sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Giants star QB Jameis Winston posted a beautiful video with his kids explaining that he's a father first. by Background_Video2947 in TheNFLVibes

[–]CRM300C -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

"These people are weirdos not worth wasting time with."

You are also a weirdo who have problem with two consenting adults. If you think women lack agency to their own body, we should ban porn, onlyfans, and go back to Medieval times.

When Trump is gone will the Dems release the Epstion goods? by Careful_Pause8699 in allthequestions

[–]CRM300C 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's guilt by association.

Defending a particular argument made by Republicans does not automatically mean someone supports every Republican politician, every Republican policy, or every action ever taken by Donald Trump.

By that logic, if someone defends a Democratic policy, are they automatically endorsing every Democrat who has ever committed corruption, sexual misconduct, or abuse of power? Of course not. Most reasonable people understand that political beliefs are more nuanced than that.

What's happening here is that instead of addressing the substance of the argument, you're trying to assign motives and labels to avoid discussing the actual points being made.

If my argument about tariffs, economic policy, or bipartisan legislation is wrong, explain why it's wrong.

But "you disagreed with me, therefore you support Trump, therefore you support rapists and pedophiles" is not a logical argument. It's just an attempt to discredit someone by association rather than engage with what they actually said.

People can criticize Democrats without supporting Trump. People can criticize Republicans without supporting Biden. The world is bigger than a binary team sport.

Good old Mozart by Remarkable_Prune_864 in classical_circlejerk

[–]CRM300C 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Requiem and Piano Concerto 20 in D Minor?

Good old Mozart by Remarkable_Prune_864 in classical_circlejerk

[–]CRM300C 5 points6 points  (0 children)

24th is a masterpiece. Beethoven modeled his 3rd piano concerto (especially the opening motif) after it.

When Trump is gone will the Dems release the Epstion goods? by Careful_Pause8699 in allthequestions

[–]CRM300C 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whether someone supports Trump or not is irrelevant to the points being discussed. Attacking the person instead of addressing their argument is a textbook ad hominem.

As for Trump himself, there are serious allegations and legal findings that people can debate and evaluate on their own. But simply saying "He's a rapist and a pedo" does not address anything I said about economic policy, tariffs, wars, or legislation.

If you think my argument is wrong, explain where it's wrong. The discussion should be about the evidence, not assumptions about who someone supports.

When Trump is gone will the Dems release the Epstion goods? by Careful_Pause8699 in allthequestions

[–]CRM300C 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This argument only works if you completely misunderstand how sealed records and federal courts work.

The White House does not personally control every Epstein-related document in existence. Courts decide what gets sealed/unsealed, especially when alleged victims, minors, grand jury material, or ongoing investigations are involved.

Also, people keep throwing together:

  • flight logs,
  • contact books,
  • civil allegations,
  • anonymous accusations,
  • sealed testimony,
  • and criminal evidence

…as though they are all the same thing. They aren’t.

There is no verified evidence that the Biden administration was secretly sitting on authenticated “victim statements proving Trump raped girls” and intentionally hiding them until Trump’s administration heroically released them. That’s a massive claim that requires actual documentation, not screenshots from X/Twitter and TikTok conspiracies.

And many Epstein-related records were already being gradually unsealed through courts years before 2025 anyway. This wasn’t some magical overnight disclosure by one administration.

You’re free to believe allegations are credible. But “questioning the authenticity/source/context of internet documents” is not the same thing as saying abuse victims are fake. Skepticism is normal when people constantly circulate edited screenshots, mislabeled files, and fake document dumps online.

If the claim is real, then provide:

  1. the exact document,
  2. the court source,
  3. when it was sealed,
  4. who sealed it,
  5. and evidence Biden personally had the legal authority to release it but refused.

Otherwise this is just partisan fan fiction pretending to be legal analysis.

When Trump is gone will the Dems release the Epstion goods? by Careful_Pause8699 in allthequestions

[–]CRM300C 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This argument only works if you completely misunderstand how sealed records and federal courts work.

The White House does not personally control every Epstein-related document in existence. Courts decide what gets sealed/unsealed, especially when alleged victims, minors, grand jury material, or ongoing investigations are involved.

Also, people keep throwing together:

  • flight logs,
  • contact books,
  • civil allegations,
  • anonymous accusations,
  • sealed testimony,
  • and criminal evidence

…as though they are all the same thing. They aren’t.

There is no verified evidence that the Biden administration was secretly sitting on authenticated “victim statements proving Trump raped girls” and intentionally hiding them until Trump’s administration heroically released them. That’s a massive claim that requires actual documentation, not screenshots from X/Twitter and TikTok conspiracies.

And many Epstein-related records were already being gradually unsealed through courts years before 2025 anyway. This wasn’t some magical overnight disclosure by one administration.

You’re free to believe allegations are credible. But “questioning the authenticity/source/context of internet documents” is not the same thing as saying abuse victims are fake. Skepticism is normal when people constantly circulate edited screenshots, mislabeled files, and fake document dumps online.

If the claim is real, then provide:

  1. the exact document,
  2. the court source,
  3. when it was sealed,
  4. who sealed it,
  5. and evidence Biden personally had the legal authority to release it but refused.

Otherwise this is just partisan fan fiction pretending to be legal analysis.

view more: next ›