The Instigator
Alexhawkins998
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Reformist
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Hillary Clinton should not be able to be president

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
Reformist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 435 times Debate No: 84349
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Alexhawkins998

Con

You know Hillary Rodham Clinton may have the support to win the nomination for the Democratic Party, however she isn't someone that can be trusted with handling a country. For example, when she was Secretary of State for 4 years under President Obama, her #1 priority was to protect our ambassadors who were overseas. She didn't obey that priority and because of that it resulted in the deaths of four americans in Benghazi. She was sent multiple emails by Ambassador Stevens, clearly wanting security and all she did was throw those emails away.
Reformist

Pro

So since you didn't really define your argument I will do so know

You basically think that Hillary Clinton is not qualified to be president and others are. If this is not your argument please say so in the comments below and we will work something out

I see you are outraged by the Benghazi issue and we will get into that but first here is just a simple fact. These things happen

60 deaths, 13 attacks on US embassies under George Bush.
(http://www.politifact.com...)

Did you hear about those? No because the whole reason Benghazi was inflated was because Fox News acted as a propaganda station for the right.

But why don't we look at the facts?

You say that Clinton refused to send help? Here's some of the report

".....No U.S. government element refused or denied requests for emergency assistance during the crisis. The evidence also does not show there were armed air assets above Benghazi at any time or that any such assets were called off from assisting U.S. personnel on the ground."

"The progress report finds that officials at the Defense Department were monitoring the situation throughout and kept the forces that were initially deployed flowing into the region. No evidence has been provided to suggest these officials refused to deploy resources because they thought the situation had been sufficiently resolved."

You also said that she tried to "cover" up the incident. Even the lead investigator, Jason Chaffez, could not articulate what was being covered up.

You would think after spending 3.3 million dollars they would come up with a shred of evidence. But they haven't. They just haven't. The real crime here is that the money going to this witchhunt could've fed hungry children living here in the States

Sources:

http://www.politifact.com...

http://mediamatters.org...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 1
Alexhawkins998

Con

Do you think someone who isn't able to handle national security well should become president? Is that your arguement? Don't give me typical left wing bias. Lets talk about the emails, she lied and said that she didn't email any classified material using personal email server. Didn't the state department find more classified material in her server? Didn't they contain material on Benghazi? BTW, Trey Gowdy was doing the investigation on Clinton, not Chaffetz. Here lets see if you can answer all these questions you left wing debater:
Why did she erase most of her emails on her server? Did she have something to hide? Why didn't she provide security for those four americans? Was it their job to go and die in the reign of terror
Reformist

Pro

Well firstly Jason Chaftez was the investigator while Trey Gowdy questioned Mrs. Clinton.

Hillary Clinton used a personal email accont.

Lets look at Section 1236.22B of the Federal Register:

""Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.........specifically designates that employees of certain agencies are allowed to use non-federal email systems."

And guess which one of these certain agencies were called? The State Department.

Now of course the regulations changed and now any official is not allowed to have a personal email account but that change occurred in 2014. After Clinton served her term.

I have made your point have no impact because what you said was misleading and just outwright wrong.

Okay so now you talk about why some of her emails on her server were erased.

Any email sent to any federal reserve or official was automatically preserved

Any email that was "erased" is copied on to a DoD"5015.2 STD-certified product that can be viewed by the State Department or any other federal Reserve

Ive made that point null and void because they already have the emails but they haven't found anything.

Now on to the security of the four americans.

I find it funny that you keep bringing up Benghazi. Everytime you say she didn't do anything to help them I'm going to keep bringing up this

"In addition, the House Armed Services Committee conducted a review of air assets available to respond to Benghazi. No U.S. government element refused or denied requests for emergency assistance during the crisis. The evidence also does not show there were armed air assets above Benghazi at any time or that any such assets were called off from assisting U.S. personnel on the ground. According to witness testimony, the security officials on the ground did use laser sights, but they did so as an escalatory demonstration of force in an effort to deter some attackers. They were not lasing targets for air assets.

The House Armed Services Committee also examined the question of whether the Defense Department failed to deploy assets to Benghazi because it believed the attack was over after the first phase. The progress report finds that officials at the Defense Department were monitoring the situation throughout and kept the forces that were initially deployed flowing into the region. No evidence has been provided to suggest these officials refused to deploy resources because they thought the situation had been sufficiently resolved."

http://www.newsweek.com...

http://mediamatters.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Alexhawkins998

Con

My opponent clearly doesn't understand what he or she is talking about! Back in March, Megyn Kelly revealed that Trey Gowdy was looking to get that email server from Clinton. For the 100th time, Chaffetz wasn't involved. He was not even on the Benghazi Committee. Go to benghazi.house.gov, and look at it yourself. My point that I am trying to make is that If you want to be president, you have to be honest. She simply doesen't meet those categories. She lied about her emails. Lied about
Reformist

Pro

I don't know what I'm talking about?

I've listed multiple sites/sources and you haven't

I wont bring up any new arguments since this is the last round but i've successfully proven all of your points wrong.

Don't trust Megyn Kelly, she works on Fox. All they do is spread propaganda.

Everyone lies. Republicans lie more than the Democrats ever will. Its impossible to not lie. Its just human nature. But ive proved that the things you thought she lied about were just not true.

Vote Reformist!!

(P.S.- I know Jason Chafftez is not on committee. He was an investigator)
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RNG_REKT 1 year ago
RNG_REKT
Alexhawkins998ReformistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: What the voter below said
Vote Placed by Balacafa 1 year ago
Balacafa
Alexhawkins998ReformistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made multiple bare assertions without the usage of sources when they were absolutely necessary. For example, in the very first round: " she was Secretary of State for 4 years under President Obama, her #1 priority was to protect our ambassadors who were overseas. " This required sourcing and evidence since without it Con's entire argument crumbles. Pro provided multiple sources showing both statistics, general view and misconceptions that Con made. Pro's rebuttals were extensive and despite the fact that Con's arguments carried little weight due to the lack of sourcing, Pro treated these arguments as valid and went in detail as to why Con was incorrect providing reliable and relevant news articles and political sources to combat the lack of sources from Con.