Part II: The Testimony of Two Witnesses
It is a command of Torah to establish facts on the testimony of two or more witnesses (Deu 17:6). Therefore in part one, I pointed out the testimony of two witnesses on the topic of Mr. Trump’s repentance: his own testimony is the first witness, and the testimony of more than one Christian leader is the second witness.
It is also reiterated in the New Testament to refuse to entertain an accusation against an elder (a leader) unless it can be established from the mouth of several truthful witnesses (1 Tim 5:19). These safeguards are in the word of God, because accusation is the favorite tactic the enemy employs against those whom God is using (Rev 12:10).
The month of October has been a month where one accusation after another has come against both candidates for both parties in rapid-fire succession. The accusations against Mr. Trump have been printed and blasted from the major newspapers and TV stations: The New York Times, the Washington Post, Network News, CNN and Fox. The accusations against Mrs. Clinton have been buried from mainstream media but blasted from alternative media.
The debate should be about the issues and not about unsubstantiated accusations. However, accusations work, because whether they are true or not, people hear them and then close their ears, eyes, minds, and hearts to hear anything else. It is a strategy of the enemy that works with devastating effectiveness, much to the shame of the Lord’s people, who should know better.
The same criteria the Lord established in His word as an admonition to judges to investigate and determine the truth of the matter, is reliable criteria we citizens can use to investigate and determine the truth of these accusations. Because the fact of the matter is, if one side in a contest has weaker policy or weaker support than the other side in a contest, then the only way for the weak side to win, is to boost their own vote and suppress the vote of the strong side. If their policy is weak, then the only way they can suppress the vote of the strong side, is to wait right before the election is to be held, and then sling mud, knowing that accusation will have its deadly effect, and the time will be too short for the truth to come out and correct the damage done.
In a free society, the press is our safeguard against unfounded accusations, however, the press as a safeguard only works where the press is committed to nothing but truth, refusing to print or broadcast anything sensational just for the sake of ratings or a subscription boost – or because the owner or editor refuses to use his platform to broadcast his own personal preference, regardless of truth.
I am sorry to burst your bubble, but we do not live in a free society where the press is our safeguard. They do print unfounded accusations and sensationalism for the sake of ratings and boosts. They do use their platform to broadcast personal preferences, or even opinions they are paid to broadcast. Whatever makes money is king, not truth. As we will see, we cannot rely on the press in these matters; we have to do our own digging.
Assault accusations against Trump
In each case the test of two witnesses is not passed. The two witnesses must be witnesses for the same event, and then their witness has to match, or pass the test of true, before it can be admitted. according to Torah standards. This type of assault accusations are notoriously hard to substantiate because of this; assault usually takes place away from the public eye, and it becomes a case of she said/ he said. However, logical analysis can sometimes help.
Think about this. These accusers have been silent all the years that Trump was famous and wealthy. Any one of them could have sued him for a fortune at the time of the assault! Why didn’t they? Other famous and wealthy people paid off victims in order to prevent a scandal, but that never happened with Trump. So, a famous billionaire is surrounded by beautiful women for 40 years, and assault allegations only come out three weeks before an important, hotly contested election? And I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you too … It makes far more logical sense that these attacks come under the heading of false witness, since only the accusation is needed to damage the candidate before the election, and not the actual truth.
Then also, there are two kinds of witnesses that have come forward to debunk these claims. The first are people who actually know the accusers or have knowledge of facts in their stories, which have brought out major discrepancies.
Trump’s accuser says she wanted him to visit, sought business advice (Broken link, active October 21, 2016)
The second are the women (and men!) in similar circumstances, who also had dealings with Trump, but who categorically deny that his treatment of them was anything less than honorable.
Miss USA 2005, a former assault victim, has harsh words about Trump accusers’ timing (Broken link, active October 21, 2016)
Because the witnesses do not agree, their testimony cannot be admitted, and the connection of some of the accusers to the Clinton campaign just makes the whole thing smell rotten.
Trump is suing the New York Times for libel, and his lawyers would not recommend that against the most powerful newspaper in the country unless they thought they had a fair shot of success.
Trump is about to take the gloves off against the billionaire he says is behind the groping stories in the media (Broken link, active October 21, 2016)
Is there a media bias against Trump? When one media outlet reports on another media outlet’s “unhinged” obsession with a candidate, you can put the checkmark in the possible column.
Mike Pence drops the mic on Trump groping accusations with one undeniable fact about the media (Broken link, active October 21, 2016)
But when a newspaper comes out and straight up admits there is bias, and apologizes for it?
The media, the election, and bias – Daily Commercial, Leesburg, Florida
Then the recent release of Wikileaks emails reveal major media news outlets coordinating with the Clinton campaign in their coverage, in order to “spin” the public’s perception of each candidate: positively in the case of Mrs. Clinton, and negatively in the case of Mr. Trump.
Are the accusations against Mrs. Clinton likewise unfounded? This is harder to say, “Yes, they are,” because we have just had this summer, the testimony of the director of the FBI himself before the Congress, that Mrs. Clinton did in fact do the things she was accused of. Since that time much more damaging evidence has come to light, both by video testimony and by written communication, of unethical and criminal behavior:
Project Veritas videos: