Anonymous #1 4w

Sweet. Again, no argument.

-8

Anonymous OP 4w

You can be taken seriously once you stop supporting kid fuckers.

15

Anonymous #1 4w

Verbal bludgeoning.

-7

Anonymous OP 4w

Cry about it.

10

Anonymous #2 4w

This entire thread proves my point.

-7

Anonymous OP 4w

why should have a good faith conversation with someone who supports a motherfucking pedophile lol

14

Anonymous woodyguthrie 4w

As it lies right now, there is no objective evidence proving this. Something is clearly suspicious, and there is guilt. But your framing of objectivity is entirely assumptive. Is the dude sketch? Am I ready for this presidency to be over, fuck yeah. Is he a pedophile? I dont know, so im saying I dont know, and if it comes out he is, bury his ass under the jail, but if he’s not, then what?

-6

Anonymous #1 4w

I'm laughing because your tactics are so predictable that you've proven my point entirely. So go ahead, levy a new accusation against me and further erode your credibility and the magnitude of the allegations you so casually hurl.

-6

Anonymous OP 4w

You’re crying about verbal bludgeoning lol.

10

Anonymous #3 4w

Great point. What will you do in three years when he’s not?

-5

Anonymous OP 4w

I didn’t actually read passed the “I’m laughing” bit btw. I don’t engage in delusional tantrums.

8

Anonymous OP 4w

How much proof do you actually need? He is a convicted felon. Rapist, pedophile, twice impeached, mentally deficient, compromised foreign operative. Nothing anyone says on YY will convince you if none of his history, or actual proof hasn’t changed your mind.

8

Anonymous OP 4w

Then he still tried to hide the names of kid fuckers?

8

Anonymous #1 4w

There it is, disengage entirely.

-3

Anonymous OP 4w

talking to y’all is like talking to fuckin skinwalkers. you’ve sold your soul to this demented fuck and he’s just going to make your life worse, irrespective of whether or not he’s an pedophile.

8

Anonymous #4 4w

And now Letita James is accused of the same offenses she was bringing against him. Your reality is tethered to theater.

-5

Anonymous OP 4w

which he is, y’all needed less proof to call chrissy teigen one and countless others. so shut the ever loving fuck up you vampire mf.

9

Anonymous OP 4w

And that offends you that you won’t be taken seriously until you choose to stop supporting kid fuckers? Yes or no?

7

Anonymous woodyguthrie 4w

There we go. Skin Walkers is a good one. Haven't heard that one before. A for originality.

-5

Anonymous #1 4w

Ok, take your tongue out of the electrical socket for just a second. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE OF CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN?

-6

Anonymous #4 4w

When was he convicted of rape and pedophilia?

-4

Anonymous OP 4w

That didn’t answer Try again.

8

Anonymous OP 4w

According to him, he’s not leaving. He’ll be serving another term. Screw the constitution and all the laws.

7

Anonymous #4 4w

And what does it say if the impeachment was levied on nerfed intelligence?

-4

Anonymous OP 4w

Ironic

6

Anonymous #1 4w

Ok, bury kid fuckers. Now present me with evidence of a child fucker.

-6

Anonymous #4 4w

He has gone on record as saying he will not seek a third term. Now, let's just play a theoretical game: What happens if he doesn't?

-5

Anonymous OP 4w

Didn’t ask that either. Yes or no was the question moron. Try again.

7

Anonymous #1 4w

Ok, the answer is no. It does not offend me.

-5

Anonymous OP 4w

Sure see was that so hard? now you want proof or evidence of him colluding or aiding pedophiles?

9

Anonymous #1 4w

If you’re alleging collusion or aiding pedophiles, then present evidence that proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.

-4

Anonymous OP 4w

So to be clear, it’s not whether or not there’s evidence, you only trust courts of law completely?

5

Anonymous #1 4w

No, I trust evidence. Courts are one way to test it, but not the only way. If you have solid, verifiable evidence, not memes, not rhetoric or hearsay, then put it forward.

-4

Anonymous OP 4w

Idk don’t you think it’s odd that trump let convicted sex offender and child predator Lawrence Taylor speak at his launch of a youth sports initiative, or that he repeatedly hints at pardoning ghislaine maxwell, or that he allowed her to be moved to a low security prison where she’s allowed to leave for work, or that he just recently allowed an israeli government official and pedophile to flee prosecution in las vegas and isn’t demanding his immediate extradition back to the united states?

9

Anonymous catboycommunist 4w

Those are associations and speculations, not evidence of him committing or aiding child abuse. If you're alleging a crime, present proof. Presenting suspicion as evidence is the exact tactic of Stalinist show trials.

-3

Anonymous #7 4w

Ok, so present an argument or policy measure, I don't understand?

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Trumps tax bill was moronic. Largest breaks went to the 1%, added trillions of debt while slashing food and healthcare for millions of citizens

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Okay, so then you’re not asking for it to be beyond a reasonable doubt. You’re just asking for evidence.

3

Anonymous #1 4w

Rhetoric without evidence of a crime is meaningless.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

anti-trans bills, elimination of DEI, anti-abortion bills, etc.

2

Anonymous #3 4w

The bill lowers taxes for everyone, but more importantly it forces price transparency in healthcare and ends third-party payer distortions. That’s what actually brings costs down for ordinary people.

0

Anonymous OP 4w

If i had it my way you’d be in a stalinist show trial right now but that’s besides the point

9

Anonymous OP 4w

I can provide evidence that he had aided in the protection of pedophiles or been okay with pedophilic behavior.

3

Anonymous OP 4w

To be clear though. The only way you’d believe these claims would be if he was convicted right? Or are you able to contextualize repeated actions outside of a court to imply a reasonable expectation of what’s being claimed?

3

Anonymous catboycommunist 4w

So you're a fascist?

-2

Anonymous OP 4w

Just ignored what I said got it

1

Anonymous #1 4w

What you’re describing isn’t evidence but an implication. In any system of justice, evidence must prove a charge, not just “suggest” one. Otherwise you’re arguing for guilt by association, which is text book authoritarianism. You’ve just admitted you don’t need proof, only suspicion.

-2

Anonymous #3 4w

But I didn't

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Lmao, eat my entire ass, jordan peterson. We can do gotcha’s all day long and it still won’t change the fact that in an ideal society you’d be laughed out of the public square

5

Anonymous catboycommunist 4w

That's fine. You're still a fascist.

-3

Anonymous OP 4w

“Fascism is when Stalinist show trials” 😂 what an idiot

6

Anonymous OP 4w

That’s not true at all. Evidence is not proof. In court you show evidence of something. You do not show proof, you show evidence that suggest it. If I claim Trump sent condolences to a pedophile, after the pedophile was outed, would you believe me yes or no?

0

Anonymous #1 4w

Holy christ are you actually jordan peterson, only one man could be this obsessed with semantics

6

Anonymous xi.jinping 4w

Classic Xi, strawman tactic. I never said fascism is Stalinism. I said show trials without proof are authoritarian, whether fascist, Stalinist, or otherwise.

-3

Anonymous #1 4w

Evidence without sufficiency is speculation. Courts don’t convict on suggestion, they convict when evidence meets a burden of proof. If all you have is “evidence that suggests,” then what you have is gossip, not a case.

-1

Anonymous catboycommunist 4w

Precision isn’t semantics; it’s quite literally the only thing that separates truth from accusation. If you think clarity is a problem, it’s because the entire foundation of your argument style is predicated on blurring definitions so that suspicion can masquerade as proof. Basically, you’re too dumb to argue.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

That’s absolutely untrue lol. You also didn’t answer. Try again.

4

Anonymous #1 4w

Ok. Why is it untrue?

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

Once you answer. Hurry up.

5

Anonymous #1 4w

Sorry my guy. Notifications turned off and dont live on this. I'll be sure to email you for permission to respond late. Sorry for wasting your time oh humble one.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

Didn’t answer. Try again

3

Anonymous #1 4w

“Try again, nerd. I'm owning the nazi cuck.“ It doesn't matter because you dont explain what's untrue or why. I dont even care anymore, enjoy ripping through the toilet paper on your wipe.

-3

Anonymous OP 4w

One question and you run away lol. That’s the most unsurprising thing about this, pedo protector lol.

3

Anonymous #1 4w

I've consistently engaged you, and you're too dumb to debate. You have not owned anything. Association is not a crime. Ok, person A and person B are bar buddies. They have a drink together every time they see each other. They dont call each other or spend time together outside of the bar. Person A, however, consistently sexually assaults person C. Person B does not know person C. Is a person an accomplice or a rapist?

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

All of this and you still didn’t answer. Try again. Yes or no? That’s all you have to type. I don’t need your half tantrums

3

Anonymous #1 4w

I did answer, with an analogy that directly tested your logic. You dodged it. So let’s settle it. In my example, is Person B guilty of rape just because they had drinks with Person A? Yes or no.

-2

Anonymous OP 4w

I didn’t ask for an analogy. I asked a yes or no. So try again, this time answer.

7

Anonymous #1 4w

I've already answered yes and no to your questions and l've given reasoning with each one. You, on the other hand, haven't answered a single one of mine. So let's cut the game, yes or no, are you a bad-faith arguer?

0

Anonymous #1 4w

But either way, in the most roundabout way possible, you’ve proven my point, the only tactic the progressive left has is to avoid substance and try to bludgeon opponents instead of debating.

0

Anonymous OP 4w

So my yes OR no, was answered with a yes AND no? And you think that’s what was asked of you?

4

Anonymous OP 4w

You keep crying about bludgeoning lol. I’m not engaging in the tantrum. Just answer and we can move on.

5

Anonymous #1 4w

No, that never happened. There’s no evidence Trump ever sent condolences to a pedophile after they were outed. That’s a made-up scenario, and using fiction to argue guilt is exactly the problem.

-2

Anonymous #1 4w

Now answer mine, if Person A and Person B are bar buddies, and later Person A assaults someone, does that make Person B guilty of rape? Yes or no.

-2

Anonymous OP 4w

Yes and no. Do you believe that Matt Gaetz had inappropriate contact with minors?

5

Anonymous #1 4w

Yes. It’s your turn, stop dodging and answer my question ye or no.

-1

Anonymous OP 4w

I just did. I said yes and no. So if you believe that he did. Trump sent condolences to Matt Gaetz for what he described was a which hunt against him for getting him to resign/leave out of congress. There it is, you admit that Trump sent condolences to a man you acknowledge had inappropriate contact with minors

3

Anonymous #1 4w

Is congress effective, yes or no.

0

Anonymous OP 4w

You already admitted you believe Gaetz was inappropriate with minors, i.e, pedophilia, so when I said Trump sent condolences to a pedophile and you claimed that never happened you were wrong lmao. Good job

1

Anonymous OP 4w

question: do you believe diddy trafficked women? keeping in mind he wasn't ultimately charged with trafficking

2