Ten oz

- Members of Trump's campaign reportedly reached out to Russian hackers in an attempt to obtain hacked (illegally obtained) emails: https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-activist-who-sought-clinton-emails-cited-trump-campaign-officials-1498872923 - Members of Trump's campaign knowing distributed Russia propaganda via their social media effort through 3rd party company Cambridge Analytica: http://time.com/4783932/inside-russia-social-media-war-america/ http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/23/fec-trump-russia-facebook-238695 https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2017/05/26/jared-kushner-in-his-own-words-on-the-trump-data-operation-the-fbi-is-reportedly-probing/#262b260fa90f - Then candidate Trump was briefed by U.S. intellignce that Russia was responsible for the hacks yet Trump himself continued to publicly claim otherwise, cite hacked material, andblame China: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-was-told-russia-was-blame-hacks-long-debate-n663686 - Key members of Trump's staff (Kushner and Flynn) omitted meetings with Russia when filling out their Security Clearance forms: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html - There are also many other questions regarding Manafort, Page, and Stone's activities: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/05/30/timeline-what-we-know-about-trumps-campaign-russia-and-the-investigation-of-the-two/?utm_term=.4877bd9913df Claiming "No Evidence" is easy. Just dismissing any evidence produced is also easy. For example, what "evidence" is there that OJ killed Nicole? You might cite things link DNA, bloody gloves,and OJ's history of violence but I can dismiss all that by claiming DNA is unreliable (it isn't), the gloves didn't fit (they did), and his history of violence was taken out of context (it's wasn't). Denial is easy when one lacks integrity. We know for a fact, that at the absolute minimum, Trump was personally aware that it was the universal belief of our Intel agencies that Russia was responsible for the hacks and attempting to influence the election (in his favor) and he still publicly provided Russia cover by denying reports, criticizing our intel cummunity publicly, used the hack material in his ad campaigns, and publicly imply it may have been China. Alone those actions are extraordinarily unethical, deeply unpatriotic, and served to provide Russia cover and continues to. The attitude from the right seems to be that so long as Trump lied and obfuscated to the benefit of Russia out of stupidity and greed rather than coordination it is acceptable. As if his campiagn was he on twitter alone and not a staff of thousands strategically managing events.We know Trump's team was aware of what was happening and willfully took advantage of it and since have sought to cover the whole thing up with a series of deflections and denials. The only thingswe don't know for sure is whether or not money of formally exchanged, promises were made, or if specific attacks were by request.

My grandmother passed away in 1996 at 87yrs old. She never had a President who didn't win the popular vote. I have already had two. As a kid in grade school in 92' teachers took the election that year as a good opportunity to explain the electoral process to us student. That year was special because of the popularity of 3rd party candidate Ross Perot. I recall them describing what it would take for a candidate to win without the popular vote as being a "perfect storm". It was something we were told was possible but unlikely and we'd probably never see it. While your example seems next to impossible we simple can't say never. In 00' when Gore lost while winning a half million more votes no one predicted that just 16yrs later a candidate would lose with 3 million more votes. Standard for whom? Claiming all politicians do this merely provides cover for those who do it to the worst degree. You cannot provide equal examples of this behavior under the previous several administrations. Obama, Bush, etc didn't fire the FBI Director while themselves under investigation by the FBI and then provided conflicting excuses for why. Pervious Atorney Generals didn't lie to the Senate during their confirmation heirings. You are implying a status qou which hasn't ever existed. We have never had a National Security Director whom themselve were a risk to national security. None of this is normal politics. There aren't equal comparisons to other situations over the last few decades.

This has become the standard defense for all manner of things. Argue that it never happened while also arguing that it is no big deal that it happened. The other game being played is to raise the bar for what's considered proof. That unless there is a recording of what transpired we can never know. The under oath testimony of a FBI director who took notes in real time just doesn't cut it in our current political climate. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Why work so hard to prevent, weaken, stop, or otherwise block an investigation into a matter if you're innocent? Why did Trump continue to deny it was Russia and muddy the waters by blaming China even after receiving intel briefs that it was Russia, why did Sessions lie under oath to the Senate. why did Kushner lie on his security clearance paperwork, why did Flynn lie on paperwork and to officials, why did White House officials feed Nunes (House intel committee Chair) false info, and etc, etc, etc. I understannd that being caught lying about that which you are accused doesn't in itself prove you're are specifically guilty as accussed but it certianly begs to question. In my opinion logic dictates that a person would not lie under the threat of penalty (perjury and falsifying official forms) less they had something to hide. We can debate that lying is not proof that Trump or his people have committed other crimes but the lying certianly dimishes their creditability and significantly increase suspicion. This isn't simply a matter of one or 2 people misremembering. This is an ongoing coordicated attempt to obscure the truth. The first Russia hacks that went public were a year ago now. Trump and his people have had a year to decide how to answer these questions. They are either guilty or inept to comical level.

Our govts Budget runs Sept - Aug. 2017's budget was signed by Obama in Aug of 2016. Trump's first budget doesn't exist yet and his policies are not yet in place. The stock market is up on anticipation of tax cuts and deregulation. After Trump's first budget is passed we will have a clearer idea of where things might be headed. Currently it is just speculation. We really don't know if Trump will be able to get the tax cuts and defense spending he wants through congress. We really don't know what will happen with healthcare.

In this case, what is being investigated by both the Senate and House Intelligence Committees well as the an appointed Special Counsel, there is only one side. The "bothsides do it" platitude doesn't apply here. Bothsides aren't currently doing it and when it was the otherside, Hillary Clinton being investigated throughout the campaign, no Democrats obstructed so no supporters were in the position to defend such behavior. I understand that implying some measure of parity in political discussion is the default nonpartisan move that is generally tolerated as most fair but in this case it only muddies the waters.

He is wrong and perhaps just making a political statement. What insights do you have that lead you to that? John Brennan has worked with the CIA under 3 Presidents and most notably was tapped to stand up the National Counterterrorism Center in 04' by President Bush and was made Director of the CIA by President Obama in 13'. He isn't a partisancareer politician. What information do you have that his under oath testimonybefore the Intelligence Committe is valueless? Did I miss it when Obama gave fake information to a house intelligence Committee investigating his campaign, fired the directory of the FBI who was investigating him, got caught blabbing classified info, and etc? I know it feels fair to say "bothsides do it" but they really don't. Not to the same degree. We have never seen what we are currently seeing and implying it goes both ways and on some level is politics normal diminishes the seriousness of the matters.

What take my breath away about all of this isn't the corruption and bad behavior of Trump but rather the total complacency of his supporters. Trump himself ran as a questionable figure. He lied repeatedly, had no grasp on the issues, was openly racist, islamophobic, anti immigrant, chauvinist, and surround himself will nefarious group of misfits. I was never under any delusion about the type of President Trump would be. Despite his denials I always expected there would be nepotism, questionable budget math, no payments from Mexico for a wall, no real plan for healthcare, daily obfuscation on all policy matters, investigations, and obstruction of those investigations. Saw those things coming. It is the casual way those who support Trump are at easy with the very real risk that our President is compromised to Russia that leaves me shocked. That they simply want their guy in office so bad they don't even care what he may be doing in office. It is very surprising to me how little respect so many seem to have for our govt and our allies that they'd tolerate such clear disrespect and treat defending that disrespect like sport. Trump defenders really don't seem to believe that what govt does matters. That we can just empower Trump to weaken partnerships with our allies and demagogue our own legal and intelligence communities. I am not even referencing partisan policies here. This isn't left vs right policy. Republicans & Democrats alike have always agreed on basic things like who our allies around the world are and that a free press and public accountability are important. It has only been 4 months and already Trump and his team have repeatedly lied to the press while several cabinet members have been exposed for lying to Congress well as the Intelligence Community. The same crowd that were shaken to their cores by the disgraceful unethical behavior of Hillary Clinton having the temerity to use a server to route emails to a blackberry (that the State Dept new about) to read classified emails now defend Trump having his son inlaw attempt to open back channel communications that would bypass the intelligence community, Justice Dept, Congress, and the press? Words like contadiction and hypocritical do the situation no justice as they fail to address the malevolence involved. Trump supporters are implicit in impugning our democratic system and obfuscating constitutional checks and balances.

The argument that both Clinton and Trump were flawed was intended to give Trump cover and create apathy. There was simply no making Trump appear decent and honest. Only way to get Clinton and Trump to appear anywhere near equal was to lower the bar.

The first 10 we there when it was fatified. 17 were amended after.

@ Kiplngram, perfect world start from scratch solutions are seldom possible in an ongoing world. It isn't whether or not the ACA is the best possible answer. It is whether or not the ACA is better (by and inch or a mile) than what we had before and what Congress is looking to change to. The ACA made incremental improvements. It isn't perfect but it is was an improvement. All our nothing in politics doesn't work. Analogy, an air compressor is far and away superior to a hand pump yet both are far and away superior to inflating something with lung power alone. It would be foolish to stick with lung power if offered a hang pump simply because you would've preferred to have been offered an air compressor. Limited or minimal govt is defined differently by every individual. We all want to be masters of our own fates. None of us want govt standing between us and the choices we want to make for our lives. I don't think anyone wants more govt than needed. The argument is over which things are needed. Humans are a group living species and the larger the groups we have and the better governed those groups the more we have thrived. When we were hunter gatherers governance were extremely minimlist. I think some people idealize such an existence. Pure freedom to go out onto the land and make ones own way. Of course it wasn't practical for long term survival of the species. We (humans) repeatedly found ourselves are the edge of extinction. It was coming together in larger groups that allow human to build larger and more solid structures, cultivate land, irrigate, and etc. Living in large groups requires govt. How much govt is required arguably depends on what the collective group is attempting to achieve. The grander the the design the more collective planning and organizing (govt) that is needed. In the U.S. we pride ourselves as the the powerful country the world has EVER had. Pride ourselves as the most influential, the most wealthy, the most free, etc,etc, etc. We have very grand designs and that requires a large robust govt. It simply does no getting around it. So who should be left out? Our Military has govt provided healthcare for themselves and there dependents. That seem pretty necessary. An unhealthy military isn't a very strong one. Diito for the millions of police, fire fighters, and various first responders around the country who have healthcare provided by federal and local govts. How about teachers; are they worth the govt providing them healthcare? They only handle the nations children daily. What about bakers and butchers; they handle our food? Do we keep Medicare for the elderly? Who gets left out. Where is the line in the sand. When is it too much govt vs the needed amount for what the nation is trying to accomplish? The Constitution empowers our govt to create laws, departments, taxes, and etc. It even empowers govt to amend the very powers it outlines. The Constitution has been amended 17 times.

No exactly. Just because the perceived choice we are making was actually already decided unconsciously doesn't me it isn't still we (me, myself, and I) that made it. Our unconscious is in our brain same as our perceived conscious. Neither is more us (me, myself, I) than the other. Both my unconscious and conscious are mine, me. Which ever one is driving the decisions made are still equally as individual.

"purposeful effort", the opposite of that. Sitting in a chair and relaxing is the oppisite of purposeful effort. Feedback circuits use outputs as inputs. Just because inputs and outputs exist doesn't mean they must function in a linear manner. Outputs can be feedback creating loops that change proceeding actions. The input you are calling perception could be created by feedback and not the initial generating source. Our minds are significantly more complicated that a simmple circuit of linear inputs and outputs. "Feedback occurs when outputs of a system are routed back as inputs as part of a chain of cause and effect that forms a circuit or loop.[2] The system can then be said to feed back into itself. The notion of cause-and-effect has to be handled carefully when applied to feedback systems: "Simple causal reasoning about a feedback system is difficult because the first system influences the second and second system influences the first, leading to a circular argument. This makes reasoning based upon cause and effect tricky, and it is necessary to analyze the system as a whole." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedback

@ tar, DrmDoc is describing what I see as a rather linear systems of inputs and outputs. I see the relationship more being more akin to electrical feedback where outputs are routed back as inputs. I don't have a good grasp of your dopamine theory. It is outline in pieces across different posts. It has been used as a counter position which has muddled it some. At least for me. Can you summarize it as a stand alone theory and not a response?

Yes, I agree with all other that. None of that means one must consciously perceive the the afferent process as it happens. Clearly the thoughts we perceieve in realtime and the thoughts which lead to things we know yet have no perception of how/why are both processes of the brain. As a simple expirement I have just sat in a chair and relaxed. Tried not to think of anything specific and to not purposefully move or prevent myself from moving. Within several minutes I nearly always find myslef doing something that I wasn't aware I was doing and am not sure how long I had been doing it for. I will sit, relax, tell myself to just do nothing, and then after several minutes come to realize I have been countinng the buttons on my remote, tapping my foot, or whatever. The action began at some point without any perceived conscious instruction and continued unnoticed for some unknown duration of time. A buddy and I both did this several years ago in his living room. After 10 minutes he said he noticed nothing. That for ten minutes he had just sat doing and not really thinking anything. Being there in the same room with him I noticed him humming some tune for most the time and at one point he mouthed something and shrugged. Yet in his own perceived conscious thought he had done absolutely nothing. He did not believe he was humming and thought I was totally pranking him when I said he had mouthed something and shrugged. As an add on to that anecdote I often catch myself mouthing things. From time to time my wife will look at me and ask "what" thinking I am saying something to her. It is how I first noticed it. I was otherwise unaware and when it happens I am not thinking about anything special. Just watching TV, cooking dinner, or whatever. I am not under the impression that what I am mouthing is related to what I am doing or thinking (perceived conscious thought) about. Don't honstly know though. I don't do it in public. I think most of us have some standard faces we keep in public as opposed to just being relaxed and that prevents it from happening. I assume.

The water is muddy. No two people are the same. People have different degrees of everything from eyesight to bone density. The brain develops till adulthood. What we are taught, what we see, what we hear, the way we are taught, what we eat, and a million other things influences the way a person's brain develops. The physical way it develops. Not just memories but the actually physical size of different areas of the brains and the way the the neurons connect. ADHD is a disorder but one which wasn't determined to be one until a little over 30 yrs ago. How many other disorders exist, we find new ones all the time. It can be argued that everyone gots a little of something: narcissism, passive agression, paranoia, anxiety, dyslexia, low self esteem, perversion, kleptomania, agoraphobia, insomnia, etc, etc, etc, etc. There is no single standard we can look at and say it is the perfect example for how the brain should work. Depending on environment many things we might consider a disorder today might be critical to survival in another enviroment.

I am not a fan of the platitude that "both stripes" do X, Y, Z. Saying such always seems fair. It is a centrist position which seeks to treat all sides fairly which lends it credibility. Problem is that it has no levels of accuracy or degree. If there are 2 politicians and one of them has lied a handful of times to spare themselves or others embarrassment and the other lies virtually everytime they speak with the intention of completely misleading people the two politicians are not equal. Saying both are liars because both have lied might be true but fails to distinguish them and favors the bigger liar by making them no worse than their opponent when in fact they are. Yes, bothside deflect and attempt to focus attention else where but both do so to different degrees and to distract from very different things. I think it is counterproductive to say both stripes do it and move on. It provides whomever is doing it in real time cover.

So many unresolved issues: - Russian interference in the Election - Accusations of collusion with Russia - Tax Returns - Conflicts of Interests - Nepotism - Firing Yates - Firing Flynn - Sessions lying to the Senate - Pressuring Comey - Firing Comey - Giving classified info to Russia To date the White House has been successful in changing the narrative and keeping people focused on other things. The list of unresolved issues just keeps growing. Even if no wrong doing exists in any of the situations the Whites House's inability to even present a consistent response to them and Congress's refusal to acknowledge and look into them is extremely disheartening and creates a real crisis. While failure to honestly investigate Trump isn't proof that Trump is guilty it is proof that Congress is either unwilling or unable to do their constitutional duty.

@ dimreepr I think one of the challenges here is how intimately we experience whatever label we choose to assign the rolling monologue in our heads. We imagine it as being the epitome of who we are. Implying that other parts of our minds, which we don't perceive interactively, make decision for us feels foreign. As though it is being implied that we have no control or choice at all. That isn't the case of course. All of my brain is part of me. Regardless of where various thoughts and ideas arise it is still from within us. It is just hard to imagine it. Hard to feel intimate and connected with thoughts we aren't knowingly creating in real time. There is a clear bias, in my opinion, toward wanting to believe we consciously control who we are. That clearly isn't true though. At least not for everyone. Not for people with schizophrenia, ADHD, depression, addiction, and etc, etc, etc. Everyone isn't the same and the health of our bodies, nature of our upbringing, genetics, environment, and etc all play a role in shaping us and during the most important years of brain development we has no control over those shaping factors.

@ DrmDoc, as mentioned earlier I don't see it as binary. Unconscious translating sensors and conscious acting. I see consciousness as a whole being segmented. For the sake of this conversation we are saying unconscious and conscious. It is very complex. There are things I know, things I think I know but don't, things I want, things I feel, feelings I don't understand, things I have learned, things I have forgot, things I have misremembered, and on and on and on. Some of this One am consciously aware of. Some of it I am not. The nuances are different for everyone. Consider synesthetes. They can experience the world very differently. They can internalize numbers as colors and dates as imagined physical distances. There unconscious processes information differently and uses different pathways than is typical. Or consider children who grow up exposed to violence. Studies show that depending on the stage of brain development exposure to violence can alter grow of various parts of the brain and effect language, aggression, or have latent effects that take several years to surface. Conscious perspective simply having it limitations. I have been trying to pay better attention to the thoughts that pop into my head since creating this thread. Today I was walking to walk. Nice sunny morning. Half way to work it accorded to me that if I continued walking the route I was walking I would being staying in the sun and would start to sweat prior to arriving at work. Attach to this thought was an alternative route I should walk. With that information, I will start to sweat and an alternate route, I began to consciously think about. First I had to determine if the alternate route would provide shade. So I wondered what angle the sun was rising from in relationship to the alternate route. As I wondered where things were in space, without a conscious demand to do so, I looked up over my left shoulder directly at the point the sun traveling. At that moment I knew the alternate route was good and chose to walk it. Was it really a choice? Seems to me in retrospect it was a passive order. My unconscious decided to walk an alternative route to get out of the sun and presented it to my perceived conscious as a idea/choice. Then when I wasn't sure where the sun vs myself and the route were in space my unconscious turned my head to show me which prompted my decision. Mind you this all took a second. Choices/thoughts like this present themselves all day. Often I don't even notice. I am aware of the outcome but not involved in the thought or initiation of the action. In this case I think the only reason I noticed and momentarily was consciously involved is because I have been consciously trying to notice these things. @ tar, is fairness to the squirrels the feeder probably had a strong mouth watering odor of seeds.

@ Lord Antares, United States have poeople from many different backgrounds: Native, African, Indian, European, etc, etc. about 50 million people in Unite States have Africa heritage. Yet according to your charts United State is basically the same as most all of Western Europe. Within the United State our most developed cities are also amongst our most diverse. New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, Dallas, Miami, Boston, Los Angeles, Seattle, and etc have very large immigrant populations. Very diverse populations. Same is true throughout Western Europe. Places like Paris and London are more developed than areas which are less immigrants. IMO geopolitical factors are a larger component than genetics for why different parts of the world are more or less developed. People from every country in the world have proved they can thrive when given opportunities.

Implying that Hilter's eugenics campaign was a success and that there is a healthier population out there today as a result requires a citiation. "I don't recall, but you can check" really doesn't cut it. Hilter killed millions of Jewish people. He did not selectively breed them. He murdered them. Today Israel has the 8th highest life expectancy in the world. Higher than the scandinavian countries of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

They Republicans currently have good odds heading into the midterms of keeping both houses. Triple the democratic Senate seats up for election than Republican and House districts are so gerrymandering that regardless of the political enviroment the overwhhelming major of seats are safe. Impeaching Trump could change that.Less people vote in the midterms as is. If the GOP impeach Trump it is possible Trump's far right fringe base, the "build the wall" chanters & Tea Party birther types, might stay home. Bad as things seem to be going for Trump his base of supporters have not abondoned him. Even the few Trump supporters on this site still support him.They are too important to midterm election success for Republican House members to risk turning them away. Trump being impeached by his own party would be egg on the faces of his red hat wearing supporters and a block of them might just stay home on election next year.

Identifying and knowing doesn't require thought. I can identify thing without any thought. It is something that actually takes conscious attention being paid to even notice.I probably identified several thousand objects today with total indifference and no conscious effort. I see this as far more nuance than you do. You seem to be saying that everything I know must pass through on conscious for me to be aware of it and that simply isn't the way I experience the world. I do things, have thoughts, knowledge, and etc were only after the fact think back do I consciously know or understand what happened. I think everyone does. Consciousness simply isn't a requirement to experience reality. And by consciousness, in this context, I mean the perceived sense of thought or think we all have and not conciousness more broadly.

My conscious, unconscious, subconscious, etc is all in my brain. My brain is still 100% responsible. I fail to see how ones unconscious being in control shifts responsibility. Plus responsibility is merely a human concept. natural selection doesn't care about the concept of responsibility.

That can be known unconsciously. Identification doesn't require conscious thought in my opinion. When I see green lawn grass I don't consciously tell myself "oh, that is lawn grass". One can be aware of things without needing to think and rationalize. Conscious, unconscious, subconscious or what have you are all forms of conscioussness.