• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If the preponderance of the evidence indicated that Trump sexually assaulted children, would you still support him?

If preponderance of the evidence indicated Trump sexually assaulted children, would you support him?

  • Total voters
    27
W_Heisenberg

W_Heisenberg

Trade Representative of Heard and McDonald Islands
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
26,440
Reaction score
28,514
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
If the Preponderance of the evidence indicated that Trump sexually assaulted children, would you still support him?

Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

This standard of proof is far less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt found in criminal trials, and is typically found in civil trials.
 
Why does it have to be "a preponderance"? Can't we just assume that he's a baby raper and prosecute him?
 
Lutherf said:
Why does it have to be "a preponderance"? Can't we just assume that he's a baby raper and prosecute him?
Click to expand...

I chose preponderance of evidence level of proof because I think if there were a significant amount of evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he sexually assaulted children then he would already be in prison.

Also, please answer the poll question.
 
There is NO evidence, if any is "produced" it will be by the Deep State, Globalists, and Trump "haters" who suffer TDS.

BUT there will be evidence that Obama, Biden, B. Clinton, Hillary, and a whole host of Democrats and Libruls were in bed with Epstein.

So, we have here another thread meant to take down Trump who did NOTHING wrong ever, and I just wish people would ...................

1753541286165.webp
 
Lutherf said:
Why does it have to be "a preponderance"? Can't we just assume that he's a baby raper and prosecute him?
Click to expand...
No one is accusing him of raping "babies" but that schtick of yours, taking ANY criticism of Trump and blowing it all out of proportion is really getting old - and boring.

I really don't understand why Righties are such feeble and easy triggered people. ANY criticism of Trump, and I mean ANY, sends them off the deep end. Must be TDS..........

1753541415936.webp
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I chose preponderance of evidence level of proof because I think if there were a significant amount of evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he sexually assaulted children then he would already be in prison.

Also, please answer the poll question.
Click to expand...
Your premise is fundamentally flawed.

If there is one thing we have learned about Donald Trump, it's that no burden of proof ever puts him in prison.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I chose preponderance of evidence level of proof because I think if there were a significant amount of evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he sexually assaulted children then he would already be in prison.

Also, please answer the poll question.
Click to expand...
No no, according to Luther it wasn't children............
Lutherf said:
Can't we just assume that he's a baby raper
Click to expand...
 
W_Heisenberg said:
I chose preponderance of evidence level of proof because I think if there were a significant amount of evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he sexually assaulted children then he would already be in prison.

Also, please answer the poll question.
Click to expand...
I don’t think there is ANYTHING that could get you guys off this track. I mean. Trump said “ grab ‘em by the *****” so that means he’s guilty of whatever you all say he’s guilty of.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
If the Preponderance of the evidence indicated that Trump sexually assaulted children, would you still support him?

Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

This standard of proof is far less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt found in criminal trials, and is typically found in civil trials.
Click to expand...

There is NO evidence.

Quit the bullshit.
 
Bok Tuklo said:
No way any evidence sees the light of day.

The DOJ is wholly controlled by Trump. It is a corrupt organization in the service of one man.
Click to expand...
Right. It was even controlled by Trump from 2021-2024. Trump controls EVERYTHING…. and he rapes babies because you all say he does.
 
Lutherf said:
I don’t think there is ANYTHING that could get you guys off this track. I mean. Trump said “ grab ‘em by the *****” so that means he’s guilty of whatever you all say he’s guilty of.
Click to expand...
If he ain't guilty of anything release the Epstein files with all the names attached. Lots of Dems will be on there so that should make you very very happy. But someone else might be on there too, so you will continue to deflect and whine about us talking about the Epstein files.
 
Lutherf said:
I don’t think there is ANYTHING that could get you guys off this track. I mean. Trump said “ grab ‘em by the *****” so that means he’s guilty of whatever you all say he’s guilty of.
Click to expand...

"One of the young women who later said Mr. Epstein groomed and abused her was recruited into his world while working as a spa attendant at Mar-a-Lago. Another accuser recalled being eyed by Mr. Trump during a brief encounter in Mr. Epstein’s office, and claimed that Mr. Epstein had told Mr. Trump at the time that “she’s not for you.”

Months later, when Mr. Trump hosted a party at Mar-a-Lago for young women in a so-called calendar girl competition, Mr. Epstein was the only other guest, according to George Houraney, a Florida-based businessman who arranged the event. Mr. Houraney recalled being surprised that Mr. Epstein was the only other person on the guest list. “I said, ‘Donald, this is supposed to be a party with V.I.P.s,” Mr. Houraney told The New York Times in 2019. “You’re telling me it’s you and Epstein?’”

“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Mr. Trump told New York magazine in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.""

Link

It stretches credulity to breaking point to think that Trump didn't at least know what Epstein was up to, if not participating in it himself.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
If the Preponderance of the evidence indicated that Trump sexually assaulted children, would you still support him?

Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

This standard of proof is far less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt found in criminal trials, and is typically found in civil trials.
Click to expand...
They have to support him. Always. To stop supporting him would mean admitting that the Libs were right.
Can't happen.
 
Lutherf said:
Right. It was even controlled by Trump from 2021-2024. Trump controls EVERYTHING…. and he rapes babies because you all say he does.
Click to expand...
Oh look, another rightist making up stupid shit so he can show us how stupid his made-up shit is.
 
Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

Heck, no preponderance of anything is required for left of center folks hereabouts to adamantly believe Trump is capable of doing just about anything morally rotten.
 
Along Came Jones said:
Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

Heck, no preponderance of anything is required for left of center folks hereabouts to adamantly believe Trump is capable of doing just about anything morally rotten.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that is?
Trumps been prominent in local news in NYC for many years. Guess how a poll of New Yorkers about his moral character would go.
 
Lutherf said:
I don’t think there is ANYTHING that could get you guys off this track. I mean. Trump said “ grab ‘em by the *****” so that means he’s guilty of whatever you all say he’s guilty of.
Click to expand...

The reason why this is a controversy now is because of Trump's actions:

President Donald Trump outraged many of his supporters after the Justice Department published an unsigned memo saying it would not release any more documents related to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. For years, Trump and some members of his administration fanned conspiracy theories about the content of the files.

www.pbs.org

What to know about the dismissal of the Epstein files by Trump's Justice Department

The Trump administration said there’s no Epstein “client list” and releasing more information isn’t warranted. The announcement divided Trump supporters and members of his administration. Here’s what to know.
www.pbs.org www.pbs.org

And, yes, people are probably a little more suspicious than they otherwise would be precisely because:

1. Trump had a relationship with Epstein for approximately 15 years, and

2. because Trump bragged about grabbing women he just met by the *****, and

3. because Trump was found in a civil lawsuit to be liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll.

All of these things are things that Trump did.

Trump is responsible for his own actions.

And the reason why everyone is suspicious of Trump now is because of Trump's actions.

I think everyone's reactions to what Trump is doing is totally normal. The people who aren't normal are the MAGA diehards who think everything Trump has done and is doing is perfectly fine.

It is my sincere wish, whatever becomes of this specific controversy, you learn one day that Trump is not a good person. Trump is not the big shot you saw on The Apprentice. Trump does not treat people well, whether they're a woman or not, because he's not a good person. If a friend or acquaintance in your life acted like Trump, constantly trying to screw you over in a business contract, or constantly trying to **** your wife, you would have nothing to do with him.
 
Along Came Jones said:
Preponderance of the evidence here is defined as: the evidence makes you think it's more likely than not, greater than a 50% chance, that Trump sexually assaulted children.

Heck, no preponderance of anything is required for left of center folks hereabouts to adamantly believe Trump is capable of doing just about anything morally rotten.
Click to expand...

You don't believe Trump is capable of, much less driven to, doing just about anything morally rotten?

Venezuelan makeup artist returns home, describes torture during El Salvador detention. "an encounter with torture and death".

Good job Christians. MAGA. Anyone who voted for Trump who considers themselves decent people. "Many of our fellows have wounds from the nightsticks; they have fractured ribs, fractured fingers and toes, marks from the handcuffs, others have marks on their chests, on their face ... from the...
debatepolitics.com debatepolitics.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom