Instigator / Con
0
1500
rating
1
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#5505

Are the charges against Trump politically motivated?

Status
Voting

The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.

Voting will end in:

00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
0
1469
rating
348
debates
41.52%
won
Description

The pro must argue that the charges are motivated by political reasons.

Round 1
Con
#1
Every charge against Trump has had enough evidence to warrant legal action. Democrats have absolutely taken these charges and tried use them for political purposes, but the prosecutions in themselves are not witch hunts, and we have no reason to believe that they are. Just because the charges are being politized, doesn't mean they were made with political intent. Every one of them is completely called for, as I will proceed to explain.

Let's start with the January 6th indictment. When people storm one of the nation's most important buildings in your name, and when you do nothing to stop it for over three hours, that absolutely calls for legal action.

Now, let's consider another easy one. The classified documents case.  When secret files are found in a bathroom, legal action is necessary. 

The Georgia case is also simple. There is a recording of Trump asking to "find more votes" after all of the votes are counted. Now this doesn't automatically mean he's guilty, but again, it definitely deserves further action. 

Finally, there is the falsification of business records. Considering the witnesses against Trump and all of the financial records. We know for certain that hush money was paid, and while that's not a crime, we have guilty testimony from Cohen that he falsified records for Trump.

My argument is in no way that Trump is guilty of any of these things. My argument is that for every case, there is copious evidence to launch a legal prosecution, and as no man is above the law, it is of civil duty to prosecute Trump when there is this much evidence pointing to these crimes. Prosecution is just obvious. 

Therefore, while democrats have tried to make these cases political, the charges in themselves are based only upon evidence and facts. 
Pro
#2
Are the charges against Trump politically motivated?

Yes, everything is politically motivated. Politics are another area of people activity. Without people, no politics, with politics we're dealing with people interaction.

Everything and every movement of a society socialize into agreements, votes, democracy,elections, selections, petitions, contracts, support, lobbying, campaigning, forming rules, regulations, legislations, laws. 

Now society is governed. If a president has gotten to the position where he can be impeached, what does this ultimately mean?

That president is gone for a chance for another, perhaps one that didn't win before and hoped to be now to take place. This is all politics and the process between persons to get this transition running is political.

So any angle or direction or opportunity that can be pursued to prove justification in an act of doing something supposedly in the name of justice, ending criminality all for the sake of running a country which would include in the process not having such a one that has been charged or convicted not able to take office is political you better believe it.

It all runs in line with politics which is again people activity, the governance of a country right. Which just boils down to people activity. Through public voting whether big or small government parties, we politic with one another.

The laws from congress or the power of Congress:

Pass laws
Negotiate treaties
Arrest federal officers


I'm going off the top of my head . Let me check online, all the powers.

Congress has the power to:
  • Make laws.
  • Declare war.
  • Raise and provide public money and oversee its proper expenditure.
  • Impeach and try federal officers.
  • Approve presidential appointments.
  • Approve treaties negotiated by the executive branch.
  • Oversight and investigations.
Now all of these are accomplished by..... people.

Society is made up of...... people.

These people have what?

A government which is who? A body .


A body of ..... people.


What kind of people?


Agreeing people. People of the land get consensus to run the land, govern the land, govern themselves in order to be a live functioning systemic bunch of citizens.

The consensus is orchestrated or administered or processed via governing body that makes the laws, via supreme court, court of law(justice system) such as former presidents have been processed though,penal systems, federal offices, social services, civil services and so forth.


All political networks. No matter which part of the cycle or network you visit, from the citizen voting in the law to the citizen in Congress acknowledging/requesting votes from the citizens, from citizens testifying in a court to uphold the law; the legal process back to those in the jury.

All political.

"Democrats have absolutely taken these charges and tried use them for political purposes"

Exactly right, it's all political. Democrats are a political entity operating politically in a political system in the justice system within or under a political arena, government.

"Just because the charges are being politized, doesn't mean they were made with political intent. Every one of them is completely called for, as I will proceed to explain."

Everything that has to do with people is political. As long as a people exist, they're able to do so by control, power , order, ordinance.

"that absolutely calls for legal action."

Political again.

"When secret files are found in a bathroom, legal action is necessary. "

So therefore politics are in play, the play from  government (legal) in order to control , govern maintain a society of people. All this has intent, purpose and plans driven by motivation.

"The Georgia case is also simple. There is a recording of Trump asking to "find more votes" after all of the votes are counted. Now this doesn't automatically mean he's guilty, but again, it definitely deserves further action. "

This person is politically moving using a political system.

"We know for certain that hush money was paid, and while that's not a crime, we have guilty testimony from Cohen that he falsified records for Trump."

This is the political system in action. That's how whatever verdict is able to happen occurs and has occurred. The people involved in these systems are driven to do what they do to some end circling back around what the political systems enables to be done. 
As said via government down to the state, jurisdiction, court of law.

"My argument is in no way that Trump is guilty of any of these things. My argument is that for every case, there is copious evidence to launch a legal prosecution, and as no man is above the law, it is of civil duty to prosecute Trump when there is this much evidence pointing to these crimes. Prosecution is just obvious. 

Therefore, while democrats have tried to make these cases political, the charges in themselves are based only upon evidence and facts. "

This is all politics flowing, sparking and fireworks. Democrats, a political  entity don't have to make anything political. They operate as a political movement in a political arena that at the end of the day will affect their lives by political terms and political parameters.

Proving something in court is a political parameter. From the constitution to miranda rights, innocent until proven guilty.

All within legality. Legal right.. 
Round 2
Con
#3
During your argument, you talked about how everything related to politics, and what they were. However, you failed to actually thoroughly explain how the motivation of the charges is political.  A lot of your arguments don't actually even address the motivation behind the charges at all, and that's what this debate is about. 

One argument that you made is that since the Justice Department is a part of government, and politics are also a part of government. That being absurd on its own, it also doesn't make the motivation for putting Trump through the Justice Department political.

You also argue that everything that as to do with people is motivated by politics, and therefore Trump being prosecuted is as well. People do everything to seek power. This is a better statement, but the charges aren't to seek power. They're based off of an understanding that no man can be above the law, and that everyone needs to obey them to retain the natural rights of a country. The charges are not motivated by the need for power. The prosecution didn't get power from it. He was a district attorney. He was only doing his job. The charges were just how government works. 

You would argue that how the government works is politics, but politics are clearly defined as an attempt at power, which is not related.


Pro
#4
"However, you failed to actually thoroughly explain how the motivation of the charges is political.  A lot of your arguments don't actually even address the motivation behind the charges at all, and that's what this debate is about. "

I'm not going to reiterate what I said as being that it went over your head or you didn't grasp all of it.

I'm going to proceed on into basic straightforward questions to ascertain what we're basically dealing with.

I think you understand that everything involving people are politics. People have motivations and desires, do they not?

If you say yes just to progress my point along, taking it that you say yes, everything involving people is politically motivated.

It all goes together. Now if you want to know or debate about the specific political motivation, do you agree that it was in the name of justice?

Being that or if it was for the sake of that, is this not an event sought by people driven to receive whereby that very event driving them towards it?

Is not the court of law of government in which politicians whom are people acting to have this system in place?

Being that this is all the case, how does not any of this relate to politics and motivations?

For the record, none of these questions are necessarily rhetorical. You can still answer yes or no and we can go from there. These are just the basic questions and things to help us see what's before us really.

No matter which angle you take a look at on this, directly or indirectly, dealing with people, the political arena enters into it.

"One argument that you made is that since the Justice Department is a part of government, and politics are also a part of government. That being absurd on its own, it also doesn't make the motivation for putting Trump through the Justice Department political."

Regardless of the specific motivation per se, it's all political. It's always political involving people , a governing people right.

See the conventional view is that politics is one sector of life in society, labor, recreation are others. But when you look at everything on a grand scale, life in society, life in a governed society is a politically operated, driven society or people.

Now this may be not the angle you expected in this topic as you more so may take the angle of only some things concerning politics.

But I more or less will always take the unconventional route.

"You also argue that everything that as to do with people is motivated by politics, and therefore Trump being prosecuted is as well. People do everything to seek power."

Ok, doesn't conflict with everything regarding people being political.


"This is a better statement, but the charges aren't to seek power. They're based off of an understanding that no man can be above the law, and that everyone needs to obey them to retain the natural rights of a country. "

Sounds like the justice system to me which is politically driven.

"The charges are not motivated by the need for power. The prosecution didn't get power from it. He was a district attorney. He was only doing his job. The charges were just how government works. "

Ok the government works politically right. That's what a work of government is, political, political power or political work.

"You would argue that how the government works is politics, but politics are clearly defined as an attempt at power, which is not related."

Oh the definition I'm using is in regards to just people handling and dealing with people which is called governance which is government.

So you're using something else which you did not specify initially. You say politics are at an attempt of power. Which is pretty broad . But you never specified this initially. 

According to a search on the google search engine: 

"pol·i·tics
noun
  1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power."
So it's not just broadly power as  it concerns the activities  with a governing or governance involving a country which would be a people or other area which would be a people.

It's the activities or activity of people at which some way or another govern themselves or control themselves accordingly. Which you can't be powerless to be able to do.

Power wasn't brought up until I mentioned it regarding the powers of congress.

Which are just meant for people to govern themselves which is done in everything (politics) that people do.

Again people can't govern themselves, can't govern a people being powerless. Gotta be able to work for the people, work for yourself.

Even if you want to say broadly speaking, politics are an attempt at power, that will evitably cycle back around to people activity as I mentioned.

If you really stop for a moment to unpack what you're saying "an attempt at power", an attempt at power of what? Of what, for what to do what?


So at this point, I suggest you start with those questions I posed to progress this forward somewhat.

Thank you, awesome discussion.

Round 3
Con
#5
First, as you requested, I will answer your questions. 

It all goes together. Now if you want to know or debate about the specific political motivation, do you agree that it was in the name of justice?
Yes, of course, I agree with this. 

Being that or if it was for the sake of that, is this not an event sought by people driven to receive whereby that very event driving them towards it?
That is true.
Is not the court of law of government in which politicians whom are people acting to have this system in place?
While that is true, I still find it irrelevant to this debate. The system itself does not have any relation to the motivation of going through that system.
Being that this is all the case, how does not any of this relate to politics and motivations?
While I agree with all of your statements, I believe we have differing perspectives of the definition of the word "politics."

I would like to use your own definition you provided:
"pol·i·tics
noun
  1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power." 
First off, I want to point out the bolded words above. Pressing charges is not directly associated in any way with the activities to govern a country. While it has to do with government, it is not governing. The second part also doesn't apply. As we both agree that this is in the name of justice, and not political prosecution, as you have mentioned through your questions in your last argument, this was not meant to benefit and individuals or parties. 

That was a great debate! It will ultimately just come down to whichever perspective on the definition of politics the voters agree with most. 




 




Pro
#6
"Yes, of course, I agree with this. "

Ok doing an act in the name of justice is a political act politically charged and motivated.

"That is true."

A political drive to a political end such as the event of a verdict in a courtroom.

"While that is true, I still find it irrelevant to this debate. The system itself does not have any relation to the motivation of going through that system."

Of course it does. People rely on the system in order to carry out or fulfill the motivation. This is why I say you have to see how everything is connected. You agree with the the point that doing such in the name of justice is the motivation or tied to it. Well justice rides on the justice system which is politically developed and orchestrated.

"While I agree with all of your statements, I believe we have differing perspectives of the definition of the word "politics." "

Right you're perspective is more narrow. But even with that, if you unpack it, it still falls back in with what I'm saying.

Like I said last round:
"If you really stop for a moment to unpack what you're saying "an attempt at power", an attempt at power of what? Of what, for what to do what?"

See when you get down to the point of power, we're still talking about a country, a society, a people participating in the ordinance and governance to complete the point of a person to have power, to make things happen, prevent things, protect and defend the people. Otherwise you have no people, no people activity to elect, to work for , to enlist to do anything of civilization. Broaden that scope, broaden it up.

"Pressing charges is not directly associated in any way with the activities to govern a country. While it has to do with government, it is not governing."

I think I said directly or indirectly. Regardless, it's still associated,see. That's what I'm saying, it's all connected. Regardless if one thing is right next door or a few doors down.

Anything that has to do with government is governing. Otherwise why have any such thing to do with it when it isn't in a governing operation or nature, see?

It's like you're saying things unconsciously not realizing the woven tapestry we have here.


When you press charges or take somebody to court in the justice system which is setup by
law(government), that is a way of governing a people, a country. You have to look at the big picture as in relation to everything. Once you do that, once we do that, you'll get all of this, I'm telling you.

"The second part also doesn't apply. As we both agree that this is in the name of justice, and not political prosecution, as you have mentioned through your questions in your last argument, this was not meant to benefit and individuals or parties."

This is more of you not realizing the words you're using and what they mean at the end of it. Justice or the law which is government which is political is that. So of course it's political. When you talk about benefits, what is justice for if not to benefit?
You see what I'm saying. I wish we had more rounds to shed light on what your view was and hopefully through the course of this, your horizons have been broadened.

But maybe you'll read this last round and you can message with feedback or thoughts.


"That was a great debate! It will ultimately just come down to whichever perspective on the definition of politics the voters agree with most."

Well you may see this soon enough. There tends to be a consistent bias against my side . Particularly on this site compared to another. So take that as indicative of how votes go .
This is why I say I'm unconventional so it's to be expected.