• 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!

Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed[W:57]

Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Henrin said:
I think laws for inciting violence are stupid. There is no harm caused by telling someone to do something or suggesting that hey it might be cool if you do something. If idiots decide to be violent then frankly the blame for their violence is on them.
Click to expand...

The case at hand seems to be empirical evidence that you think wrong, eh? Agitated people CAN AND WILL resort to violence if the suggestion is made. Read up on Stanley Milgram's experiments--you will learn a lot. BTW, the title of his book is Obedience to Authority.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

danarhea said:
When a Republican appointed Kentucky judge says you have been reckless, then there is something to it. The lawsuit against Trump for inciting violence by known white nationalists against 3 black protesters will proceed, and those protesters will get their day in court.

Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed
Click to expand...
Haha...one post is all it took to blow your lie out of the water....sloppy.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Thoreau72 said:
The case at hand seems to be empirical evidence that you think wrong, eh? Agitated people CAN AND WILL resort to violence if the suggestion is made. Read up on Stanley Milgram's experiments--you will learn a lot. BTW, the title of his book is Obedience to Authority.
Click to expand...

I don't see how I'm wrong. Making a suggestion of violence is not violence in and of itself. Sure, some moron can take up the suggestion, but it is still their own decision if they do so. We are not mindless creatures that follow the command of others without any self control.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Henrin said:
I don't see how I'm wrong. Making a suggestion of violence is not violence in and of itself. Sure, some moron can take up the suggestion, but it is still their own decision if they do so. We are not mindless creatures that follow the command of others without any self control.
Click to expand...

Properly conditioned, as Milgram pointed out, a significant portion of us can be quite mindless, soulless and conscienceless. Some are, some are not, like most things.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Trippy Trekker said:
Excon said:
There you go doing it again. Lame.
This isn't about me or any other poster. Do you really not understand that?
So ...
Can you refute what I previously pointed out in regards to the actual subject?
Click to expand...
Duly noted as Lame -


Post #16... your use of "Doh!" Doable doh!" and "Duh!".

Your unsubstantiated claim "...the plaintiffs are only looking for a payout from deep pockets." "The only way this could win in actual trial is because folks do not like Trump."

Post #17... accepting a lame video as conclusive evidence Trump did not ridicule a disabled reporter's disability.

Post #30... continuing to repeat your same lame claim you made in Post #17.

Generally, I choose not to waste your time or mine refuting you lame and biased opinions.
Click to expand...
:lamo
Another lame post.
Figures.


Trippy Trekker said:
Post #16... your use of "Doh!" Doable doh!" and "Duh!".
Click to expand...
iLOL

What the person said deserved those.
The claim was false.

Everything said in regards to that false claim being true deserved any variation of "doh".

But way to deflect from the claim being false.


Trippy Trekker said:
Your unsubstantiated claim "...the plaintiffs are only looking for a payout from deep pockets." "The only way this could win in actual trial is because folks do not like Trump."
Click to expand...
Hilarious.
They literally are looking for a payout. That is why they are suing.
Do you really not understand that?

As for the second comment. And? These folks went to protest the event and are seeking a payout though they were not injured in any significant fashion.
You can even see her smirking the entire time. She knew exactly what she was doing.

The plaintiffs placed themselves in that situation by seeking to protest at such an event.



Trippy Trekker said:
Post #17... accepting a lame video as conclusive evidence Trump did not ridicule a disabled reporter's disability.

Post #30... continuing to repeat your same lame claim you made in Post #17.
Click to expand...
iLOL A lame dismissal.
Doh!

Funny that you failed to realize that there is no evidence to suggest the intent was to mock specifically for being disabled, while on the other hand there are more than a few examples showing he mocks people in this way regardless of any disability.

The weight/totality of that evidence is pretty conclusive.

If one is to go on the totality of evidence alone, one can not say he was mocking him for being, or because of, his disability. So yes, the claim that he mocked him because of, or for being, disabled has been debunked.



So back to what I asked: "Can you refute what I previously pointed out in regards to the actual subject?"
Thank you for showing that you can't.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Excon said:
:lamo
Another lame post.
Figures.


iLOL

What the person said deserved those.
The claim was false.

Everything said in regards to that false claim being true deserved any variation of "doh".

But way to deflect from the claim being false.


Hilarious.
They literally are looking for a payout. That is why they are suing.
Do you really not understand that?

As for the second comment. And? These folks went to protest the event and are seeking a payout though they were not injured in any significant fashion.
You can even see her smirking the entire time. She knew exactly what she was doing.

The plaintiffs placed themselves in that situation by seeking to protest at such an event.



iLOL A lame dismissal.
Doh!

Funny that you failed to realize that there is no evidence to suggest the intent was to mock specifically for being disabled, while on the other hand there are more than a few examples showing he mocks people in this way regardless of any disability.

The weight/totality of that evidence is pretty conclusive.

If one is to go on the totality of evidence alone, one can not say he was mocking him for being, or because of, his disability. So yes, the claim that he mocked him because of, or for being, disabled has been debunked.



So back to what I asked: "Can you refute what I previously pointed out in regards to the actual subject?"
Thank you for showing that you can't.
Click to expand...

Excon, the Debate Community has noted you exceeded any reasonable notion of a timely response. Going forward, please adjust your response time to the same day or next day.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Moderator's Warning:
This thread is not about other posters. Continue to make this thread about other posters instead of the topic of the thread then you will be given an infraction and thread banned.

Trippy Trekker said:
Excon, the Debate Community has noted you exceeded any reasonable notion of a timely response. Going forward, please adjust your response time to the same day or next day.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Trippy Trekker said:
Excon, the Debate Community has noted you exceeded any reasonable notion of a timely response. Going forward, please adjust your response time to the same day or next day.
Click to expand...

As I previously said.

So back to what I asked: "Can you refute what I previously pointed out in regards to the actual subject?"
Thank you for showing that you can't.​
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

Trump is claiming Executive Privilege on this one. He is in good company with Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon.
 
Re: Judge: Lawsuit against Trump, supporters can proceed

danarhea said:
Trump is claiming Executive Privilege on this one. He is in good company with Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon.
Click to expand...

The judge was being stupid.
Nothing trump did or said could be considered as a first amendment violation.

nothing he said or did would incite a crowd. Get the out of there obviously was referring and talking to his security staff to remove
the trouble makers from the event.

yet another judge that needs to be removed since he can't follow the law or wants to make up his own law
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom