The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Jamais23
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Donald Trump's child rape case allegations are credible.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 244 times Debate No: 94299
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

This is not about whether or not Trump is guilty. This is about whether the allegations against trump warrant further investigation or not. Are these allegations credible? [0][1] I for one say they are.

Sources
0. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
1. https://www.scribd.com...
Jamais23

Con

Hello, I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

Thanks for the debate.

The main part that makes the allegations credible is that the plaintiff has a witness. Other parts are that Donald Trump makes overt anti-woman remarks and previous allegations. Science has shown an association between sexual violence and sexual objectification [2] .

2. http://psycnet.apa.org...
Jamais23

Con

As much as it is intriguing that the "plaintiff" just spoke up now, I don't think these allegations should be given further investigation.

My reason:

The "plaintiff", according to Snopes, was never located, interviewed and identified (1). A judge had ordered her to supposedly pay for her attorneys' fees and court costs but the "plaintiff" asked to be let off the hook, claiming she only had $300 to her name. The address affiliated with her name was found to be an abandoned home and her phone number goes straight to voicemail.

Also, the "plaintiff" just chose to speak up after 22 years when the supposed "defendant" is on his peak of victory on presidential election? That is very fishy.

SOURCES:

(1) http://www.snopes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Pro

"The "plaintiff", according to Snopes, was never located, interviewed and identified (1). A judge had ordered her to supposedly pay for her attorneys' fees and court costs but the "plaintiff" asked to be let off the hook, claiming she only had $300 to her name. The address affiliated with her name was found to be an abandoned home and her phone number goes straight to voicemail.

Also, the "plaintiff" just chose to speak up after 22 years when the supposed "defendant" is on his peak of victory on presidential election? That is very fishy." Jamais23


All of this can be explained because the plantiff was allegedly threatened.
"Johnson says in the complaint that Trump and Epstein threatened her and her family with bodily harm if she didn’t comply with all of their disgusting demands." [3]


You would be scared too if you were threated. People take time to come forward when they are young. These allegiations are credible and warrant further investigation.


Sources.
3. http://www.snopes.com...
Jamais23

Con

Hello, thanks for the debate response.

I'll copy my original response.

"The "plaintiff", according to Snopes, was never located, interviewed and identified (1). A judge had ordered her to supposedly pay for her attorneys' fees and court costs but the "plaintiff" asked to be let off the hook, claiming she only had $300 to her name. The address affiliated with her name was found to be an abandoned home and her phone number goes straight to voicemail."

This is enough details to abandon the case because the "plaintiff" cannot even give the right information in which she could be contacted and had chosen to settle in a federal court in which she cannot even afford. That is enough information for me to gather that the "plaintiff" is not serious in this case.

You said, "You would be scared too if you were threated. People take time to come forward when they are young. These allegiations are credible and warrant further investigation."

Really? For 22 years, she did not do a single thing, just waiting for her "violator" to have his moment of ultimate victory? Are you telling me that Trump and Epstein had her in surveillance for 22 years? That is hogwash. She didn't even explain what she did with her life after these attacks.

Donald Trump has been attacked many times after receiving his presumptive presidential nomination in the Republican Party and ultimately the party's presidential nominee. If the "plaintiff" just chose to speak up now after 22 years and that she cannot even give her right details in which she could be contacted and that she didn't even explain what she did after these attacks, this whole case paints a picture that it is highly likely to be an attempt to bring Donald Trump down and damage his reputations. Make America Great Again!
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Stupidape 4 months ago
Stupidape
Flickr_G

lol, its obvious neither me nor my opponent knows anything about the subject. If you want I started another debate on the subject, taking the Con side.

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Flickr_G 4 months ago
Flickr_G
References:

Mic - 15/5/13 - https://mic.com...

Daily Mail - 29/4/16 - http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

Independent - 27/1/16 - http://www.independent.co.uk...

NY Daily - 6/5/97 - http://www.nydailynews.com...

Telegraph - 27/1/16 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

mother jones - 7/12/15 - http://www.motherjones.com...

NY Daily - 2/11/11 - http://www.nydailynews.com...

Rewire - 2/8/16 - https://rewire.news...

eonline - 21/11/14 - http://www.eonline.com...
Posted by Flickr_G 4 months ago
Flickr_G
(part 2)

His ex wife, Ivana, accused him of "raping" her in 1989. She was later made to sign a gagging order in regards to their marriage, but was granted a divorce on the grounds of "cruel and inhuman treatment" against her by Trump. Even when she retracted her statement, this was not in full, changing the definition of the word rape, from a physical act to an emotional state. Twenty years on a court would probably conclude that the aggressive act, still constitute some form of sexual assault. (Independent - 27/1/16)

Jill Harth Houraney accused Trump of sexually assaulting her over a business contract in 1993. It is particularly notable that she said Trump refers to making her his "sex slave" a term used in the Johnson accusations. (NY Daily - 6/5/97)

Selina Scott, accused Trump of stalking and sending her abusive correspondence in 1995, after she said "unflattering" things about him in a documentary. (Telegraph - 27/1/16)

Aside from these allegations, he also has supported other powerful men accused of similar sex crimes. In 1992, he managed to stop Tyson being imprisoned for rape against a teenager (mother jones - 7/12/15). Defended Herman Cain in 2011 (NY Daily - 2/11/11) and Roger Ailes in 2016 (Rewire - 2/8/16). Trump was also known to say, prior Epstein"s conviction (of which he only served a fraction of his sentence, part time), that he and Epstein were great friends and shared an interest in young women.

When the Cosby allegations were made, Trump"s reaction was particularly worrying as it was not about concern for the truth or justice - he instead made comments to the press that Cosby needed to use better PR because he was handling the situation wrong (eonline - 21/11/14).

If we are too have any faith left in our justice systems, we at the very least need to allow the authorities to carry out formal investigations into allegations of any form of abuse or servitude.
Posted by Flickr_G 4 months ago
Flickr_G
(part 1)

Less than 1% of rape allegations are falsely made. (Mic - 15/5/13)

"Katie Johnson", has made two separate claims about Trump for the same circumstances, the 1st was thrown for administrative reasons after Trump"s lawyer implies the victim doesn"t exist. Upon the second attempt, a witness ("Tiffany Doe", allegedly connected to the already convicted friend of Trump, Epstein) is brought forward to back up the story. (Daily Mail - 29/4/16)

This already shows that there is a level of determination by the apparently non-existent victim to pursue this complaint. I would suggest that a hoax wouldn"t bother make a second attempt if already discredited.

Trump"s lawyer, Garten, suggests that because the address and telephone aren"t registered to the victim, suggesting this is proof of dishonesty, but when we are also told that the have less than $300 to their name, there is a plausible argument that the victim might not be able to afford a permanent residence or phone contract of their own. An alternative scenario could be that following her time as a "sex slave" she was forced into a life on the streets, therefore giving a friend"s contact details or squatting at the foreclosed house at the time of filling the report.

Ethically, should not all alleged crimes be investigated? If there is no evidence or witnesses to prove a connection between the two ladies and Trump, then the case would be dismissed anyway. Is it not a bigger risk to just ignore the allegation?

Particularly when Trump has a trail of similar accusations from that time period:
Posted by Jamais23 4 months ago
Jamais23
That's right. If you can't even provide the right location where you live in which you can be contacted and that you cannot also be contacted by phone, why bother? It is sad if the media still parades this case because it is all hogwash and an attempt to bring down Trump.

I am honoured to convince you with the arguments. It was a pleasure debating with you!
Posted by Stupidape 4 months ago
Stupidape
Wow, Jamais23 you actually convinced me to change my mind. Rarely does an opponent in a debate site convinced me that I am wrong. The fact that the plaintiff lied about where she lived destroys her credibility. I really think you made the better argument.
No votes have been placed for this debate.