Instigator / Pro
21
1551
rating
26
debates
57.69%
won
Topic
#3627
Donald Trump committed criminal offences whilst President of the United States.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 3 votes and with 18 points ahead, the winner is...
PoliceSheep
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
3
1486
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Description
Donald Trump committed criminal offences whilst president of the United States.
Pro will have to Prove that Donald J Trump under the appropriate federal and/or state law.
The burden of proof is on pro to prove Donald Trump committed an offence. Given this debate does not allow subpoenas or direct testimony, the judgement should based on the available evidence presented by both sides.
This debate is about whether or not Trump committed these offences, not if he would be likely to be convicted in a court of law or if he is likely to be indicted on any of these offences.
Con's role is to defend Donald Trump from the charges Pro puts forward, offering a defense, challenging factual basis and challenging the laws as applied to those circumstances.
Max. Character Limit is high to prevent people being cut-off and is not a suggestion. Quality > Quantity.
No Kritiks. No new arguments in Round 3.
Round 1
Thank you for accepting this debate. Good luck!
Definitions
Specific legal definitions will be argued during the debate, however all rules in the debate description stand as read plainly by the voter (jury).
Charges
The Pro(secution) will set out the first four charges against President Donald J. Trump and the allegations of fact relating to them. Con can then respond arguing which matters of fact and/or law that Con is challenging and why. The Pro(secution) will then respond either by defending or dropping the offences. The Pro(secution) may add additional charges until Round 3.
The Pro(secution) will provide a single source as context for the events as covered in the news to assist Con. All information about laws have been taken directly out of the text of the statute.
18 U.S. Code § 2074
During the events of Hurricane Dorian, it is alleged that then President Donald J. Trump did knowingly alter a Weather Bureau forecast of the path of the hurricane with a Sharpie pen to cover southern Alabama and did publish this to his Twitter account. [1]
The requirements that the Prosecution have to prove are:
- That Trump published a weather forecast or warning of weather conditions.
- The forecast or conditions were counterfeit
- Trump knew they were counterfit
- That the forecast or conditions were a false representation of a forecast or warning to that had been issued or published by the Weather Bureau, United States Signal Service, or other branch of the Government service.
18 U.S. Code § 1512 (k)
Whilst President of the United States, it is alleged Donald J. Trump did conspire with former Mayor of New York City, Rudolph Guliani to threaten an investigation into Michael Cohen’s father-in-law to influence his testimony and participation in testimony before the House of Representatives Intellegence Committee. [2]
The requirements that the Prosecution have to prove are:
- That former Mayor of New York City Rudolph Guliani violated 18 U.S. Code § 1512(b)(1):
Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding.
- That Donald J. Trump had an agreement with Rudolph Guliani to dissuade Mr. Cohen’s testimony
- That Donald J. Trump furthered that end with the overt act of tweeting about Mr. Cohen’s father-in-law.
52 U.S. Code § 30121
President Donald J. Trump is charged with soliciting something of value for the 2020 Presidential election, namely a public announcement of investigation into the son of a political rival, then former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in a phone call with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine. [3]
The requirements that the Prosecution have to prove are:
- Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a foreign national OR the Government of Ukraine is a foreign principle (as defined in 22 U.S. Code § 611(b))
- Donald J. Trump solicited an investigation into Hunter Biden from Volodymyr Zelenskyy OR the Government of Ukraine
- An investigation is “something of value” to President Trump
- That “something of value” is related to a federal, state or local election.
GA Code § 21-2-597 (2020)
President Donald J. Trump is alleged to have intentionally interfered with the electoral process in the State of Georgia by way of a phone call to the Secretary of State Bradford J. Raffensperger where Trump pressured Raffensperger to change the results to grant Trump the electoral college votes of the state of Georgia.
The requirements that the Prosecution have to prove are:
- That Bradford J. Raffensperger was performing a duty as Secretary of State under Title 21, Chapter 2 of Georgia State Law
- That Trump interfered with, hindered, or delayed or attempted to interfere with, hinder, or delay any other person (Brad Raffensperger) in the performance of any act or duty authorized by Title 21, Chapter 2 of Georgia State Law.
- That Trump acted intentionally
References
Forfeited
Round 2
Forfeited
Forfeited
Round 3
Forfeited
Forfeited
What are these absolutely dishonest characterisations?
Obama ordered a drone strike that killed an American citizen.
But he did not order the drone stick to specifically kill an American citizen, nor was it known that it would've. It was a tragic accident, but clearly not an assassination on an American citizen, and hardly is indicative of a will to conduct drone strikes of US citizens in general.
Trump wasn't just questioning the results of an election. He took specific action through multiple lawsuits in an attempt to baselessly shift the results of the election. Concession aside, has he still to this day even acknowledged that he lost that election?
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually agree with Best.Korea for once. Though I wouldn't go so far as to say Trump was the best president we ever had, he definitely was top 10 at least.
But he is completely right that Bush and Obama committed blatant war crimes and did blatantly unconstitutional actions while in office but both got a free pass. Obama wanted to conduct drone strikes on U.S. Citizens for goodness sake. In fact he did just that. He literally assassinated at least one U.S. Citizen. But he wasn't impeached. In fact he is considered a national fucking hero by half of the country. Think about that for a second. The media calls Trump a threat to democracy yet glorifies a man who assassinated an American citizen.
What is a bigger threat to democracy? Assassinating American citizens or questioning the results of an election yet still conceding anyways?
That should tell you the pulse of the left right now.
Donald Trump was the best president you ever had. Maybe if your media(such as CNN) didnt put so much effort into making Trump look like the bad guy, you would be able to see this. Also, if presidents were really charged for crimes, bush and obama would be in jail for a very long time. But since you didnt prosecute someone who killed over a million of people, surely you cant say that you have the right to prosecute Trump for whatever "crime" you think he committed.
Apologies for the delay, however, I have now published my argument.
Thanks
Hey, welcome. I will go first, and as soon as my argument is published, there will be a button under the timer for you to publish your repsonse.
Hello
Sorry, this is my first debate on this site. Do I go first? And how? Thanks
The debate to begin.
what are you waiting for?
Waiting....