Debate Now Who are the serious debaters on this forum?

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Lol, mentally limited copy cat.

.

Who can't even copy accurately. It must be drunk.

.

 

[jc456]

25 women accused him of sex abuse, accusations which are consistent with his bragging that he can commit sexual abuse and get away with it because he is a celebrity, his having to pay $5 million after being sued for sex abuse and defamation, his bragging about owning a pageant and barging in on nubile teens in various stages of undress to inspect the room because 'he own's the pageant' his response, when asked what he has in common with his daughter Ivanka, while Ivanka is sitting next to him, and he says 'Sex' and you are going to tell me he is not a sex abuser?

so where's the link to the verdict?

 

[miketx]

so where's the link to the verdict?

He has to make it up, so soon.

 

[jc456]

so where's the link to the verdict?

Rumpole , still waiting for that link bubba!!!! did your balls shrivel up and you had to leave?

 

[Rumpole]

Rumpole , still waiting for that link bubba!!!! did your balls shrivel up and you had to leave?

I made reference to historical events. Not court rulings. If you want the jury's verdict in the
Carrol case, read about it here:

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rumpole]

so where's the link to the verdict?

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rumpole]

No, the jury determined he DEFAMED the bitch. No wonder you are shit as a debater, you LIE all of the time!

The jury found Trump liable for BOTH sexually abusing and defaming Carroll, ordering him to pay $5 million in damages.

Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M

A jury has found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996. Jurors awarded her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The verdict was announced in a federal courtroom in New York City on...

apnews.com

you can't be determined as liable for sex abuse unless you commit sexual abuse.

Wake the fuck up.

 

[Rawley]

25 women accused him of sex abuse, accusations which are consistent with his bragging that he can commit sexual abuse and get away with it because he is a celebrity, his having to pay $5 million after being sued for sex abuse and defamation, his bragging about owning a pageant and barging in on nubile teens in various stages of undress to inspect the room because 'he own's the pageant' his response, when asked what he has in common with his daughter Ivanka, while Ivanka is sitting next to him, and he says 'Sex' and you are going to tell me he is not a sex abuser?

And your guy took inappropriate showers with his daughter. Yer point?

 

[Rumpole]

Again, your truths aren’t facts

I can substantiate every claim in that post. Just ask.

 

[Rumpole]

And your guy took inappropriate showers with his daughter. Yer point?

You're accusing biden. If there were sex abuse committed by Biden to his Daughter, the diary would have indicated trauma, and there is zero trauma indicated in the diary, and all that is there is a fleeting reference to it. in fact, the diary is mostly about her boyfriend and her social troubles. We have interviews of Ashley speaking about her father in glowing terms. We have photos of her smiling next to her father, holding her father in loving embrace. Hardly evidence of a daughter abused by her father. It's not unheard of for parents to bath a child while they are bathing themselves, it's all very innocent. '

What you are accusing Biden of is not evidence, it would easily be destroyed on cross examination in a court of law, especially if Ashely, herself, testified.

None of this is remotely equivalent to the 25 women who accused Trump, and he was found liable for sex abuse and defamation and ordered to pay Carrol $5 million.

That is my point.

 

[Rawley]

You're accusing biden.

Not me his daughter,

If there were sex abuse committed by Biden to his Daughter, the diary would have indicated trauma, and there is zero trauma indicated in the diary,

"Hypersexualized" "sex with friends @ a young age" "molested" The girl has some serious trauma. Fucked her whole life up. Serious drug addiction .....

and all that is there is a fleeting reference to it. in fact, the diary is mostly about her boyfriend and her social troubles. We have interviews of Ashley speaking about her father in glowing terms. We have photos of her smiling next to her father, holding her father in loving embrace. Hardly evidence of a daughter abused by her father. It's not unheard of for parents to bath a child while they are bathing themselves, it's all very innocent. '

What you are accusing Biden of is not evidence, it would easily be destroyed on cross examination in a court of law, especially if Ashely, herself, testified.

LOL NO EVIDENCE You Bidenfluffers need a new tag line.

None of this is remotely equivalent to the 25 women who accused Trump

Odd that not a single one of them filed a criminal complaint.,

, and he was found liable for sex abuse and defamation and ordered to pay Carrol $5 million.

That is my point.

LOL A gold digging hag makes up a story about a rape that allegedly occurred 30 years ago ina a department store on 5th ave of all places and a NYC jury finds she's a liar, but awards her $5M anyway LOL,

 

[miketx]

The jury found Trump liable for BOTH sexually abusing and defaming Carroll, ordering him to pay $5 million in damages.

Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse, awards accuser $5M

A jury has found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996. Jurors awarded her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The verdict was announced in a federal courtroom in New York City on...

apnews.com

you can't be determined as liable for sex abuse unless you commit sexual abuse.

Wake the fuck up.

We are awake, we all know you're a lying pos, rump hole.

 

[jc456]

I made reference to historical events. Not court rulings. If you want the jury's verdict in the
Carrol case, read about it here:

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Still can’t provide their actual decision from the link. I have no desire to research nonsense that I already read, and it’s not what you said. It’s courts that decide, not you. Too fking funny

 

[jc456]

I can substantiate every claim in that post. Just ask.

But you haven’t

 

[jc456]

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It’s a civil case. He is liable until he appeals. The evidence wasn’t there. He needs to be found guilty of abuse as a crime. Evidence is different ina criminal case. Where’s the verdict he’s guilty of a crime

 

[Rumpole]

.

If someone can't say it in fifty words, I don't need to know it.

It's called being succinct, and it's a valuable skill in life.

Definition of SUCCINCT

marked by compact precise expression without wasted words; being girded; close-fitting… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

.

You'll have a problem with the Federalist papers, the Constitution, Philosophy, Science, Law, Geology, Shakespeare, The Bible, the Tao Te Ching, Wealth Of Nations, scholarly articles, Supreme Court rulings, Kissinger's "White House years," history in general, Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent", and most subjects in politics, science and life, because life is more nuanced than your short attention span addled brain can handle. Your requirement will keep you ignorant, that is certain.

You see, the art of brevity does not actually mean short sentences, less that fifty words, etc., it means not being verbose, not using more words than necessary. You can write a book with a 1000 pages and not be verbose. Many times a complete understanding of something requires learning about the nuance of the thing, the shades of gray, because life is not so often simplistic or black and white. Sometimes a message is more artful if expressed in a certain way, which just might include more words than necessary, insofar as the style might be part of the message, maybe it's done for more impact, which is the case in these two paragraphs.

You see, some folks don't get it in short sentences, for some people, you have to repeat yourself in different ways to get message across. No profession knows this more than advertising copywriters, which used to be my profession, long ago.

Now, I will shorten the above, and watch how the color of the thing changes:

Life's complexity often demands more than fifty words for clarity and nuance. Brevity isn't about word count but about avoiding verbosity. Understanding deep topics like law or philosophy requires detail. Your stance risks ignorance. Even in advertising, my former field, repetition and style are key for impact.

Sure, the message is basically the same, but the breadth and depth of the original is now stripped away. You'll miss out on much that is written in the world, you'll miss color depth, life's innumerable hues, if you insist everything you read fits your requirement.

Would you insist on all painters use only red, yellow, and blue, the primary colors, or use the colors inherent in real life? Most objects in life are a complex amalgam of many colors, and there are actually over some 16 million colors (used on the internet), and if you insist on simple solid colors, you won't see life as it really is. You will be rendered ignorant. Painting is a perfect analogy for written expression, in my view.

 

[Rumpole]

Rumpole, I would be happy to debate some issues with you. Above you refer to authoratative sources being necessary, but you don't take into account that sources you deem to be authoritative, may not be credible sources to others.

Well, we could agree that all that matters is the argument. Links should supplement the argument, but shouldn't make the argument. There are some sources that are a deal breaker for me, such as Gatewaypundit.

Here's an opportunity for you to expand on that idea: I deem the sources that are saying that the war in the Ukraine is an American proxy war against Russia as credible and authoritative. Most Americans disagree.

It isn't, but it could be. one could make stronger argument that Vietnam was a war with China by proxy.

Instead of you starting to debate the issue I've used as an example, can you suggest how a debate can proceed from differing opinions of that depth and gravity?

An argument doesn't have to be strong, it doesn't even have to be logical.
What it should be is to be written sans 'non arguments' Non arguments just waste time.

What is a non argument? Below is a boiler plated list.

So the point is any argument, bad, weak, medium or strong, moves the debate forward. Someone makes a bad argument, the debate moves forward because you just debate the person, point out the logical fallacies, incorrect data, etc. and the debate continues. But, if someone response with a snarky weasel words, you can't debate those. The really good
example of a non argument is a thought-terminating cliche, such as 'TDS'. That
is a non argument. It's a non argument because the person who wrote it has no
desire to debate you, they just want to kill the conversation. Posturing is very common, and it comes in many flavors, that is where someone tries to elevate themself, puff themself up either by claiming authority (which you really can't do on an anonymous forum) or talk another down, shame, belittle, insult. So, they are 'non arguments'. See, a non argument isn't really debatable. You can't substantiate weasel words, words that lack coherence or sincerity, they are unreality. You'd be surprised how few people understand this.

I would assert that the quality of 'debaters' is lacking and that can't be fixed unless the quality of the moderation is fixed to meet certain minimal standards.

What I would suggest is join www.politicalforum.com they have much better moderation over there. They don't allow ad homs over there (the mods will mod like they should, when reported, they don't do it here very much). I'm "Patricio Da Silva" on that forum.

Would you like a debate between us so that we can put our ideas to the test?

You may find too that there are no more than two or maybe three others on this board who are actually capable of reasoned debate that's within your parameters.

Join the other forum, and PM me over there.

 

[Rumpole]

It’s a civil case. He is liable until he appeals. The evidence wasn’t there. He needs to be found guilty of abuse as a crime. Evidence is different ina criminal case. Where’s the verdict he’s guilty of a crime

So what? He asked for a link to the verdict, and in Carrol v Trump there was a verdict. A jury found that Trump was liable for sex abuse and defamation. It's not BARD, but it is based on a 'preponderance of the evidence' such that they will award of $5million damages. You can't grant such an award if you didn't see enough evidence to convince you that Trump did the deed. Now, that's not BARD for a criminal sanction, but it is sufficient to hold an opinion about Trump, given that he has bragged that because he is a star he can commit sexual abuse and get away with it., not to mention that when he was asked about what he had in common with his daughter, Ivanka, while she was sitting beside her, he said' sex' (she was a bit stunned by the comment') so, holding an opinion that Trump is a sex abusing perv is reasonable. .

 

[Rumpole]

Not me his daughter,

Ashley did not accuse her father of sex abuse.

"Hypersexualized" "sex with friends @ a young age" "molested" The girl has some serious trauma. Fucked her whole life up. Serious drug addiction .....

Show me the quotes that her father did these things to her.

LOL NO EVIDENCE You Bidenfluffers need a new tag line.

Sorry, there is no evidence.

Odd that not a single one of them filed a criminal complaint.,

LOL A gold digging hag makes up a story about a rape that allegedly occurred 30 years ago ina a department store on 5th ave of all places and a NYC jury finds she's a liar, but awards her $5M anyway LOL,

The jury spoke, based on a 'preponderance of the evidence.

Hell, Trump even bragged that because he is a 'star' he can sexually abuse women and get away with it. When asked what he had in common with Ivanka, he said 'sex' while his daughter was sitting beside him, she was stunned. The man is a perv, and you need to admit it.

 

[Anomalism]

That never has been the etiquette in any forum

These apes have no etiquette.