It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
There were a lot of false suppositions thrown out, which is why it ended up being people talking over each other.
When you throw out false assumptions to debate, there isn't going to be much debating now is there?
originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
You can watch the debate on youtube, stop being lazy. Find out for yourself.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
There were a lot of false suppositions thrown out, which is why it ended up being people talking over each other.
When you throw out false assumptions to debate, there isn't going to be much debating now is there?
I would like you to define these assumptions.
Sounds more like an excuse.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
There were a lot of false suppositions thrown out, which is why it ended up being people talking over each other.
When you throw out false assumptions to debate, there isn't going to be much debating now is there?
I would like you to define these assumptions.
Sounds more like an excuse.
originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
There were a lot of false suppositions thrown out, which is why it ended up being people talking over each other.
When you throw out false assumptions to debate, there isn't going to be much debating now is there?
I would like you to define these assumptions.
Sounds more like an excuse.
So far, I'm only up to the first "abuse of power" question. It sounds pretty loaded to me. There is obviously no reason any president would wait for a victorious opponent to appoint a new Supreme court judge.
Do they also think the present Congress should stay out of session and pass no laws until January, because it is possible different people might be in their seats at that time?
originally posted by: panoz77
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
There were a lot of false suppositions thrown out, which is why it ended up being people talking over each other.
When you throw out false assumptions to debate, there isn't going to be much debating now is there?
I would like you to define these assumptions.
Sounds more like an excuse.
Here is just a short list from memory:
Biden claimed Trump said the military were losers - Never an ounce of proof anywhere this was ever said. Trump said Biden told a military audience to "Clap you stupid Bastards" and they were a "dull bunch", video proof of Biden saying this to the military audience, Biden denied ever saying it.
Biden refused to answer if he would pack the SCOTUS and did not name one person he would nominate as a justice.
Biden couldn't name one single law enforcement agency that endorsed him.
Biden denied saying that he called criminals predators when he led to pass the 1994 crime bill.
Other gems
Biden denied that his son Hunter accepted 3.5 million from the wife of the Moscow mayor.
Biden said he does not support the Green New Deal.
Biden endorsed Amy Coney Barrett, "I'm not opposed to the justice, she seems like a very fine person"
Biden said that "I am the democratic party"
Biden called Trump a clown twice.
Did they both just act like children the whole time?
Oh, look.
Biden, Biden, Biden, Biden, Biden, Biden, Biden
I hope you’re not a poker player.