by the diocesan review board- not only those involving minors.
This would ensure that lay experts advise the bishop on every single case that could fester into something criminal, and, in many cases, ensure that problematic situations are stopped before they get out of hand. It would also help the review to evaluate patterns- and if the bishop himself were involved in sexual immorality involving priests or seminarians- it is likely that the review would begin to suspect that.
The second local change would be to significantly expand the role of the diocesan promoter of justice. The “promoter of justice” in canon law, acts analogously to a public prosecutor. However, the function is usually filled by a chancery canon lawyer who carries the title as a third or fourth job, and only in a perfunctory way.
Promoters of justice don’t generally expect to have to do anything in the diocese unless a penal trial takes place, which is a rare occasion.
But if a bishop wanted to be held accountable within his diocese, he could refashion the role of the promoter of justice to resemble an ombudsman, or a civil district attorney. A well-funded and well-staffed office for a promoter of justice could include oversight of the diocesan safe environment program and review board, involvement in personnel decisions, and a mediation role for whistleblowers and others involved in conflicts at the parish level.
A bishop could establish a promoter of justice who was empowered to keep authority figures, including himself, accountable to the norms of canon law and diocesan policy. The promoter could, if the bishop wished, even be supervised by the diocesan pastoral or finance council, in order to ensure independence. He could be required even to issue an annual report about the cases and issues he’d taken up each year.
Establishing a promoter in that way would be an unusual step for a bishop, but these are unusual times. Canon law says that the promoter of justice is “bound by office to provide for the public good.” At this moment, when trust is waning, such an office seems like it could be an extremely valuable step.
A long road
Next week, Catholics will look to DiNardo, and to the bishops’ conference he leads, for some signal that serious reforms are coming to the governance structure of the Catholic Church, and that the U.S. bishops might somehow be able to regain the trust of their people. The road to restored credibility, if it is to come at all, will be long and painful.
As the meeting begins, it remains to be seen whether the bishops will deliver on their promises of bold and courageous leadership. Catholics will be watching, hoping that this time, bishops who say”never again” will mean it.
[…]
For those of us who may have missed in the left-wing media DT’s verifiable acts of kindness, among them his acts of helping Christians in general and Catholics in particular, and his actual change of mind re Hillary Clinton to avoid hurting her further. A few examples among many:
a) School choice, which benefits Catholic schools:
“Among the many executive orders signed by President Donald Trump in the first weeks of his new administration is one that frees up federal funding in support of school choice. This is great news for many parents and a much-needed pushback against public schools’ virtual monopoly over our nation’s education system.” https://ewtn.co.uk/article-why-president-trumps-executive-order-on-school-choice-is-great-news/
b) SAVING CATHOLIC SCHOOLS: Upon Cardinal Dolan’s call for help, DT raised millions that saved the NY Catholic schools
“Fundraising for Catholic Schools
Overview of Trump’s Efforts
Former President Donald Trump has actively supported Catholic schools, particularly during his presidency. He raised significant funds for Catholic education, especially in New York, to help address financial challenges faced by these institutions.
Key Fundraising Events
Catholic Fundraiser: Trump participated in a fundraiser for the Archdiocese of New York, where he made a direct appeal for the Catholic vote and emphasized the importance of supporting Catholic schools.
• Support During the Pandemic: Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump expressed his commitment to providing federal financial support for Catholic schools, which were experiencing severe financial stress due to decreased enrollment and tuition payments.
Impact of Fundraising
• Financial Aid: The funds raised have been crucial in stabilizing Catholic schools, allowing them to continue serving students, particularly those from low-income backgrounds.
Educational Justice: Catholic leaders have highlighted that supporting these schools is not just a religious issue but also a matter of educational justice, as they provide quality education at a lower cost compared to public schools.
Trump’s fundraising efforts have played a significant role in sustaining Catholic education in New York and beyond, ensuring that these schools can continue to operate and serve their communities effectively.”
c) One example of DT mercy is that eventually he changed his mind about “locking her up” and he has said repeatedly that Hillary Clinton had been through enough and he was not going to prosecute her:
“President-elect Donald Trump indicated he would not pursue charges against Hillary Clinton, with a source close to his transition team stating that Trump felt Clinton had “been through enough” and would not go after her officially over her email scandal. Trump also expressed that he didn’t want to hurt the Clintons, calling them “good people,” and said he was not looking to revisit the issue. While he had previously vowed during the 2016 campaign to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton’s use of a private email server, his senior adviser Kellyanne Conway confirmed in November 2016 that Trump “doesn’t wish to pursue charges” against her.” See
https://nypost.com/2016/11/23/why-trump-isnt-pursuing-charges-against-hillary-clinton/
d) Many consider DT crackdown on illegal immigration not “compassionate,” yet during his first term, he actually allowed the illegals covered by Obama’s DACA to remain in the country despite the justifiable efforts by many conservatives to deport all those who had violated the laws of this country by entering illegally or by being brought in illegally. Cf. what the Vatican does with those entering ITS premises illegally:
Vatican Promises Stiff Penalties for Illegal Aliens Crossing its Border
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/01/16/vatican-promises-stiff-penalties-for-illegal-aliens-crossing-its-border/
Correction: Most Catholic voters – such as myself – STRONGLY support Trump on deportations, despite the bishops’ phony concern.
Well, we pay the for the largesse they get to assist with the invasion. Taxes, press 1 for English, costs associated with maintaining translation services in hospitals, schools, ballots, reduced wages, accidents caused by illiterate and uninsured drivers
They get all kinds of money from the government and then have the audacity to run their annual appeals so they can have meetings in ritzy places…
Many polls show a massive gender divide. Here is what I found from this poll with regard to deportations (https://www.ncregister.com/news/catholic-voters-still-back-trump-ewtn-news-realclear-opinion-research-poll-shows): 62% of male Catholic voters view him favorably, compared with 45% of female Catholic voters. Catholic women voters also gave the president the strongest unfavorable rating at 33%, compared with 23% for males. Male Catholic voters were more likely than female voters, 21% to 10%, to list mass deportations as the most important campaign promise. As with the gender divide over the question of the most important campaign promise, his deportation policy has also sparked a split between the sexes, as 62% of men strongly or somewhat favor the policy, while 46% of women strongly or somewhat favor it.
“Catholic women voters also gave the president the strongest unfavorable rating at 33%…”
That’s because most women (not just Catholic women) think of Trump’s personality instead of the issues.
Most Catholics are law-abiding citizens. It is against the law to enter the USA without following the established procedures. The bishops disregard the law and foster lawlessness when they condone aliens entering the USA illegally. Those of us who are fathers and grandfathers have a moral responsibility to insure the safety of our children and grandchildren. Bishop have no children to protect and cannot possibly understand the moral obligations of fathers to protect their children.
The bishops seem to ignore the vast numbers of illegal aliens who enter the USA and rape, murder, and steal which, the last time I looked, were sins in the Catholic Church.
There used to be an examination of conscience at the back of my Church that used the Decalogue as sort of checklist, along with some other considerations implicit in each individual Commandment.
For the Fourth Commandment, the additional considerations were obeying employers and legal authority-with a specific question: “Have I paid all my taxes?”.
That question always gave me some amusement in its naivete. Being a CPA, I have a better than average understanding of taxation, and I understand NOBODY other than those with the simplest situations can answer that in the affirmative, because taxes-especially federal taxes are incredibly complex, uncertain, variable and voluminous. The best a person, even a licensed practitioner could say is “I haven’t intentionally evaded a liability”.
Now if I’m bound to OBEY Title 26, with all of obnoxious cost and effort involved with compliance, then why aren’t foreigners obliged to obey Title 8-which is relatively simple?
I am not insensitive to the plight of refugees. I had an elementary school teacher who was a refugee from Castro’s Cuba. She and her husband came to the United States and were model citizens as are their children. Cuba’s loss was our gain.
The Bishops never comment on taxes, other than to encourage more spending taxes-without the slightest knowledge of the dictum “the power to tax involves the power to destroy” and that taxes are meant to be instruments to fund legitimate functions of government, not instruments of economic engineering.
The contrast and disparity couldn’t be more stark. No Bishop would call a tax evader an “undocumented taxpayer in duplicitous attempt conceal the illegality of unauthorized entry. They don’t run organizations to assist with compliance with our onerous tax burdens. They don’t opine endlessly on the inequities or cruelties of tax administration or militate for relief.
Errata:
No Bishop would call a tax evader an “undocumented taxpayer” in the way as they label lawful entry evaders entrants “undocumented immigrant” in duplicitous attempt conceal the illegality of unauthorized entry.
The other issue is that much of this spending is borrowed funds, the becoming “Federal Funds.”
It seems there is no frugality in the federal government at all. (I realize the grossly underfunded Medicare, Social Security and sometimes Medicaid funding is likely most of the problem of this black hole)
A young relative (early 20s) works full time and has medical insurance set up through his employer (due to income he as forced onto the exchanges). With these subsidies dropping off Jan 1, the monthly pmt is set to be over 500. This is for a healthy non smoker non drinker. I think he can still get on his parent’s plan, but other than that I told him to go without, due to his low risk.
The graphic in the article asks “Do you favor or oppose the detention and deportation of unauthorized immigrants on a broad scale?” That question alone calls into question the validity of the survey. The question does not use the term “illegal alien,” the technically correct term. No, the crafter of the poll knew exactly what they were doing by using the oxymoron “unauthorized immigrants.” Such a blatant and obvious attempt to sway the response. Shameful.
And Pitchfork Rebel, you are spot on. The vast majority of bishops are completely out of step with the sentiments of the American Catholic voter. The overwhelming support for Trump in the last election proves the point. And ritzy meeting places? Indeed. The optics of that…
I’d like to say you have a gift for understatement “out of step”, because there’s almost an arrogance to their actions.
I remember when they were having a meeting at the Inner Harbor in Baltimore in 2018 this very day, November 12, where my former Bishop, James Timlin defied Bishop Bambera’s order prohibiting him from representing the diocese at any public events, liturgical or otherwise.
Timlin was 91 at the time, so it now doubt took some effort to get there and to fail to momento mori.
I didn’t take a vow of obedience-Timlin did and when he retired as Bishop, he was returned to the instruction of the new Ordinary.
CCC Paragraph 2241 is clear and it provides no quarter for Episcopal oversite of the nature and extent of immigration.
All persons have a right to preserve their nation, it’s customs, laws and traditions-its distinct identity. Charity shouldn’t mean Muslims capturing municipal governments and telling Christians they are not “welcome” or having inner cities turned into enclaves of foreigners.
Even Theodore Hesburgh had a grasp that unlimited immigration was pathological altruism at best.
“It is not enough to sympathize with the aspirations and plight of illegal aliens. We must also consider the consequences of not controlling our borders,”
March 1986
The issue boils down to the Rule of Law as a foundational principle of our national life. My willingness to obey various state and federal laws is how I contribute to a functioning society. I am not above the law, and I am not the exception to all the rules. Allowing unlimited and unvetted mass immigration is an insult to all of those responsible citizens who are playing by the rules. If a person’s first act is to disobey laws to be here illegally, then he or she forfeits the privilege of being here. If I’m an athlete who is not willing to play by the rules, I don’t get to play in the game. If illegals cannot follow the law and honor the process, they don’t get to be here. It’s much more simple than the out-of-touch bishops realize.
Somewhere I read recently that Biden is responsible for the illegal immigration mess.
Well, duh.
These actions are taking place daily but the left wing media will not report them to the citizens of this country:
ICE Sweep in Sanctuary California: 10,000 Criminal Aliens Arrested, Including 14 Conviction Repeat Offender
https://www.breitbart.com/border/2025/12/11/ice-sweep-in-sanctuary-california-10000-criminal-aliens-arrested-including-14%e2%80%91conviction-repeat-offender/
ICE Sweep in New Orleans Nets Rapists, Human Smugglers, Child Abusers
https://www.breitbart.com/border/2025/12/11/ice-sweep-in-new-orleans-nets-rapists-human-smugglers-child-abusers/
Maria Corina Machado Credits Trump Admin with Aiding Daring Escape from Venezuela
https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2025/12/11/maria-corina-machado-credits-trump-admin-aiding-daring-escape-venezuela/
Our family knows immigrants that came from Vietnam and are model citizens. They went through the Naturalization process, spoke the pledge to this country, and are now model citizens. This what I support. It’s a slap in the face for the people who sacrificed to become an American citizens the lawful way. We are country of laws and if your first inclination is to disregard those laws and arrive here illegally then chances are you are….well you can fill in the blanks.
Politics and religion don’t mix, except when we have no other moral choice.
I agree that Cartel criminals must be arrested and deported, but the process is seriously flawed and the colateral damage is overwhelmingly cruel and in some cases, life threatening. Puppy killer Noem has divided families even sending some immigants to El Salvador’s dreaded Cecot prison that mandates no release.
Trump’s mass deportation process is using the National Guard with polICE using a saber instead of scalpel to find the worst of the worst has failed miserably causing mass uprisings ans havoc across the bation.
Trump has difficulty with morals, honesty, and character. Calls Somalis GARBAGE. Other nations are S*i*-Holes. His tirades of falseness and spewing of lies and hatred place him a historically unique President. Examples:
Trump calls his purported enemies, like ailing Joe Biden, “a walking corpse and a lunatic.” MT Greene is a “traitor,” which often triggers death threats by his criminal MAGA sycophants. Geene said her family has gotten death threats on her children.
Ironically, Pete Segheth is calling for the court martial of decorated astronaut Mark Kelly for following the UCMJ, which clearly supports illegal commands. A sure loser for Trump who never served a second in defense of the country that made him a billionaire!!!
White House Assistant Press Secretary Taylor Rogers told CNA that Trump “won in a landslide victory with historic support from patriotic Catholics across the country because he promised to fight for people of faith, and he has delivered in record time.”
The Guardian: FALSE! Final certified results indicated he won approximately 49.8% of the popular vote.
Donald Trump (Republican): ~77.3 million votes (49.8%)
Kamala Harris (Democratic): ~75.0 million votes (48.3%)
The convicted criminals’ averages hover around 36% …
Approval Ratings by Policy Area
Recent polls indicate varying levels of approval for how he handles specific issues, most of which are underwater (more disapproval than approval).
Policy Area Approval Rating (Approx.) Polling Source/Note
Crime 43% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Foreign Affairs 41% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Foreign Trade 39% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Immigration 37% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Economy 31% – 36% Reuters/Ipsos (Dec 2025), Gallup (Nov 2025)
Middle East Situation 33% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Federal Budget 31% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Ukraine Situation 31% Gallup (Nov 2025)
Healthcare Policy 30% Gallup (Nov 2025)
https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+trump%27s+approval+rating+for+his+policies&oq=what&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBggAECMYJzIGCAAQIxgnMgYIARBFGDkyBggCECMYJzIMCAMQABhDGIAEGIoFMg0IBBAAGJECGIAEGIoFMgwIBRAAGEMYgAQYigUyDAgGEAAYQxiABBiKBTIGCAcQRRg80gEINTY2MWowajeoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
There is not enough ink to list Trump’s many unlawful and immoral acts. The most egregious is that he has broken his oath to protect the Constitution. Trump is a divider, not a uniter.
God protect our children.
“Politics and religion don’t mix, except when we have no other moral choice.”
Meaningless drivel. Worse, completely false.
MorganD: Your TDS is way out of control. I’d get help soon if I were you. In the meantime, stop watching CNN, PBS and anything coming from AP or Reuters as it will exacerbate your condition.
Trump is a symptom, not the problem. The problem is that a large swath of the population buys into the MAGA schlock. The white working class has lost a lot of ground over the past 40 years. Instead of blaming the true culprits, CEO’s and billionaires, Trump and the Republicans transfer the blame to safe targets, such as immigrants, transgenders and other culture war targets.
Incredibly, MAGA buys into tax cuts for the rich and other supply side economic drek, even though it does nothing for them. Millions of MAGA people will lose their Medicaid health care coverage, but by golly Trump beats up those Transgenders, so everything is great.
No one will be losing Medicaid under Trump. Democrats like you have been repeating that lie for decades, so no one is buying what you’re selling here.
I have a friend suffering from TDS who texts me with anti Trump rants before 5am and composed an anti Trump tirade on her Christmas card.
I hope Mr Morgan’s TDS is less painful. It can’t be a pleasant affliction to suffer.
mrscracker: My prayers for your suffering friend !
That text message sounds like good food for thought early AM, over coffee (I’m kidding). You should tell your friend that his text alert beeping just woke the grandkids spending the night and now they are upset and can’t get back to sleep!
(they think Santa texted Grandma that they aren’t getting any presents this year)
Its funny how many liberals attack Trump on “name calling”, except when its THEIR side that does it. I have lost track of how many democrat politicians have called Trump a dictator, a nazi, a murderer; said that he is going to refuse to leave office, is endangering our democracy, and any number or other clearly deranged accusations. They do the same with his cabinet picks. Tom Homan has been personally threatened and his agents physically attacked. All of those attacks far and away supercede calling obviously dysfunctional third world nations full of pirates, criminals and terrorists “S…Hole” countries. And all of THAT leftist name calling has thus far resulted in two REAL assassination attacks on Trump, not to mention illegally ginned up legal charges made up out of whole cloth simply intended to knee-cap his political ambitions. The weaponization of our government agencies. And lets not forget the attack on the Republican baseball team in Washington DC.
My big concern is that we have too many uninformed voters who expect instant results on bringing normality back to our nation while Trump is attacked in the courts every single time he makes a move to pass a law. It does slow things down. I wonder about the people who vote for a party that wants to free criminals,open our borders to terrorists, and pay for every Tom , Dick and Harry who can jump the border. These voters are clearly ill-informed, partisan, credulous or simply not too smart. Changing your vote every year is not a pathway to fixing the government. Our schools, hospitals and housing stock is bursting at the seams. And we see from the recent Somali theft rings that stole a BILLION of taxpayer dollars, that not all immigrants are nice folks who just want to work. Save me the fairy tales.
Put me down as an educated woman who is thrilled Trump has shut the border, and is stopping boat loads of terrorists before they and their DRUGS, reach our shores. I dont care how many times we have to hit their boat. They are enemy combatants, trying to kill our citizens. “Just poor folks trying to earn a living”???? REALLY? So its ok they kill our kids?? Americans need to wake up and understand we are at war.
Well on the bright side, at least our schools are getting some numbers back recently. I was reading a border town newspaper and their enrollment keeps falling because people are having fewer children. The article said it’s a feature now in the state elementary schools and eventually will affect enrollment numbers for high schools and colleges.
I’m sorry for the lives lost in those drug boats. Cartel workers aren’t always given a choice when they’re recruited. But what they carry are weapons of mass destruction. I don’t know a single family who hasn’t lost a loved one to an overdose, has a member who suffers an addiction, or has someone incarcerated because of addiction.
Thanks, LJ, for your excellent post. God bless you.
Regarding drugs,the problem is demand. Those “Narco-Terrorists” would not be bringing drugs to the US unless there was demand. Yes,we should make every effort to stop drugs from coming to the US, but we must also stop demanding them. The drug users are not exactly innocent victims, but participants in this mess.
LJ: Well said. We have to recognize that those with TDS are deranged individuals, full of hate and vitriol.
When we saw how the TDS crowd went about keying Teslas because Elon Musk was busy trying to uncover fraud in government, we witnessed this deranged hate.
When Charlie Kirk was murdered by a homosexual trans maniac we saw evidence of how the TDS crowd applauded his murder.
When two assassination attempts were made on President Trump we saw the TDS hate crowd rejoice at the prospect of his death.
There are so many more examples of the TDS syndrome of hate and violence that illustrate that much of their thinking and behavior is the work of the Evil One.
This may not help poor TDS sufferers. Please do not show it to them:
Nobel Prize Winner Machado: Trump Is ‘Champion of Freedom’ for Hemisphere
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/maria-corina-machado-trump-venezuela/2025/12/14/id/1238291/
I seem to recall Biden calling all Trump supporters “garbage.” Did we cry? Did Trump cry? No, instead, he wore garbage man’s yellow vest (“because it made him look thinner”) and drove a garbage truck. It was hilarious!
“…using a saber instead of scalpel to find the worst of the worst…”
The “worst of the worst” and the “best of the best” are the same – they both violated our immigration law. They deserve the same treatment.
“Young said much of American Catholic history has been an ‘immigrant group coming in and being the target of nativism.’”
Oookay! When nothing else seems to work, pull out the race card. But the race card – and the charge of “nativism” that goes with it – do not work for us LEGAL immigrants, because we are not native., But we, too, are here. Don’t ignore our presence. The difference is, we’re LEGAL.
Why do the pope and bishops purposely overlook the difference between legal and illegal immigrants? When was the last time we hear the pope or a bishop preach that illegal immigration is immoral? They hardly ever, because for them, illegal aliens are sacred. Preferential option is only for illegals. Period.
Neither is it true that immigrant groups are the target of nativism, since natives and alien groups hardly ever sit in the same Mass. They don’t interact. The natives attend the Mass in their preferred language (English); the immigrants have their own Mass in their own languages. Where did the idea of “target of nativism” come from, then? Obviously, it’s the race card.
Using the race card indiscriminately without regard for us, Brown legal immigrants, is in itself racist. The race card is old and does not work. What works is the green card.
Thanks to Carl and to all who responded to my post on more young Catholic voters supporting President Trump. Complementary discourse is always a winner. It concerns me when vile personal rhetoric destroys the discussion. Those stark words incite the very thing we need to fix.
My overriding fear is for the future of our innocent children being exposed to today’s enormous challenges, including political polarization driven by lies and hatred. I feel that President Trump’s bully pulpit causes much of that fear. He shows a stark cognative difference from his first term.
The broader question is how can we come together and put “America first”? The term coined by the president.
Putting America first requires collaboration and conciliation with other nations. The key is strong and fair leadership. Current events pose many negatives and dangers.
I suggest that we become more involved and vocal in defence of our Republic.