TWS1405_2

Are you saying that we don't touch a topic because it is unpopular? 

• Leave it to TWS to say he's going to review a TV series and then exclusively focus on the appearance of the actors.  I don't think I've ever seen a more literally superficial review of any entertainment- it is as if he based his review on the show on actor's head shots.
  
• Also, he neglected to tell us whether he liked the head shots of the two main characters.
  
• Is there more profound example of missing the point than a white supremacist who says he enjoys Star Trek.  I guess you'd have to be insanely superficial because if you listened to the words coming out of the character's mouths, you'd understand that this show's values are diametrically opposed to white supremacy.
  

You need facts to know a former President can’t take classified documents to his house and store them in a bathroom and then lie about it, say he doesn’t have any documents, and try to get his attorneys, including Bobb to lie and say all documents have been returned.

That’s a lie. 

You are a mental insect. M

I recognise their "opinions" not as reasoned and amenable to reason but as compulsions. Who knows why he goes on to engage them, but.

Then if someone else is muddying up the water with ad hominema and spam you could have a leg to stand on.

The only reason Trump took the material was that he thought he could make money off of it.

You have absolutely zero evidence to back this big pile of shit up!! 

I'm a grown ass adult

I laid it all out in these last few threads.

That would be fun, quite a different demographic though. Because it's true - this site is pretty much dead. 

TWS is just a Karen who sometimes uses artificially-inflated vocab. 

IwantRooseveltagain

No, just a rapist. An American jury decided he likely assaulted that woman in a dressing room. He told you he feels entitled to grab strange women , kiss them and fondle their private parts. 

I will throw my hat into the ring and say that TWS nor Roosevelt should be banned.  Both can be annoying and seemingly "mean" in their posts, but is that really grounds for a ban?  Also, TWS is correct saying that a ban is only good for that one username.  They can come back to really be a butt-head, theoretically, an infinite number of times.  

I know we would all like to see civil debates and points made, but we are all corresponding with humans here with such differing points of view.  I do not agree 100% with anybody here. So are we whining about feelings being hurt?  

If this is not a debate site for thoughts being tossed back and forth, and even if it's heated, then it's not much of a debate site.  

@DavidAZ

The fact that Trump has been constantly bombarded with impeachments, trials, investigations, etc, really shows a bias to the outside contender.

Or it means Trump has broken a lot of rules and laws, including the constitution 

• Your conspiracy theory is not a fact or an argument
  

• No evidence the Dems want one party rule
  

• No evidence the Dems weaponized the government. Let me guess, Durham report?
  

• It doesn't need to be a criminal statue. One of his many violations is withholding documents that don't belong to him. That's theft. The Presidential Records Act dictates who owns the documents in question. 
  

• What Woodrow Wilson did or did not do is irrelevant
  

• Your conspiracy theories are not an argument
  

• Your opinion of what happened is not an argument
  

• Complete BS, in addition to the willful retention of classified documents he is also being charged with obstruction and lying to federal investigators
  

• Biden's statements to the FBI are irrelevant to the charges against Trump
  

• Whataboutism is not an argument against the indictment
  

• The indictment does not charge Trump with selling these documents and Trump did not give them back, they were seized during the search warrant
  

• The DOJ did not interrogate Trump's attorneys, they testified. You should know the difference. Attorney/Client privilege does not apply when it is used to commit a crime
  

• Why are you even asking this question? 95% of the residents of DC voted against Trump, so if they were just out to get him they would have tried him there. My guess is they are trying him in Florida because that's where he committed his crimes, which would make sense.
  

• Reed's record with SCOTUS is not an argument against the indictment
  

• Your opinion is not an argument against the indictment
  

• Whataboutism is not an argument against the indictment
  

This is a war on Trump, the Republican party and the Republic itself.

No, this is what holding a criminal to account looks like. It's unbelievably sad and pathetic that even something so simple as this indictment, complete with Trump insiders as witnesses, pictures, and recordings of Trump literally committing his crimes, the cult still remains unwaivered. (sic)

Indicting a former president and presidential candidate is definitely a problem,

...but the issue here is not the DOJ, the problem here is that we elected a man who so brazenly thinks he is above the law and would burn the country down before ever admitting to anything he did. Even Nixon had enough respect for democracy and the rule of law to resign. This is on you and every moron who put our nation's secrets in this man's hands.

If TWS was intelligent he'd be able to handle counter arguments and rebuttals. The fact he never concedes a point when defeated and just tries to redefine what he said (moving goalposts) is also a red flag. He is basically just the conservative version of Roose

This dude is a fucking liar. No cop uses the term bootlicker. 

 the one phrase guaranteed to earn you an ass kicking from any black person who hears it in modern times, whether they’re 8 years old or 80 years young."

Again check your premises. You are focused on me using a racial slur rather then your internal belief that every single black person is an emotional baby who will act like an animal if they hear a word that offends them.

Yeah, you hate it because it speaks the truth; and the truth sounds like hate to you.

Also, your analogy in rebuttal is patently fallacious and truly retarded. 

I heard that 100 IQ and below people struggle a lot with analogies. 

For example the above analogies both having people with obvious problems that stick out like a sore thumb, and both saying that only a professional is capable of seeing plainly obvious things. I person with a 3 digit IQ would not have been confused.

Also bro, you got offended at me for using the word nigger. Are you one of those self hating black people?

Words shouldn't offend you. the natural conclusion of your beliefs is that niggers are subhuman animals and should be treated as such. If that thought makes you uncomfortable than perhaps you need to really take a look at your hidden premises and do some internal work to change that belief system.

Sorry for removing the veil in front of the mirror and scaring you.

tws, 

No moderator here is a licensed psychologist/psychiatrist. Any ascription of that label is purely ad hominem of emotively subjective nature, a defense mechanism per se, because you cannot handle the tough subjects and lack the education on said topics to debate them. 

I hate this argument. I can see a similar type of argument from some type of retard who had a limb cut off. "You aren't a doctor you can't tell I am missing a limb"

-->

@oromagi

You can't be for real dude. 

• At its core, debate was invented and still mostly exists as practice for law in a democratic society.  If we want to attract real debaters, we must demonstrate our respect for laws.
  

Great job on not letting badger push you around, despite his belligerence.

After all, what's the point of having the CoC if it's thrown out the moment badger gets upset with someone?

The fact that he can't cite the CoC to explain why TWS should be banned truly shows what this is about: he wants to ban people he disagrees with.

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

And anyone banned could always come back. Circumventing bans are easy. And you wouldn't even know it if and when someone, anyone banned, came back.

I think once another user pops on here with 10 nigger crime threads a day, it will be obvious

@oromagi

You can't be for real dude. 

• At its core, debate was invented and still mostly exists as practice for law in a democratic society.  If we want to attract real debaters, we must demonstrate our respect for laws.
  

Integrity has more profound justifications than just attracting debators, but the conclusion is the same.

BTW I saw the video where a white object was pointed out in Floyd's mouth, the defense used it in the trial. I don't know or care if TWS produced it when asked but it did exist.

I'm gonna (sic) call it gross negligence for a moderator to recognise (sic) someone as a sociopath and not ban them. 

>

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

To be fair to you,

That post they mention,

Does seem more that you are doubtful about the claims at first, than insulting them or anyone lost,

You 'do say condolences, though arguably not very. . . diplomatically.

• At its core, debate was invented and still mostly exists as practice for law in a democratic society.  If we want to attract real debaters, we must demonstrate our respect for laws.
  

oro this is the dumbest shit I've ever read. Even Wylted is calling for his ban. Nobody cares if we ban one piece of shit user. Everyone cares if we don't. We all got to see his shrill shitty posts every single day. Click into the Society board and see what you're choosing for. Have a think about how many people and what sort of people are going to come join you in that choice. 

>

@badger

You can't be for real dude. 

• At its core, debate was invented and still mostly exists as practice for law in a democratic society.  If we want to attract real debaters, we must demonstrate our respect for laws.
  

He hasn't shown any regret for mocking a person who just lost a friend in a tragedy and several coworkers. 

Here is what the ban list should be to improve the site and I will remind everyone that quality of users is more important than quantity.

Ban list 

1. TWS

2. Roosevelt

This site improves ten fold tomorrow with just those two people removed. 

Also I remove myself soon anyway if anyone is going to be a smart ass and add my name to that list

I really think we can just be rid of him here. No one bats an eye. 

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

citing the thread I made on Floyd and how he killed himself…whining about that thread chalked full of fact based truths I put forth, simply because you can’t handle the truth let alone discussions on the FACT that less than 0.5%  of the black male population commits over 50% of the entire nations violent persons crimes SPEAKS VOLUMES about you triggered ostriches. 

• Of course, you are well aware that Badger is talking about your abominable piece-of-shit creulty to a stranger when that stranger advised you that he'd just suffered a loss of friends to a plane crash.  You accused him of being a liar and a coward and mocked him with maximum despite.  When he sent links showing you that the plane crash was real, a national story, you admitted that you knew his story true but told him to that he could go fuck himself for failing to document his grief to your satisfaction.  
  
• That really is just perfect evidence of sociopathy.
  
• Let's take full note of the fact that you have not once, in this forum, addressed the specific behavior Badger is citing as inhumane.  He's not talking about your White Supremacy propaganda, (sic) he's talking about your apparent lack of empathy.
  

You ALL hate the truth because the truth sounds and feels like hate to you ignorant (uneducated) liberals who lack the emotional and intellectual temperament to have an open and honest debate/discussion on race relations in America. 

• You falsely claimed that you had video evidence that George Floyd took a speedball immediately before his arrest.  When I demanded that you show me that evidence you dodged and squealed and then quite cowardly denied that you had ever made such a claim.  Please don't try to pull that "honest debate" bullshit with me.  You are the most despicable of cowardly liars, trying deserately (sic) to make your fake news seem true by constant, compulsvie, (sic) disordered, unwanted, unwarrented (sic) repetition.
  

@<<<TWS1405_2>>>

There is no such thing as humanity or inhumanity in an online environment. 

• The fact that you believe as much (I have no doubt you do)  is probably the best argument yet for disposing of you.  This website is an online society and  a fundamental prerequisite to any society is the recognition of the group's shared humanity, as well as a shared cultural interest.  It is clear from this and many of your posts that we are not fellows to you, much less humans- we are your targets, your prey.   If you can't recognize your fellow humans in an online society than you are a textbook sociopath, at least in any online context.  Furthermore, I think moderators do have some responsibility to protect our community from sociopaths, when they can be identified.
  

>

@badger

-->

@<<<oromagi>>>

He should be banned for gross inhumanity. I can't find the CoC now, but that shouldn't be so controversial. 

• Fortunately for all of us, gross inhumanity has its limits when posting anonymously.
  

He didn't present one single argument in his entire rant. The closest he came was by calling it a "documents case" completely lying about the fact that the bulk of these charges are for obstructing the investigation and overtly lying to federal investigators. This was pretty much 9 minutes of whataboutism.

This, btw is why I don't watch videos by people who are too intellectually lazy to write their own arguments. Is there one snippet of this rant that you think was insightful here? Don't know. I could sit here tearing it apart piece by piece and all you do is go "well that's not the part I was highlighting".

So feel free to enlighten us with your own words; what about this silly rant do you think destroys anyone's argument?

• Democrats want to take control of the United States
  
• Democrats want one party rule
  
• Democrats have weaponized the DOJ and FBI against their political opposition
  
• Presidential Records Act =/= a criminal statute
  
• Espionage Act: Woodrow Wilson weaponized it against his opponents and jailed over 2,000 of them
  
• DOJ and Jack Reed (via Eric Garland) are weaponizing the Espionage Act against Trump to trap him in a corner
  
• The allegations of obstruction are all false, there has been no obstruction at any time by Trump
  
• This is a documents case (civil law)
  
• Biden asserts he never told the DOJ and/or FBI what to do - LIE!
  
• Biden had to sign off on the weaponization of the DOJ & FBI against Trump, moving the matter from the National Archives over to the DOJ
  
• Double standards / 2 tiers of justice: Biden has in fact had documents from the days he was a fledgling Senator to VP strewn across the Eastern seaboard since the 1970s, all in insecure locations with no oversight; Hilary actually obstructed the government and should have been charged with 10,000 obstruction charges for each email bleachbit'd and 5 for destroying the 5 phones (government property)
  
• Did Trump sell any documents to the enemy? NO! Did he burn the documents to hide them? NO!! The government has all the documents back in their possession, so there is no violation of the Presidential Records Act.  
  
• DOJ has forced under duress, Trump's attorneys to violate their attorney client privilege during interrogations - Trump has been denied due process
  
• DOJ indicts Trump in Miami but not DC, why? Venue issues Reed and Garland know they would lose the case thereon. 
  
• Reed has an 8-0 loss ratio with SCOTUS precisely because he takes statutes and expands them into areas they do not cover. Reed is doing the same here against Trump - directly interfering with a Presidential Election
  
• Under the special counsel statutes, Biden should be investigated not Trump - a political rival - as a documents case doesn't warrant it nor falls under said statute.
  
• Biden should be under investigation for the clear-cut case of corruption with the pay to play bribery scheme that is actionable, but the DOJ criminalizes a documents case to hinder Trump's ability to campaign
  

He posts non stop about the problems black Americans are facing with crime and violence in their communities. There isn't anything for liberals to debate. This stuff is known facts.

The amount he posts his same topic over and over is also spam at this point and he should be banned for spamming the board, just like Roosevelt who spams repeatedly "conservatives stupid derp"

Here is what TWS is not arguing, because he is either a coward hoping people come to the conclusion on their own.

1. Black people should be genocided

2. Black people should be treated like 2nd class citizens. 

Here is also some stuff TWS is not doing with his black criminality threads because he isn't after an honest discussion or debate.

1. What can we do to fix the violence and criminality that the black community is experiencing which affects us all.

2. What is the cause of this epidemic so we can address it together

3. Any posts stating empathy for the black community as more black people are forced to live around this criminality and violence than non blacks.