Transcription
because I'm the owner of the pageant and therefore I'm inspecting it. You know, I'm inspecting. I want to make sure. Is everyone okay? You know, they stand there with no. Is everybody okay? And you see these incredible looking women and so I sort of get away with things like that.
It's also worth giving out that on top of Donald Trump's admission of guilt here, uh, where he says that he'd gone into the dressing rooms, there'd be naked people had to look great. He'd get away with it. Sexual exploitation. Uh, we also have the testimony of many victims.
Dixon.
Hey Dean, question for you. Did he ever say dressing rooms in that clip?
He described dressing room.
Oh, really? He said No, he said backstage.
He said he go through the backstage into a place where men were.
No, he didn't. He said he went backstage where people were getting dressed.
Wait, one second. You dispute that he said that he went into a place backstage where men weren't allowed? Where where women?
He didn't say where men weren't allowed. Did he say men weren't allowed?
Yeah. Where men were anywhere. That means that men weren't allowed. No, he didn't say that. He said that people, uh, he's allowed to go backstage because he's the owner of the pageant because most people aren't allowed backstage at a pageant if they don't work for the pageant.
He said backstage.
Did he explicitly say no men were around?
Uh, I don't know if he said that, but he definitely didn't say dressing rooms.
What he said?
Okay. I said I wasn't sure if he said that. I couldn't remember.
I'll I'll give you.
But he definitely didn't say dressing rooms. That's a lie. You lied. Can you admit you lied? Admit you lied right now. Admit you lied.
I did not lie. Okay. You said that he went. You said that he said he went into dressing rooms. You didn't say that.
Dressing rooms.
No, you said that he admitted he went into dressing room.
He never said that. Million. He never said he went into dressing rooms. He said he went backstage, which is completely different.
The reason why I say that Donald Trump admitted to going into dressing rooms is because what he describes in the clip is a dressing room. He says that he went backstage, a into a place where men were not anywhere, b into a place where he had abused his special authorities, the owner of the pageant, to enter into that space under the guise of.
This sounds like conjecture, speculation. Dean, did do you contest that people get dressed backstage sometimes?
Hey, do you contest that people get dressed backstage sometimes?
Straight up that he went into dressing rooms. You can't just cut me off midway through.
It's called conjecture. It's called conjecture. This is not speculation because speculation would be coming to conclusions without reasonable justification to underpin the conclusions. That's what we use the phrase speculation to denote when in my in in culminating in building my conclusion that Donald Trump walked in the dressing rooms. Not only am I using reasonable evidence to justify that conclusion, but this is reasonable evidence that is obviously apparent to anybody with more than three brain cells. So, I'm not going to give you that reasonable justification for the claim that he went into dressing rooms and you're going to sit like a good boy and listen unless you want to continue to interrupt me in that case. Go ahead. I I bet we could agree. We're both adults. We want to have a productive dialogue here, which would necessitate that we listen to one another.
Go ahead, Dean. You say whatever you want to say and then I'm going to have a line of questioning for you afterwards.
Okay. Well, hopefully we'll just get a concession afterwards because this is common sense, man. It's super duper easy. So the claim that you want me to justify is that he went into dressing rooms. So first and foremost, the contestants at the beauty pageants would get dressed in dressing rooms. Why do we know this? Because that's what the contestants said and that's what contestants would do at Miss Teen USA. But more so on top of that, we don't even need to look towards what the contestant said and what would happen at the beauty pageants to tell us where they would get dressed in order to prove that he would go into a dressing room. We have to listen to what Donald Trump admitted to. There are four things Donald Trump said in this clip in which demonstrate he would go into the dressing rooms. The first thing that he said in this clip that would prove that he went into the dressing rooms is the fact that he'd say the space that he went into are spaces where men were no were not around. There no men at all. Okay. So now it seems like we have some reason to believe that this would be a woman's dressing room because it seems like this is a space for women and women only. Let's see if we can find more reason. Yes, we can. He also said that he has to abuse his special privilege as the owner of the pageant to go into this space where no men are anywhere in order to get into the space under the guise of doing an inspection. If it was just a general backstage area, he wouldn't have to abuse any special privilege under the guise of doing an inspection. He would just be able to walk in and out because it's just a general backstage area. The fourth reason why I believe that this was a woman's dressing room is of course because he describes the women to be naked with no clothes on and he describes the women to be getting dressed. And the fifth reason why I believe that this was a woman's dressing room is because at the end of the clip he says, "So I would get away with that." What is he getting away with if it's just a general backstage area where he's allowed? This further represents that the claim that no men were anywhere therefore no men weren't allowed is true. The second reason, uh, suggests that while they were getting naked and they're getting dressed. The third reason, once again, it's a woman's only area. He wasn't allowed in there. That's why it's a woman's dressing room. And these reasons aren't even mentioning the testimony of the victims like Tasha Dixon, who said that he'd barge into the dressing rooms and look at her while she's naked. Mariah Belato, who said, "Yeah, he'd just walk in on us while we were changing and all and we're all naked." The three other unnamed teens from Miss Teen USA 1997, or Miss Vermont, Miss Massachusetts, and many of the women from the other years, or even like the pro-Trump contestants like Victoria Hughes, who said, "Oh, well, he just walk in when we were dressed, when we had clothes on. We were we we were completely dressed." Okay, well, she's still saying that he walked into the dressing room. So, in consideration of all of these points and the testimony from the victims and the women who claimed their were victims, like uh Victoria Hughes, it seems to be the case that he clearly was walking into women's dressing rooms. Yeah.
Okay. Awesome. So, I have a line of questioning I'd like to I'd like to pose to you. Um, do people ever get dressed to any degree backstage at all? Ever?
Outside of dressing rooms?
Backstage? Yeah.
Outside of dressing rooms? Backstage? I mean, I wouldn't know because I've never attended a beauty pageant, but I would assume like putting on like, I don't know, like wigs if they're wearing them, jackets if they're wearing them. Uh, like, you know, like small makeup and costume fixes.
Okay, so it's possible. It's possible that people are getting dressed in the general backstage.
Parker, Parker, Parker, Parker, pipe down. This is This is me and Dia. Um.
Is it possible?
I I want to point out here, Cam, that what I'm saying is I I could reasonably see people like doing small makeup and costume changes. Is it possible that they were getting dressed?
But I don't think that we could reasonably see people like literally getting naked backstage.
Is it possible that Is it possible that they were in their bra and underwear backstage? You think that's possible at all?
I I don't think that there'd be a high enough level of.
No, no, no, no. I'm asking you if it's possible. I'm asking you if it's possible.
I'm asking you if it's possible.
Parker, pipe down. I'm asking you if it's possible.
Is bra and underwear clothing?
They are a small amount of clothing.
I'm asking Dean if it's possible. Parker, pipe down. Cam, when he says no clothes on, does that mean that there's minimal clothing on?
Parker, I'm asking you to pipe down. It's me and Dean. Is it possible.
You don't know how to respond to that one, but Dean's gonna ask the same question, buddy.
No, it's irrelevant because I could perfectly well see somebody referring to bra underwear as naked.
Is it possible that people were in their bra underwear backstage?
Okay, you can say that's ridiculous. It's fine. Were Is it possible that people were in their bra underwear backstage? Dean, go ahead.
Like logically possible?
Yeah. Is it possible? Like, is there a chance it happened? It's It's logically possible that.
Okay, great. Awesome. That's all I needed to know, Dean. That is all I needed to know. Consideration of this logical. That's all I needed to know.
Because we have. That's all I needed to know, Dean. That's all I need to know. The case in the slightest.
That's all I needed to know, Dean. I don't need I don't need to know anything else. Yeah, I don't need anything else.
You want to ignore nuance on the subject because.
I don't want to I don't want to. I have a line of questioning. I sat back and and was quiet while you were talking. So now I have a line of questioning for you that I'd like you to not officiate from. Okay? So be quiet and listen.
I just want to clear I just want to clarify what we've demonstrated.
You're just you're just railroad logically possible that they were in their.
Yeah. Everybody who's watching knows that Dean. Everyone's tracking, everyone knows you're just.
Officiating that unicorns exist. So we've demonstrated.
Everyone knows this, Dean. You're just trying to distract the conversation.
You have demonstrated. Go ahead. You've demonstrated.
Demonstrated that unicorns are are logically possible to exist. What happens next?
Is it my turn to talk yet or are you just going to keep talking so that I can't talk?
I can the floor of yours.
Okay, great. Thank you. So, we've demonstrated that it's possible that people were getting dressed backstage. Now, I'm just going to need a simple yes or no answer here, please.
No. No. Off.
That's not what we agreed to.
Is it possible at all that he's not talking about a dressing room in this clip? Is it at all possible?
Yeah, it's logically possible.
Okay, great.
Awesome. Um, can anyone just walk backstage at a beauty pageant? Is my next question.
No.
Oh, really? Nobody can. Okay. So, let's let's hone in on your two primary points here. Is that if Trump wasn't the owner, uh, if he wasn't abusing his ownership powers, um, he would be able to just walk on backstage freely, which isn't true because nobody, you can't just walk backstage. Not just anybody can walk backstage. The owner can walk backstage and that would be a perk and a privilege that the owner would have to walk backstage in the general area. No, I'm not done yet. You also said, uh, there's a few people who accuse Trump of having walked into the dressing room on them. There's five people. There's 11 people who say that it never happened. 11 girls who were part of the pageant that say it never happened. So, you can you can say, well, five people say it happened and then 11 say it didn't happen. It's just those 11 versus those five. So, it's not going to be a strong point either. The fact of the matter is that you lied and said he went into a dressing room and said he went into a dressing room, which he didn't. He said he went backstage, which is completely different. It's perfectly logically possible that people were getting dressed backstage. You admit to this. It's perfectly logically possible that he wasn't talking about a dressing room. You admit to this. So, what you're doing is operating off of conjecture. You're guessing. You're filling in blanks, uh, based on evidence that isn't present. It doesn't exist.
Go ahead. Okay. Is it logically possible that Donald Trump is secretly a Democrat who just wants to destroy the GOP from within?
Sure, it's logically possible.
Do you think that Donald Trump is secretly a Democrat that wants to destroy the GOP from within?
Do you have any evidence that that's what he's doing?
I'm asking you a yes or no question, Ken. Uh, no I don't because there's no available evidence that points to the idea that he did or that he is.
Given your argu given your line of argumentation, uh, that is baseless conjecture and speculatory due to the fact that it is technically logically possible that he is secretly a Democrat who wants to destroy the GOP from within. The point that I'm trying to demonstrate here is that I cannot believe that you would choose such a white belt line of argumentation in an attempt to argue that he never barged into the dressing rooms of beauty pageant contestants at the beauty pageants that he owned. You asked me, and this was the crux of the argument, is it logically possible that this was not a dressing room? And I answered yes. And now you're using that claim to demonstrate that apparently it is conjecturous and speculatory for me to attempt to prove that it wasn't just a general backstage area, but rather a dressing room.
Hold up. You're asking me You're asking me to You're asking me to prove a negative.
It's logically possible that we're brains. It's logically possible that there's five gods. It's logically possible that that unicorns exist and it's logically possible that Donald Trump is secretly a Democrat who wants to destroy the GOP from within.
Yeah.
Merely demonstrating the logical possibility of an occurrence does absolutely nothing in demonstrating that the scenario in which you describe to be true, that it was just a general backstage area, is actually true. If we want to argue that it was not a dressing room, but rather a backstage area, then you would have to demonstrate that it was a backstage area, not predicated on logical possibility, but rather predicated on a preponderance of evidence. But the preponderance of evidence, not just to a 51% degree, but to a goddamn 99.9% degree suggests that it was a woman's only dressing room. And I will repeat that evidence now because you didn't really respond to it. And there's another thing that you did say that I want to respond to. You said, "Well, he of course would have to abuse the fact that he's the owner to go into the backstage area." And that's why he said that in the clip. Because I'm the owner, I can special.
Well, that isn't what he said that in the clip. In the clip, he said, "Because I'm the owner, I could go into the space under the guise of doing an inspection."
Yeah. Backstage. Would the owner, in order to get backstage, have to enter into the backstage area under the guise of doing an inspection? Or could the owner just go into the backstage area for any reason or no reason at all, not necessitating the guise of doing an inspection?
Well, what else would he be doing backstage? Probably inspecting to make sure everybody's doing a good job. Obviously.
Answer my question.
I just did.
No, you didn't. I will repeat the question because you weren't tracking. Would the owner have to go into a general backstage area necessarily under the guise of doing an inspection? Or could the owner just go into a general backstage area for any reason or no reason at all? [ __ ] An owner of a beauty pageant could go into a general backstage area to pick his nose or check his phone.
You could say the same thing about the dressing room. It's irrelevant to the argument. Here's what you're doing.
You cannot say. Here's what you're doing. Pause. Pause. Pause. I I disagree. You cannot say the same thing about the dressing rooms. And the reasons why you're calling this an irrelevant argument is because you know that it defeats your view. The fact that Donald Trump said that not only was he allowed to do this because he's the owner, but in doing this had to do so under the specific guise of an inspection in order to quote unquote get away with it is what proves he knows he was doing something wrong and is what further proves that it was a space for women and women only where they were getting dressed and ready dressing room. On top of the fact that he said that there was no men around. On top of the fact that that's what the women say. Even the women that said he never performed on them while they're naked, like Victoria Hughes, on top of the fact that he said they were getting naked and changing. And the only evidence that you have that it was in a woman's dressing room, even though that's what the preponderance of evidence proves, is the fact that IT'S TECHNICALLY LOGICALLY POSSIBLE THAT IT WAS IN a backstage area. The same way it's technically logically possible, once again, that unicorns exist. We have five gods. You're brain in the bat where Donald Trump is secretly a Democrat who's trying to destroy the GOP.
Yeah. Are you done yet? Do I get to talk now?
Oh, dude. I'm done, K.
Okay. Awesome. Yeah. So, with your analogy that you posed, me, you said, "Do you think that Trump is a secret Democrat trying to take over the GOP?" Uh, I said, "Uh, or is it logically possible that's the case?" And I said, "Yes, it's logically possible." You said, "Now, prove that he's not." Uh, you're asking me to prove a negative. The difference between me and you is that you're trying to prove a positive. You're making the case that Trump went into the dressing rooms, passing it off as fact, uh, fact. But what you're really doing is you're taking small pieces of um what Trump said, his testimony, and then filling in the gaps with your own thoughts and feelings and saying that it proves that it was a dressing room that he was talking about. He didn't say dressing room. He said backstage. You've admitted that it's logically possible that it wasn't backstage and therefore you don't have any evidence that proves it was a dressing room. You don't have any material evidence at all that proves he was going into a dressing room. I'm not. Hey, can you can you grow up? Can you can you grow up? Yeah, grow up. Yeah, control yourself. You don't have any material evidence whatsoever that proves he went into a dressing room. You have five young ladies or uh women, whatever, who say that he uh he went into the dressing room. You have 11 of them that say he never stepped foot in the dressing room. Okay. So, it's their word. The only two pieces of evidence you have. The other one is that your feelings inform you. The other one is that your feelings inform you. Are you guys gonna like just whisper like are we little girls?
Yeah. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead.
Okay. You guys are intentionally like trying to talk over me so that the argument doesn't come across because you can't win. You know, you've dug yourself into a hole.
Hands up. My bad.
Once, dude.
What?
Why are you crying?
I'm not crying.
You just did.
Well, you guys can't be quiet when I'm talking.
I said one thing one time.
Yeah. Well, try not talking when other people are talking. I don't know.
Yeah, I did that. You've interrupted me more than that. How about you stop crying?
Because it's a conversation between me and me and Dean. And you're literally crying on his stream. It's embarrassing, bro.
This Okay. Is that Is that Is that what this boils down to? Is uh you dig yourself into a hole and then just.
Make a point instead of whining?
Yeah. The point is that you are just taking small pieces of what you call evidence and then filling in the gaps with your own thoughts and feelings, not based on anything. The idea that that he had to have been going into a dressing room because he said that he was he was uh inspecting because he's an owner. like this. Could Could it be logically possible that he's inspecting the backstage area? Is that possible? Yes. Like you're just filling in the gaps and saying that you proved it.
Okay. I have four things written down that I need to interrogate you your argument on. Is that okay, Cam?
Yeah.
So, the first thing that I have written down that I want to interrogate your argument on. Yeah.
Is a quote that you said. You said, and I quote, "It's technically logically possible. Therefore, you have no evidence for your claim." So, Cam.
Wait. What? Why did I say that? What? In reference to what?
Less than 30 seconds ago. That's what I laughed at when I when I laughed. I went, "Haha." Then.
I think I said techsible. Fine. Whatever. What? What?
I said it's technically logical possible. It's technically logically possible. Therefore, you have no evidence for your claim. You're telling me I can't believe what I believe in because the um affirmation of the rejection of my claim is technically logically possible. So, did you know that it's actually okay to believe things without logical certainty?
Right. But you don't have sound evidence. But this is the difference though is you're not saying I believe this. You're saying it's proven. That's the difference. You're saying it's proven.
It's okay to say things that are proven without logical certainty. Did you know that?
Not without material evidence. Like if you can't prove.
If you can't prove that something happened, you can't.
Without logical certainty. Yes or no?
No.
Oh my god. Can you prove that I exist? No, we're not getting into it like a [ __ ].
Answer the question. Can you prove that I exist, sir?
Yes, I can look at you and observe you with my eyeballs. You exist.
Oh, wait. Is it logically possible that you're uh that the uh sensor input from your eyeballs is misleading you? Yeah, they're misle they're manufacturing a Dean Withers in front of my eyes at.
Wait, is it is it is it logically possible that I'm actually.
But I'm logically certain I can be logically certain that I that you exist when I see you outside of Amfest and you're you're four feet tall and you're like begging people to have conversations. I I'm logically certain that you exist because I saw.
You saw me. You didn't look in the mirror, Cam. You didn't you weren't looking in the mirror. You saw me. So four feet tall, whatever. Now, okay. Now, once again, even when you saw me in person, is it technically logically possible that that was just an hallucination, a dream?
No, it's not.
It's not logically possible that that was an hallucination. What is logical possibility?
Logical possibility. Is that Why don't I define logical certainty? It's like I'm certain. I'm certain on a logic or I'm sure on a logical basis.
Of something.
No, white belt. White belt. That's not what these terms mean. Okay. That's why it's really important.
Okay. You define it then. Define it. Define it. Define it before we start.
You're trying so hard to get away from the actual topic.
Well, I like I said, I have four different points of refutation. This is the first one. I just want you to be able to see all four. So, logical possibility, uh, is when something is possible in the sense, uh, that it's not contradictory. So, something is logically impossible if it violates the laws of logic and something is logically possible, okay, if it does not violate the laws of logic. Do you understand what logical possibility is or would you like me to go through what the laws of logic are?
Sure. So.
Okay so so in the classical sense we have three classical laws of logic, the law of non-contradiction, the law of the excluded middle, um, and then we have, uh, what is what is the third one, Parker?
Law of identity.
Is this is this what we're doing to get away from the conversation about Trump in the dressing room?
Identity. Okay. So if something doesn't violate either of these three rules, the law of, uh, the excluded middle, law of contradiction, or law of identity, then it is logically possible. Okay? But just because logic as possible gives us no reason at all to believe that that something is true or that something actually exists or actually happened. You know, the claim that like when you ran into me at Amfest, okay, I, uh, you know, like you are logically certain that that happened. Uh, well, that can't possibly be true because it's technically logically possible that you didn't actually see me because the notion that you were hallucinating when you saw me doesn't violate any of the three classical laws of logic. Okay. Is this is this really what you have to do to officiate away from the conversation about Trump in the dressing room because you know you can't prove it. You claim that you can prove it. You claim that you can prove it. You can't.
30% of your argument, okay, so far has hinged on you using terms like logical possibility.
You brought up logical possibility.
Oh, maybe I did actually.
I did. I did.
Okay. 30% of your argument so far has hinged on phrases like logical possibility.
Well, I actually I asked if it was possible. Well, you asked if it was logically possible. So, you actually did logical question. When you use the word possible, do you mean logically possible? And you said yes.
Sure.
So, so this is what you have to do. What you have to do to get away from to weasel your way from the conversation about Trump in the dressing room?
This isn't weasling away from any conversation.
Well, you might have actually not seen me at Amfest. It might have been a hallucination.
My my point is is that when you use phrases.
You are such a little weasel. Cam, if you stop interrupting me because you're upset that you're getting [ __ ] cooked, we'll get through this argument faster. Like I said for the last time, it's important for us to understand what logical possibility even is and what logical certainty even is. Okay? Because 30% of your argument has hinged on logical possibility and this notion of logical certainty. Like for instance, just be good faith. Have you mentioned the phrase logical possibility more or less than 10 times since you joined the live?
I I'm unaware. I probably used it more after you mentioned it. You're the one who brought it up, not me. To be clear, I asked if it was possible. So yes, you asked me if it was possible.
Brother, percent. Okay. So, stop giving me this. Well, because it's technically logically possible that Donald Trump didn't do, uh, what he said he did or it wasn't addressed. It was just a general fact. Do you have any material evidence.
Didn't happen or therefore, uh, like I don't have evidence that he did. The question. Dean, do you have any material evidence?
Dean, do you have any material evidence that you're already shared with you?
Do I get to talk?
Do I get to speak? Do I get to speak or is this just the Dean talks and doesn't cut off?
Will be talking for longer segments at any given time when you interrupt me.
Okay. Dean, do you have any material evidence whatsoever that proves Trump was talking about dressing rooms and not the general backstage area or some other backstage area?
Yes, I've actually already shared it with.
Great. I'm happy. Let's hear it again.
Okay, perfect. So, the first data point of evidence that Donald Trump was talking about dressing rooms is he says the space that he went into was a space that he had to abuse not only his position of power as the owner of the pageant, but also had to enter into under the guise of doing an inspection. Uh, this this claim wouldn't have to be true if it was just a general backstage area. He could just walk into the general backstage area for whatever reason or no reason at all to pick his nose, to you know, check his phone, whatever. He wouldn't need to enter into the space under the guise of doing an inspection. This indicates that it was a more private place than just a general backstage area. The second data point of evidence is that he said that there's no men around. Okay, no men are around in women's dressing rooms. But more notably than that, he mentioned the fact that there are no men around. This seems to indicate that it was a private space specifically for women due to the fact that we already know it's a private space due to the fact that he said he had to abuse his position of power under the guise of doing an inspection to go in. The third piece of, uh, data that we have to demonstrate that this was a dressing room is the fact that he said women were getting naked and were getting dressed. So we know it's a private area. We know he had to abuse really abuse his position of power to get in. Okay, we know there's no men around. Okay, we know women are getting naked and getting dressed, which then leads us to the fifth data point that at the end of the clip, he said he got away with it. The way that we use the phrase getting away with things is to denote doing something that is wrong and then not facing consequences for it. This contradicts that he was just walking into the general backstage area because why would it be wrong for an owner to walk into the general backstage area and only further cements that it was a private woman's dressing room? Because this would explain why it's wrong. Men aren't allowed in there.