Even Republicans are beginning to notice Trump's dementia.

[McBell]

I did not flip flop my position concerning evidence .. ? Where is your support for this comical strawman fallacy accusation .. which you follow up with appeal to authority fallacy.

You flip flopped your view on the evidence at least five times in post 351 alone.
Which I broke down for you in post 357.

I suggest learning what an argument is ..

I know what an argument is.
Thus far, you have not presented one.

I can help you if you like .. as this will improve your ability to make one.

ROTFLMAO
If your whole "kangaroo not rape evidence flip flopping" nonsense is your idea of an "argument"...

 

[Sargonski]

He has a point.

What pont was that friend .. other than Biden's dementia is much further progressed than your beloved Donald ?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What pont was that friend .. other than Biden's dementia is much further progressed than your beloved Donald ?

The evidence indicates otherwise. Why do you even pretend not to be a MAGA?

his point is that you cannot make a proper argument. All that you can do is to commit the logical fallacies that you accuse others of doing.

For example one of your favorites is to to improperly use the term "Kangaroo court" as if that is a refutation. That is an accusation that you need to be able to justify, but you never have.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not the one mocking rape by equivocating forced intercourse with some gold digger claiming to have been inappropriately touched 30 years ago ?

What evidence do I not know ... there is no substantive evidence to know -- all we have is he said she said from 30 years ago. What evidence exists other than that ? you don't seem to know the he said she said evidence .. never mind provide anything substantive.

What is the Gold digger claiming .. was she commando at the time ? or did Trump have to work his way in through her panties. You keep going on about forcefull penetration but don't seem to know the details.

And there we go. "Gold digger" is an accusation that puts the burden of proof upon you. It is also an example of an ad hominem attack. You would need to show that she did it just for money and not for justice. But let me help you on that. When she first came out with how she had been raped it was not for money. She did not go after Trump monetarily until after he had slandered her countless times. If Trump had just denied it it is highly dubious that she would have done anything, but he continually lied about her and denigrated her.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

This is a strawman argument since you are ignoring that when it happened to two friends that confirmed her claims. That was long before Trump became political.

Unfortunately, there is no good evidence that this happened. You are proposing we convict someone if they are simply accused. Again that is not justice. You believe her story, I am not convinced.


Also, do you support charges against Biden? If not, why do you not believe Tara Reade's and the people she told story but believe Carroll's and the people she told story?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847840765/new-information-emerges-around-biden-sexual-assault-allegation

This is not whataboutism, my point for posting this is to show the different treatment of Biden and Trump by the justice system and his supporters.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

What you won't do to defend his depravity. He was found guilty, and yet you "think" that you know more. If Biden had done anything even remotely similar, you'd be all over him and broadcasting it from the rooftops.

Would you?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847840765/new-information-emerges-around-biden-sexual-assault-allegation

Of course you will say these are somehow different.

 

[metis]

Would you?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847840765/new-information-emerges-around-biden-sexual-assault-allegation

Of course you will say these are somehow different.

Do you know the difference between an "allegation" and a "conviction"? If there's evidence that Biden did sexually assaulted a woman, then bring it forth. Either way, didn't your parents teach you that "two wrongs don't make a right"-- or is it that "two Wongs don't make a white"? I'm so confused!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Unfortunately, there is no good evidence that this happened. You are proposing we convict someone if they are simply accused. Again that is not justice. You believe her story, I am not convinced.


Also, do you support charges against Biden? If not, why do you not believe Tara Reade's and the people she told story but believe Carroll's and the people she told story?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847840765/new-information-emerges-around-biden-sexual-assault-allegation

This is not whataboutism, my point for posting this is to show the different treatment of Biden and Trump by the justice system and his supporters.

Here is why the Tara Reade story is not getting much traction. First what Tara described was rather mild. And she was the only one that ever accused Biden of inappropriate behavior. Trump has a history of this. Both self admitted and at least 26 women have come out and made the accusation. Plus, unlike the women that have accused Trump, Tara's story began to break down under further investigation, you might want to read this, it tells you why the story is no longer in the news:

Tara Reade Loses Her Attorney as New Reporting Dents Her Story About Joe Biden

The move comes following a series of investigative reports questioning Reade’s general credibility or weakening the corroboration of the alleged attack.

slate.com

It is a very bad sign when your own attorney drops the case.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You "rested your case" three times now and I bet we are still gonna hear you whining about it.

I rest my case a fourth time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You "rested your case" three times now and I bet we are still gonna hear you whining about it.

I cracked up because I saw this in his quote just now.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Do you know the difference between an "allegation" and a "conviction"? If there's evidence that Biden did sexually assaulted a woman, then bring it forth. Either way, didn't your parents teach you that "two wrongs don't make a right"-- or is it that "two Wongs don't make a white"? I'm so confused!

It is the same evidence as the Carroll case, the alleged victims testimony and who she told. No one cared. This is my point, the difference in treatment between Biden and Trump. I know you won't admit it but it is there.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Here is why the Tara Reade story is not getting much traction. First what Tara described was rather mild. And she was the only one that ever accused Biden of inappropriate behavior. Trump has a history of this. Both self admitted and at least 26 women have come out and made the accusation. Plus, unlike the women that have accused Trump, Tara's story began to break down under further investigation, you might want to read this, it tells you why the story is no longer in the news:

Tara Reade Loses Her Attorney as New Reporting Dents Her Story About Joe Biden

The move comes following a series of investigative reports questioning Reade’s general credibility or weakening the corroboration of the alleged attack.

slate.com

It is a very bad sign when your own attorney drops the case.

Ok, I expected this. There are problems with Carroll's story as well. The evidence is similar in these cases and Biden has been accused before of sexual misconduct by other women.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I did not flip flop my position concerning evidence .. ? Where is your support for this comical strawman fallacy accusation .. which you follow up with appeal to authority fallacy.

Good grief mate -- just because the the Nazi courts decided that Jews were sub-human -- does not make it true ?

I suggest learning what an argument is .. I can help you if you like .. as this will improve your ability to make one.

You really do not understand how to use logical fallacies properly. You cannot make an accusation of using a logical fallacy go away by flapping your arms. You continually misused the term "kangaroo court" in your arguments against disqualification and now you are using it in the Carroll case. Just because you do not like a verdict does not make something a Kangaroo court. You would need to show that only one side got to make their case. That people were illegally stopped from testifying etc.. That did not happen in any of those example. If you want an example of a "kangaroo court" the Senate trial of Trump in his first impeachment was a perfect example of one. The Republicans would not allow the presentation of any evidence against Donald Trump. That is a prime example of misjustice.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, I expected this. There are problems with Carroll's story as well. The evidence is similar in these cases and Biden has been accused before of sexual misconduct by other women.

Really? What is the problem with it? That article goes over the problems with her charges against Biden. How did Carroll's testimony fall apart?

 

[Sargonski]

And there we go. "Gold digger" is an accusation that puts the burden of proof upon you. It is also an example of an ad hominem attack. You would need to show that she did it just for money and not for justice. But let me help you on that. When she first came out with how she had been raped it was not for money. She did not go after Trump monetarily until after he had slandered her countless times. If Trump had just denied it it is highly dubious that she would have done anything, but he continually lied about her and denigrated her.

What burden of proof ? The woman dug a huge amount of Gold .. it is already proven. Your inference that she did it for the money and not for justice - looks on the surface correct - but no one needs to show anything of the sort .. could be both money and Justice .. A Jilted woman may indeed feel that it is Justice that she receives compensation for unrequited affection .. or feeling she was used and abused by some dude .. who knows .. don't need to prove any of that .. it is up to our dear Gold Digger to prove that she is not "Stretching the Truth" on account of what ever reason .. personal gain .. hurt feelings .. from some small incident 30 years ago .. been blown up a notch every year went buy in the minds of the gaggle present when the poor girl complained of Trump being handsy .. from that morphed now into "Penetration" .. the nature of which we are trying to investigate .. not getting much co-operation from the accusers claiming "Evidence"

Do you have any .... "Evidence" that might help us sort out this he said she said ? Tell us about the penetration .. was she commando that day .. .. how did Trumpy manage to navigate around the panties if not .. was there finger blasting once penetration achieved .. ..

Some have cried out "Pornographic" but .. when sex is the subject matter .. how else does one proceed ? and why would Trump not denigrate this Gold Digger coming after him --- pretending she is not aware that should the criminal charge fail the civil option is open .. not know about the Statue of limitations .. and so forth.

Do you have anything ? Evidence .. something other than Ad Hom Fallacy "Trump Lied" .. as if this constitutes evidence that he molested someone .. Tell us about the moment of Penetration if you want to talk about Evidence .. give some support for these vapid claims and accusations.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What burden of proof ? The woman dug a huge amount of Gold .. it is already proven. Your inference that she did it for the money and not for justice - looks on the surface correct - but no one needs to show anything of the sort .. could be both money and Justice .. A Jilted woman may indeed feel that it is Justice that she receives compensation for unrequited affection .. or feeling she was used and abused by some dude .. who knows .. don't need to prove any of that .. it is up to our dear Gold Digger to prove that she is not "Stretching the Truth" on account of what ever reason .. personal gain .. hurt feelings .. from some small incident 30 years ago .. been blown up a notch every year went buy in the minds of the gaggle present when the poor girl complained of Trump being handsy .. from that morphed now into "Penetration" .. the nature of which we are trying to investigate .. not getting much co-operation from the accusers claiming "Evidence"

Do you have any .... "Evidence" that might help us sort out this he said she said ? Tell us about the penetration .. was she commando that day .. .. how did Trumpy manage to navigate around the panties if not .. was there finger blasting once penetration achieved .. ..

Some have cried out "Pornographic" but .. when sex is the subject matter .. how else does one proceed ? and why would Trump not denigrate this Gold Digger coming after him --- pretending she is not aware that should the criminal charge fail the civil option is open .. not know about the Statue of limitations .. and so forth.

Do you have anything ? Evidence .. something other than Ad Hom Fallacy "Trump Lied" .. as if this constitutes evidence that he molested someone .. Tell us about the moment of Penetration if you want to talk about Evidence .. give some support for these vapid claims and accusations.

If you do not listen to posts you cannot demand any answers. I refuted your opening claim before you even made it.

 

[metis]

It is the same evidence as the Carroll case, the alleged victims testimony and who she told. No one cared. This is my point, the difference in treatment between Biden and Trump. I know you won't admit it but it is there.

Now you're being dishonest as allegations and verdicts are not the same. But hey, should we expect anything different with those that support the likes of Trump? I think Hunter Biden may well be guilty, but I don't make such disingenuous allegations like you do even with him.

Don't right & wrong make any difference to you whatsoever, or is your tribalism so strong that you can't even see straight?

 

[Subduction Zone]

@Sargonski , when people told you in the Carroll case that Trump lied and it hurt his case they also told you how he lied. You need to read those explanations and respond if you want to debate. Otherwise people are just going to remind you that they already did that.

Did you forget how it was showed that some of his claims, if not all of them, were shown to be lies? It was explained to you.

 

[Sargonski]

You really do not understand how to use logical fallacies properly. You cannot make an accusation of using a logical fallacy go away by flapping your arms. You continually misused the term "kangaroo court" in your arguments against disqualification and now you are using it in the Carroll case. Just because you do not like a verdict does not make something a Kangaroo court. You would need to show that only one side got to make their case. That people were illegally stopped from testifying etc.. That did not happen in any of those example. If you want an example of a "kangaroo court" the Senate trial of Trump in his first impeachment was a perfect example of one. The Republicans would not allow the presentation of any evidence against Donald Trump. That is a prime example of misjustice.

I have not misused the term kangaroo court? What a re you talking about .. and what is this logical fallacy I have misused. and why have you accused me of such misuse but not stated what the fallacy was .. so that your name calling is not so naked .. in your big Phat Strawman Fallacy attempt.

What does any of this name calling fallacy filled diatribe have to do with the Carroll case not being a kangaroo court.. clearly a term you do not understand. So what if people were illegally stopped from testifying .. how does this negate the kangaroo ? and what is the Kangaroo ?

What is the Kangaroo mate = The reasons I have given for why it is Kangaroo = Violations of the Rule of Law.

You have no idea what is being argued .. such to make any assertion as to whether or not the term Kangaroo is being misused .. so out with it .. what are the Rule of Law Violations being argued .. and since when do these violations not equat to 3rd world Kangarooland.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you're being dishonest as allegations and verdicts are not the same. But hey, should we expect anything different with those that support the likes of Trump? I think Hunter Biden may well be guilty, but I don't make such disingenuous allegations like you do even with him.

Don't right & wrong make any difference to you whatsoever, or is your tribalism so strong that you can't even see straight?

Hunter is guilty. I doubt if his father is. Hunter had a deal that was a pretty standard deal for tax evasion. His deal was to pay his back taxes plus a penalty. That is pretty standard of the IRS. They do not hold grudges. They only want their money. And he was in the lower tier of tax offenders. It is people like Wesley Snipes that go to prison. When he was caught not paying taxes on his wealth he fought it all the way instead of making a deal. That results in prison time and one still pays taxes