Of course not. I'm a British nobody, not someone with a high-level U.S. security clearance. — Michael

And that is what they rely on. They could release ALL the evidence to back this claim...but no.

If it was released then it would be scrutinized by those who are not in the club.

If you have no interest in the Origin of the Work of Art, then why are here? — Arne

I entered here when I read this. This reflects my thoughts on every experience.

We are not agents experiencing a work of art.

We are the experience of the work.

We are the in between. — Arne

The intelligence community and the Senate Intelligence Committee agree on that. — Michael

Have you seen this evidence?

Abandoning this investigation just because Trump is incredibly thin skinned, and allowing Russia to continue their behavior leaves American sovereignty exposed to a new age of mass political interference by a hostile foreign power — Jeremiah

I understand that this is what you have been lead to believe.

The "investigation" ("insurance policy") will not be abandoned due to Trump's supposed thin skin.

It will just likely fall on it's own sword.

Considering Russia's clear intended aim was to aid Trump in the election, — Jeremiah

There is no evidence that this is true.

There were ad bots, which are ineffectual, promoting either candidate.

Russia is made up of many business entities. These entities also compete with each other. No different than US business entities that compete with each other for business in other parts of the world. This is also what lobbyists do.

One can pluck out the entities and isolate them from the others in order to suit one's political and business ends.

So if I stole your wallet from you you wouldn't 'demand' it back, you wouldn't be able to utter the expression "give me back my wallet!" without feeling the need to seek psychiatric help? — Pseudonym

I would do only what is in my power to retrieve my wallet.

Doing all I can possibly do and then accepting I have done all I can possibly do is a good psychological outcome.

Expecting others to do all of that for me is not a good outcome with regard to my psychology.

Yes, so how does any of that change the fact that the treatment of slaves materially affected their descendants? — Pseudonym

Everyone can claim to be affected negatively by history. Many feel this to be the case.

Feelings are a psychological issue.

you may be right. Have you read the book? I would like to read the book. I have been unable to find an electronic copy. I may have to go to the library. — Arne

I won't be reading the book. The evidence of my claim is just too obvious. The only question left, with regard to "life", or, in other words, this experience, is .........Why life? Why experience?

The "how" stretches into infinity so that is out.

but asking you to share some of the wealth you gained to redress the harm done is an entirely material claim. It could be done calmly and rationally or emotionally and bombastically. — Pseudonym

One can ask for anything.

So we should look at the question of asking for something and demanding something.

If one asks for something with the expectation they should receive it then they did not really ask in the first instance.

It was a demand.

To ask is to only reasonably expect an answer in the negative or the positive or no answer at all.

Ultimately all one can do is ask.......apart from doing something for yourself.

The point is, what in all of this is 'psychological'. People who have been affected by slavery as a consequence of their heritage tend to be poorer with fewer social and educational opportunities. How are they 'psychological'? — Pseudonym

Many people are poor. Many people suffer a poverty of consciousness. Life is difficult most of the time for most of the population of the entire world.

Some can escape their poverty of consciousness and still be poor materially. Some escape their poverty of consciousness and rise up materially.

And then some are very wealthy and powerful but still live in a state of poverty of consciousness.

Wait, can you even tell the difference between speculation and evidence? — Jeremiah

Yes. That the hopeful speculation is that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the election and the evidence for this is zero.

I don't understand what you're finding so hard to comprehend about this that you think anyone who feels affected by slavery needs a psychiatrist — Pseudonym

There are many ways to address the psychological without necessarily seeing a psychiatrist.

I think that the 'restitution' idea is not one of them. I think 'restitution' has gone as far as it can go, such as equality rights that the US has evolved into.

Are you familiar with the Phenomenology of Perception by Merleau-Ponty. — Arne

I'm familiar with the fact that "my" perceptions of experience always include the subject of which "my" refers.

It is an impossibility that I stand outside of experience to observe it. In other words, I must be the experience which arises.

So even though I agree with the idea you advance, "that must therefore hold true" strikes me as too strong a claim — Arne

You are agreeing with what is a too strong a claim?

My response was to the question of restitution for slavery.

Yes, just not in an order which made any sense — Pseudonym

.

I'll attempt to simplify for you.

Those who feel they are victim of a victim of a victim of an actual victim of slavery should probably seek out a psychologist to address their personal issues.

What? — Pseudonym

I used English words.

Are you suggesting that events are isolated and none have any influence on how the future pans out? — Pseudonym

Although "restitution for slavery" is not a remedy. Perhaps a good psychologist, just as a good psychology approach can be a positive help for a victim of something that actually happened to said victim within their own lifetime.

done from a privileged vantage point of being a white male — Maw

Group identity politics right there. Sexist and racist.

Let's then forget Martin Luther King Jr's famous words then shall we?

although some vulnerable groups do need collective representation. What are your thoughts? — bert1

Who selects the representative? How is such a representative selected?

We are not agents experiencing a work of art.

We are the experience of the work. — Arne

Then that must therefore hold true for experience generally - of life generally.

That's dangerously irresponsible. Someone with reasons to immigrate illegally should never leave his family back home to suffer in his place. — Akanthinos

Border crossing is not dangerous? How so?

Punishing protesters to own the libs. Got it. — Maw

Read those rules again. They do not stipulate rules for one side only. You are imagining things.

It just seems like you don't understand why that slimy jerk Manafort is in jail. You don't seem to understand the actual purpose of the Russian investigation.

Mueller has already got 5 guilty pleas and 17 criminal indictments.You are so worried about that giant cry baby snowflake Donald Trump, that the reasons for the Russian investigation flies right over your head. If Trump is innocent he has nothing to worry about. — Jeremiah

I do understand the actual purpose of it. It's part of the racket to protect criminals.

I think Trump is not worried about the "investigation" in terms of it finding him guilty of collusion or of anything else.

People have had NDEs where they're looking at Earth from a place in space, your idea wouldn't account for such an experience — Sam26

Auras could conceivably be an example of a larger area of body - a more subtle, finer (of matter) ethereal area.

I have witnessed these 20 feet above people where the atmospheric conditions allow. Maybe we extend beyond those out into space.

National Review above

Did you simply do a five second google search? This is not an Obama or Democratic policy. The no-tolerance policy of separating children is a new policy put in place by the Trump administration. The "holding cells" from 2014, which I am certainly not defending, were for minors, generally teenagers, who crossed the borders themselves in order to escape cartel violence, poverty, abuse, or to unite with family in the States. Obama, in many respects, created perverse authoritarian immigration policies, providing him the epithet, "Deporter in Chief". While this is a legacy that liberals (and everyone) need to grapple with, it is nevertheless distinct from the Trump policy of separating families who cross the border, often times without a structured plan of reuniting them — Maw

In April, the New York Times reported:

>>>Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

According to azcentral.com, it is “common to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.”<<<

If someone is determined to come here illegally, the decent and safest thing would be to leave the child at home with a relative and send money back home. Because we favor family units over single adults, we are creating an incentive to do the opposite and use children to cut deals with smugglers.

Fact is, the Right does their fair share of protesting speakers they don't like, to the point of disruption. Should these right winger protesters also be subjected to theoretical suspension or expulsion because they protest speakers who are likely relatively wealthy, and have alternative platforms with which to present their opinions? — Maw

Yes, of course they should be subject to those same standards. This was my point.

Do you even have any clue why Manafort is in trouble? Go on, I'll wait while you Google it. — Jeremiah

Yes. And why is reading info on a case somehow a negative?

Are any of us on the ground at the scene of these events?

It is perhaps time to explain the political mechanics of this "investigation".

Let us take Manafort, for example.

1. The opposition already know there is no Russia conspiracy. It is their "insurance policy" if Trump won.

2. Russia conspiracy publicly and legally fails because political links between Clinton campaign and Steele composed dossier, along with Steele's Russian/Ukraine accomplices, exposed.

3. Investigate anybody involved with Trump campaign.....so Manafort.

4. Find Manafort has done possibly illegal things in the past, which is not related to Trump campaign.

How to try to use this against Trump.

5. Put legal pressures on Manafort to hopefully arrange a plea deal confession. Essentially get him to lie about Trump to get himself, Manafort, off of his own possible crimes.

Trump's possible response.

Protect Manafort from being forced to lie, may have to do deals with Mueller to let some FBI conspirators off. Maybe even back off from Clinton's crimes.

This is all Mafioso stuff. Dirty, dirty, dirty.

I think a lot will be revealed, sure. I think more on Trump's opposition, and not because I need this for possible partisan reasons. I just think there will be much blow out and blow back because we should realize it is rather swampy in there without attributing the swamp word to anyone in particular.

Generally don't like any politician.

That's called a strawman — Baden

Maybe it's a straw hat.

your MAGA hat for easy reference?[/quote]

Oooo, big boy. I don't wear hats. Messes with my toupee.

I accept Trump's somewhat a dufus, but the Russia conspiracy is a political orchestrated distraction.

And Mueller is the messiah. Fine.

We’re talking about Mueller’s investigation of coordination with Russia, not the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s email server. Mueller actually removed Strzok from the Russia investigation after finding out about those texts, which I think undermines your accusation that Mueller is corrupt. He appears to want a fair investigation. — Michael

The investigation is tainted.
Also, the investigation has SO FAR not included in any report of Russia/Trump campaign collusion.

The games continue.....

What bias has Mueller shown? — Michael

Should I emphasize it for you?

>>>>>>Strzok’s lawyer released statements regarding the report, calling it “critically flawed” for saying that it could not rule out, with confidence, that Strzok’s potential biases “may have been a cause of the FBI’s failure.”<<<<<<<<

Now why would this FBI's lawyer be worried that his client's "POTENTIAL BIASES" was not ruled out BY THE IG REPORT as maybe being a "cause of the FBI's failure?

Is it? Or is it just the media and politicians (on both sides) who are biased in their talking of it? What bias has Mueller shown? — Michael

You tell me how often the word "bias" comes up in the text below. I didn't write it.

>>>>>>Though Horowitz suggests these texts, among one that says, “We’ll stop [Trump from becoming president],” are indicative of bias and “a willingness to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects,” his conclusion is that their views did not affect the investigation.

“We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed,” the report reads.

Strzok’s lawyer released statements regarding the report, calling it “critically flawed” for saying that it could not rule out, with confidence, that Strzok’s potential biases “may have been a cause of the FBI’s failure.”<<<<<<<<

And I think that maybe your views about Mueller are clouded by bias — Michael

If the investigation itself wasn't so clouded by political bias then I would have little to feel biased about.

And I think that maybe your views about Mueller are clouded by bias. — Michael

Ii don't deny bias but I have bias for a reason.

Bias is no different to choice. That is all bias really means.