CreateDebate


Debate Info

17
9
Reagan said trust but VERIFY Trump can do no wrong
Debate Score:26
Arguments:26
Total Votes:30
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Reagan said trust but VERIFY (14)
 
 Trump can do no wrong (7)

Debate Creator

excon(8485) pic



Trump SAYS he has no business with Russia. Do you BELIEVE it, or do you want PROOF?


Reagan said trust but VERIFY

Side Score: 17
VS.

Trump can do no wrong

Side Score: 9
0 points

Putin STRONGLY denied that he ordered interference with our election. The Saudi's STRONGLY denied they had nothing to do with an assassination. Putin STRONGLY denied that Russia had nothing to do with the death of Russians in Britain … even though they were killed with traceable Russian nuclear products STRONGLY guarded by the government. Trump has STRONGLY denied several things that have been proven OR had many witnesses. He STRONGLY denies he has anything to do with Russia while he has "secret [unwitnessed] meetings" with Putin, then defends his STRONG DENIALS of wrongdoing …. even after Putin says "DA, I did! Yep! I want PROOF!

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
MikeSavage(55) Disputed
1 point

I like what you did there. Show us 7 Putin lies, then create a false dichotomy of correlation by throwing Trump in there.

Your logic was as follows:

Putin lies, so Trump is lying. The liberal brain surgeons pull off the mind numbing fallacies once again. Do I even need to continue? Probably not. I just got a lecture from the bum about proof on the other side of the debate, then see the mook not needing proof on this side of the debate. I wish I were making it up, but I'm not.

Side: Trump can do no wrong
outlaw60(12923) Disputed
1 point

Putin STRONGLY denied that he ordered interference with our election. The Saudi's STRONGLY denied they had nothing to do with an assassination. Putin STRONGLY denied that Russia had nothing to do with the death of Russians in Britain … even though they were killed with traceable Russian nuclear products STRONGLY guarded by the government. Trump has STRONGLY denied several things that have been proven OR had many witnesses. He STRONGLY denies he has anything to do with Russia while he has "secret [unwitnessed] meetings" with Putin, then defends his STRONG DENIALS of wrongdoing …. even after Putin says "DA, I did! Yep! I want PROOF!

Hay DUMMY can any of you IDIOTS find the RUSSIANS within the Electoral College ???????? LMMFAO ! Al you people have no idea as to what world you wake up in everyday because DNC Media must tell you where you are and where to stand !!!!!!!!!!!

Side: Trump can do no wrong
0 points

Trump SAYS he has no business with Russia. Do you BELIEVE it, or do you want PROOF?

How do you prove something does not exist?

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
excon(8485) Disputed
0 points

How do you prove something does not exist?

Hello AB:

Tax returns, tax returns, tax returns..

excon

Side: Trump can do no wrong
outlaw60(12923) Disputed
1 point

You are as defined SUPER STUPID !!!!! You are unaware of facts by your Political Party choice !!!!!!!!!!

Now let's show how truly IGNORANT you are !!!!!!!!!

I like having fun with you DUMMIES because it is way to easy !!!!!!!!!!

Candidates Are Not Legally Required to Release Tax Returns

No. There is no legal requirement of any kind that presidential candidates release tax returns from any year. Indeed, there is a strict, strong constitutional right to privacy for all tax returns. Thus, tax returns can be released by an individual taxpayer, but cannot released by the IRS to the public. However, one Senator has proposed legislation requiring presidential candidates to release tax returns.

Despite the lack of legal requirement, for the last thirty years, almost all presidential and vice presidential candidates have released reams of their personal tax returns. Of 34 past presidential and vice presidential candidates, only seven — Brown, Buchanan, Huckabee, Forbes, Giuliani, Lugar, Nader — declined to release personal tax returns. Hillary Clinton has released her tax returns for years 2007 to 2014 showing that the Clintons paid more than $43 million in taxes over that period. For his part, Donald Trump has said that the tax rate he pays is “none of your business” and “I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible.”

Are Presidential Candidates Legally Required to Reveal Any Financial Information?

Yes! Presidential candidates are legally required to file a “Personal Financial Disclosure” with the Federal Election Commission. But personal tax returns reveal different and important information, such as taxes paid and tax rate, deductions and credits claimed, charitable donations, debts claimed, offshore assets, and so on.

Trump has filed a legally required 104-page “Personal Financial Disclosure” with the Federal Election Commission. It contains general lists of investments in more than 550 different entities, and income from hundreds of different sources. However, unlike a tax return, this form does not show a person’s annual income and is not sworn to be accurate under penalty of perjury.

If It’s Not Legally Required Why Do Candidates Release Their Tax Returns Anyway?

Because it’s simply expected. Every major presidential candidate in the modern era has done so. Even Richard Nixon released his tax returns while he was being audited. Most voters believe they have a right to know how much a candidate pays in taxes, gives to charities, and claims in credits and deductions.

https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/candidates-tax-returns/

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
MikeSavage(55) Disputed
1 point

Tax returns, tax returns, tax returns..

The last time libs grabbed his tax returns, through an illegal leak, it turned out he paid $38 million in taxes that year and was in the highest tax bracket possible.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna733611

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
1 point

Do you BELIEVE it, or do you want PROOF?

So called liberals have never demonstrated any desire to have proof. You had proof on Hillary. You ignored it. You have no proof on Donald Trump. We ignored it. See the difference?

Side: Trump can do no wrong
AlofRI(1962) Clarified
1 point

7 investigations by conservative committees found NO evidence of wrongdoing, Over $7M tax dollars spent by rabid conservatives who REALLY wanted to "lock her up"!

What makes YOU think there is no evidence against Trump?? YOU have inside knowledge on the case??

NO! You have your mind made up WITH NO PROOF, and have never demonstrated a desire to HAVE any proof that Trump is innocent. See the difference??

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
MikeSavage(55) Disputed
1 point

If you are going to spew, spew facts rather than fiction. I deal in facts. You peddle fiction.

Jim Comey-

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey- on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
MikeSavage(55) Disputed
1 point

What makes YOU think there is no evidence against Trump?? YOU have inside knowledge on the case??

Yes. In 2 years, there's been no charge. Notta. Nothing. You think they are sitting there with 2 years of evidence, giving pressers that say no proof, because they have proof? Christ are you dense.

NO! You have your mind made up WITH NO PROOF, and have never demonstrated a desire to HAVE any proof that Trump is innocent.

You cannot prove someone is innocent you dolt. You molest goats. Prove your innocence. The burden is on the accuser. See how that works?

You want facts? Probably not, but let's look anyway.

Lisa Page bombshell: FBI couldn’t prove Trump-Russia collusion before Mueller appointment

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/hilltv/rising/406881-lisa-page-bombshell-fbi-couldnt-prove-trump-russia-collusion-before-mueller?amp

Woodward: No Evidence Of Trump-Russia Collusion, I Searched For Two Years

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ 2018/09/14/woodward noevidenceofcollusionbetweentrumpandrussiaisearchedfortwoyears.html

There's your evidence. There is none. But we'll keep digging away for sure.

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
outlaw60(12923) Disputed
1 point

7 investigations by conservative committees found NO evidence of wrongdoing, Over $7M tax dollars spent by rabid conservatives who REALLY wanted to "lock her up"!

What makes YOU think there is no evidence against Trump?? YOU have inside knowledge on the case??

NO! You have your mind made up WITH NO PROOF, and have never demonstrated a desire to HAVE any proof that Trump is innocent. See the difference??

DUMMY why has the Muller Team not produced any information on Russian Collusion ????? DUMMY you are a PARROT of the PARTY !!!!!! ROTFFLMMFAO !

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY
outlaw60(12923) Disputed
1 point

DUMMY where is the PROOF of false allegations brought against Brett ????????? You got some Little Gurl ?????????????

Side: Reagan said trust but VERIFY