|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did."
Don’t forget he was the one who outed himself on this by bragging about it on Howard streams live radio show.
|
On June 22 2026 03:18 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 03:16 oBlade wrote:On June 22 2026 02:33 KwarK wrote:I think the word you’re looking for is patriots. And to paraphrase from the discussion around Charlie Kirk's overdose, whether or not I think it's okay, Trump thinks it's okay. Trump famously advocated for Second Amendment enthusiasts to remove a president they disagreed with from office. What date do you plan to become a patriot? I want to make a note to check the newspapers. I don't love America nearly enough to do that. Hell, I don't even like America.
I understand you don't love America (or hate Trump) enough to shoot our president, so I guess that's just America's fault as to what we can improve in order to earn your cherished love. But you could also return home. It's obviously too late for you to stop fascism in the US but you may still have a chance in the UK.
|
On June 22 2026 05:25 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 03:18 KwarK wrote:On June 22 2026 03:16 oBlade wrote:On June 22 2026 02:33 KwarK wrote:I think the word you’re looking for is patriots. And to paraphrase from the discussion around Charlie Kirk's overdose, whether or not I think it's okay, Trump thinks it's okay. Trump famously advocated for Second Amendment enthusiasts to remove a president they disagreed with from office. What date do you plan to become a patriot? I want to make a note to check the newspapers. I don't love America nearly enough to do that. Hell, I don't even like America. I understand you don't love America (or hate Trump) enough to shoot our president, so I guess that's just America's fault as to what we can improve in order to earn your cherished love. But you could also return home. It's obviously too late for you to stop fascism in the US but you may still have a chance in the UK.
If the tree burns you're not safe in the shadow of its leaves.
|
On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did." And 11 teens said he didn't, the majority of which expressed doubt that it had happened, "most were dubious or dismissed the possibility out of hand." Which, since we're talking about teenage girls, the lack of gossip about a central truth spreading around 40+ teens strains credibility. But you can choose to believe one or another thing happened, since the account is disputed.
|
United States44247 Posts
On June 22 2026 05:40 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did." And 11 teens said he didn't, the majority of which expressed doubt that it had happened, " most were dubious or dismissed the possibility out of hand." Which, since we're talking about teenage girls, the lack of gossip about a central truth spreading around 40+ teens strains credibility. But you can choose to believe one or another thing happened, since the account is disputed.
If only he were to freely describe himself as the kind of man who would definitely have done this.
Also it would be absurd if every single participant at one of his pageants said that he walked in on them. How is that the bar? Do we give a pass to scout masters who don't fuck the ugly boys? Even the most prolific sexual predators can't find the time to sexually assault every single person they interact with.
Again, if you're going to do this hoop nonsense then commit to it. There are literally hundreds of girls Epstein never assaulted. I could gather their testimony too. So why care about the handful of girls who said he did.
|
On June 22 2026 05:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 05:40 dyhb wrote:On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did." And 11 teens said he didn't, the majority of which expressed doubt that it had happened, " most were dubious or dismissed the possibility out of hand." Which, since we're talking about teenage girls, the lack of gossip about a central truth spreading around 40+ teens strains credibility. But you can choose to believe one or another thing happened, since the account is disputed. If only he were to freely describe himself as the kind of man who would definitely have done this. Also it would be absurd if every single participant at one of his pageants said that he walked in on them. How is that the bar? Do we give a pass to scout masters who don't fuck the ugly boys? Even the most prolific sexual predators can't find the time to sexually assault every single person they interact with. Again, if you're going to do this hoop nonsense then commit to it. There are literally hundreds of girls Epstein never assaulted. I could gather their testimony too. So why care about the handful of girls who said he did. Trump doing this and everybody keeping secret about it for 20 years, then right before an election 5 girls said it happened, and 11 girls discounted it, the majority of them expressing a strong opinion that it didn't happen? Sorry, I don't think your scout leader at scout camp is the same as teenage girls in a beauty competition.
Same response as previously to the "commit to it" badgering about Epstein conspiracies. It isn't beneath you, clearly.
|
The nice part is that when they take the awful argument of he didn’t do what he said he did, it makes it very clear that none of their arguments are based in reality.
|
United States44247 Posts
On June 22 2026 06:03 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 05:42 KwarK wrote:On June 22 2026 05:40 dyhb wrote:On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did." And 11 teens said he didn't, the majority of which expressed doubt that it had happened, " most were dubious or dismissed the possibility out of hand." Which, since we're talking about teenage girls, the lack of gossip about a central truth spreading around 40+ teens strains credibility. But you can choose to believe one or another thing happened, since the account is disputed. If only he were to freely describe himself as the kind of man who would definitely have done this. Also it would be absurd if every single participant at one of his pageants said that he walked in on them. How is that the bar? Do we give a pass to scout masters who don't fuck the ugly boys? Even the most prolific sexual predators can't find the time to sexually assault every single person they interact with. Again, if you're going to do this hoop nonsense then commit to it. There are literally hundreds of girls Epstein never assaulted. I could gather their testimony too. So why care about the handful of girls who said he did. Trump doing this and everybody keeping secret about it for 20 years, then right before an election 5 girls said it happened, and 11 girls discounted it, the majority of them expressing a strong opinion that it didn't happen? Sorry, I don't think your scout leader at scout camp is the same as teenage girls in a beauty competition. Same response as previously to the "commit to it" badgering about Epstein conspiracies. It isn't beneath you, clearly.
I could very easily find 11 girls who are willing to very strongly state that Trump never assaulted them. I could do the same for Epstein.
|
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser".
|
United States44247 Posts
On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser".
No, that's actually a substantially lower bar than the current goalpost. They have to agree that he abused them personally. If a girl at the pageant says "he never walked into the changing room when I was in it but I believe the girls who said he did it to them" then that counts as "he never walked into the changing room".
He had to personally victimize every girl.
|
On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser".
The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary.
Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed".
I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does.
You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much.
Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact.
|
Even if they rounded up every victim and gave them the choice to press charges or get compensated they'd choose the compensation every time.
Even when convicted the majority would still vote for him.
It's not a crime when the rich do it applies at all times.
|
United States44247 Posts
On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser". The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary. Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed". I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does. You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much. Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact.
His arguments are bad faith and absurd. He’s saying that if a rapist rapes 5 people from a group of 16 and then the other 11 people confirm that they weren’t raped the majority take it, he’s exonerated. It’s the stupidest thing anyone has posted since the last time oblade said anything.
|
On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:
You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much.
Unless the only level of proof you'll accept is a notarized self-confession, there is an overwhelming amount of proof.
Frankly the only real proof you need is that he promised to release the Epstein files and then turned around and begged multiple Congressmen to retract their signatures from the discharge petition. Innocent people don't panic when evidence that would putatively exonerate them might become public. All the other stuff, like the doodle of a prepubescent girl for Epstein's birthday with his signature on the genitalia, bragging about loving women as young as Epstein likes them, lying about being on Epstein's jet countless times, appointing the prosecutor responsible for Epstein's sweetheart deal to his cabinet, the giant novelty cheque used to purchase a girl from Epstein, wishing Ghislaine Maxwell well wishes and suggesting he will pardon her for literally no reason, his ex-wife accusing him of rape and Trump's attorney defending him by saying spousal rape is legal in New York (she recanted the accusation before dying under suspicious circumstances, in all fairness), already being an adjudicated rapist with countless other accusations, etc. are just icing on the cake.
|
On June 22 2026 06:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser". The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary. Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed". I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does. You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much. Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact. His arguments are bad faith and absurd. He’s saying that if a rapist rapes 5 people from a group of 16 and then the other 11 people confirm that they weren’t raped the majority take it, he’s exonerated. It’s the stupidest thing anyone has posted since the last time oblade said anything.
His argument actually doesn't weigh in on Trump's guilt as best I can tell. It simply points out that in this one specific case there's disagreement that it happened at all from the potential victims. Yes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen (not what dyhb is arguing), but that you can't just flatly call it fact.
That's all. If you read dyhb as arguing for Trump's innocence, I understand the confusion. Instead he's just arguing over what is literal fact, and what isn't.
|
If dyhb were arguing in good faith he wouldn't move the goalposts so blatantly and repeatedly. He went from "lightspectra's link says the opposite of what he says" to "it was only five accusations, not good enough".
|
On June 22 2026 06:59 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 06:44 KwarK wrote:On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser". The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary. Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed". I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does. You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much. Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact. His arguments are bad faith and absurd. He’s saying that if a rapist rapes 5 people from a group of 16 and then the other 11 people confirm that they weren’t raped the majority take it, he’s exonerated. It’s the stupidest thing anyone has posted since the last time oblade said anything. His argument actually doesn't weigh in on Trump's guilt as best I can tell. It simply points out that in this one specific case there's disagreement that it happened at all from the potential victims. Yes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen (not what dyhb is arguing), but that you can't just flatly call it fact. That's all. If you read dyhb as arguing for Trump's innocence, I understand the confusion. Instead he's just arguing over what is literal fact, and what isn't. Its the same as the 'technically under NY's legal definition of rape Trump was not found guilty'.
This isn't a courtroom, and it just makes you look like a defender of despicable behaviour.
|
On June 22 2026 06:59 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 06:44 KwarK wrote:On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser". The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary. Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed". I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does. You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much. Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact. His arguments are bad faith and absurd. He’s saying that if a rapist rapes 5 people from a group of 16 and then the other 11 people confirm that they weren’t raped the majority take it, he’s exonerated. It’s the stupidest thing anyone has posted since the last time oblade said anything. His argument actually doesn't weigh in on Trump's guilt as best I can tell. It simply points out that in this one specific case there's disagreement that it happened at all from the potential victims. Yes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen (not what dyhb is arguing), but that you can't just flatly call it fact. That's all. If you read dyhb as arguing for Trump's innocence, I understand the confusion. Instead he's just arguing over what is literal fact, and what isn't.
Why do you think he chose this issue to make this argument and doesn’t use this bar in his own posts or ever with the posters who share his world view?
|
United States44247 Posts
On June 22 2026 06:59 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 06:44 KwarK wrote:On June 22 2026 06:38 Fleetfeet wrote:On June 22 2026 06:17 LightSpectra wrote:
The goalposts are now "Trump is innocent unless 100% of women on earth agree he is an abuser". The goalposts were always "You're saying it's a fact when it isn't", the declaration of Trump's innocence is imaginary. Like y'all jumping on dyhb for the small grievance of pointing out that it isn't fact as though his(?) next move is to declare that Trump is innocent, when all he's doing is saying "Technically we don't -know-" and "that's disputed". I'm sure I could go back and find dyhb saying Trump is a garbage human and that dyhb doesn't support Trump, but a lot of people seem to believe he does. You/we probably all agree that trump has a very unhealthy relationship with sex and women, but apparently dyhb being on the side of "we don't have literal proof yet that he's a paedophile" is too much. Fwiw I also believe Trump is a paedophile because why/how wouldn't you. I'm still not going to get caught in the weeds arguing that something extremely probable is actually fact. His arguments are bad faith and absurd. He’s saying that if a rapist rapes 5 people from a group of 16 and then the other 11 people confirm that they weren’t raped the majority take it, he’s exonerated. It’s the stupidest thing anyone has posted since the last time oblade said anything. His argument actually doesn't weigh in on Trump's guilt as best I can tell. It simply points out that in this one specific case there's disagreement that it happened at all from the potential victims. Yes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen (not what dyhb is arguing), but that you can't just flatly call it fact. That's all. If you read dyhb as arguing for Trump's innocence, I understand the confusion. Instead he's just arguing over what is literal fact, and what isn't.
No there isn’t disagreement. If victim A says victim A was assaulted and non victim B says non victim B wasn’t assaulted and non victim C says non victim C wasn’t assaulted then it would be extreme bad faith to present that as a 2 to 1 majority opinion that A was never assaulted. B and C are not disagreeing with A’s assertion of what happened to A.
A never claimed that Trump assaulted every person at every pageant Trump attended. B and C’s statements have absolutely no relevance. Of course it is possible to find 11 people Trump didn’t walk in on. That’s actually a surprisingly low number. Whereas 5 victims asserting that he did violate their privacy is a worryingly high number.
|
The goalposts are always moving. Even if Trump was convicted of raping a child in a federal trial with ample evidence they would just do like the other felony convictions, they'd cry "weaponization" and dismiss it.
Next oblade is going to say the usual "you can't know for sure what we'd say if X happened because X never happened".
It's like arguying with flat earthers or anti-vaxers. They have their 2-3 talking points and standard answers and when you get deeper in the subject they resort to "actually you can't prove that with 100% certainty, and if you can then I'll just dismiss your evidence as fabricated".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
