Donald Trump committed criminal offences whilst President of the United States.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 3 votes and with 18 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
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.
- That Trump published a weather forecast or warning of weather conditions.
- The forecast or conditions were counterfeit
- Trump knew they were counterfeit
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
bump