Mason Riggle

Exactly. And in diagnosing what the problem with your car might be, if any, it serves no useful purpose to point out other cars which may also be not working.

Bodigger, ^Notice the 'what-about-ism' that's going on in your thought process here.. 'but then I thought, [what about] people such as'.. and notice that this is not really related to the topic at hand, which is Trump's mental health. The thread on which you are replying is literally titled 'Trump is Not Well', yet instead of offering up any defense of this assessment, or adding any insight to it, your default move is to think (and say), 'yes, but what about..' which only appears (to me anyway) as an attempt to distract from the topic at hand. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with this assessment.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/george-conway-trump-unfit-office/599128/ "At 11,337 words “Unfit for Office” is a massive, deep-dive, example-filled investigation into President Donald Trump’s “mental stability and connection with reality” – or lack thereof. That it’s written by noted conservative attorney George Conway, husband to White House senior counselor Kellyanne Conway, should give it even more credibility."

@giglio also, let's not distract from the topic of this thread, which has everything to do with Trump's mental state. We have plenty of evidence which suggests Trump is suffering from some type of mental decline on top of any personality disorders/mental illness (giant ego) he might be experiencing. His inability to form complete coherent sentences without rambling from topic to topic. His unprecedented use of 'twitter' to announce policy, as well unleash barrages of often times confused, confusing, and self contradicting statements. His slurred speech. His mispronouncing or inability to pronounce certain words. His bizarre 'wandering' around. And the list goes on and on.

Here is a classic stawman 'everybody was so sure that he colluded'... no.. everyone suspected that the Russians interfered in the 2016 elections, which there is plenty of evidence to support, and Trump did everything in his power to obstruct any investigation into Russian interference, essentially aligning himself with a foreign power. There is no legal term 'collusion', so obviously there will be no evidence of 'collusion'. According to the FBI's 400 page report, there was laid out evidence of no less than 10 instances where Donald Trump committed obstruction of Justice, and where it not for his position as President, Trump could be indicted on these charges. They named him and 'Unindicted Co-Conspirator'. Actually we have years and years of Trump being in the public spotlight by which we may judge him. It's perfectly reasonable to 'pre-judge' a person based on the persons past behavior. Leo's video blog isn't a court of law where everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. This is a false assumption. 'Lashing out' is what Narcissists do when called out on their lies. People who are innocent and accused of doing something wrong welcome an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the accusation. They wish to bring light upon the evidence to show their innocence. They do not begin engaging in smear campaigns,character assassinations, and cover ups. This is not at all similar. Democrats (and others) have known since before Trump even announced his candidacy that he is a corrupt narcissist with a long history of using his powerful status and money to serve the interests of one person.. Donald Trump. There is plenty of evidence, in the form of Trumps own words, law suits, first hand accounts, etc. that Trump is unfit, and undeserving of the office of the Presidency. The constant degrading of Obama by Republicans seemed to have everything to do with their 'blue/orange' tribalism. This 'blue/orange' tribalism does also account for some of the negative behavior we see towards Trump, from people who simply have an aversion to classical Conservative ideology, but most of the criticism of Trump comes from more independently minded people, who also criticized Obama for his shortcomings. Many of the people involved in the current 'Impeachment' are life long republicans, Trump appointees, and non-partisan players. Many of the criticisms and accusations of Trump are coming from within his own party, within his own administration even. We have never seen anything like this. If Donald Trump was 'just trying to root out the corruption from the 2016 campaign' he has plenty of resources at his disposal to do so which are legal. That the phone call was 'also about other things' doesn't make the part about Biden go away or become unimportant. The President of the United states clearly asked a Foreign nation to 'look into' an American Citizen, who he named, by name, who just happens to be the front runner to run against him in 2020. There are NO other examples of Trump singling out ANY other individual for investigation in this 'crusade to root out corruption', and this should give you pause to reflect on what exactly his real intentions are, and should be a glaring beacon of the 'crime' he has openly committed, along with the many instances of 'obstruction of justice' he continues to engage in, which is an impeachable offense on it's own.

When one attempts to 'do nothing', one realizes that 'awareness' is all there actually is.. there was never anything 'to do' in the first place other than 'be aware of what is'. Attempting to 'do nothing' is a path to mindfullness.. it's how to 'wake up' from the dream that there is something 'to do'.

@cetus56 It's beyond 'easy'. It's infinitely easy.

Have you ever noticed that it takes exactly 0 effort to ‘be you’? Although you may feel like you have to try extremely hard to ‘be yourself’, you can notice, intellectually, that you don’t actually try at all. ‘Being yourself’ is just something you are naturally doing, without any ‘effort’, like ‘growing your hair’. Perhaps a more accurate way to put it is.. ‘you are happening’ without any effort, just the same way ‘your hair is growing’ without any effort. Notice that, even if you tried either to ’be yourself’ or ‘not be yourself’.. those would be the same thing because they would both be ‘what you are doing’… in other words.. being yourself. If you try this for yourself, you may discover that you actually can not ‘not be you’. As long as you exist, which you do.. you exist without any effort whatsoever.

@Serotoninluv Exactly..

@Serotoninluv yes, I see your point, which is why I elected to answer questions about Obama and Biden the best I could.. from certain perspectives, they are valid questions. What IS Obama's role in all of this? What is the Biden's role in all of this? These questions should not overshadow more serious questions, however. In your example, If the person in the audience had asked, 'what about how caterpillars turn into butterflies? What's up with that?', you can see how taking this question seriously might only serve to distract from the questions at hand, rather than bring any clarity.

Oops.. yes, Serotoninluv, you are correct here.. The Obama question was NOT the 'what-about-ism'.. it was the previous exchange: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Me: Why was Rudy Giuliani, a private personal Attorney involved? Bodigger: Why was Hunter involved with Joe in foreign affairs?

@Bodigger yes, this was obvious.. this was the 'whataboutism'. It's perfectly valid to ask what the Bidens are up to. It's 'whataboutism' to ask this question as a method of avoiding the topic at hand. This thread is about Trump's Impeachment, not Biden's corruption, which may or may not be be a valid separate discussion. "Were Trumps actions Impeachable?" is a completely separate question from 'Were Trumps actions justified?" We have to follow the rule of law, if our goal is to promote the rule of law.

@Bodigger you see.. asking about Biden's son is not a response to the question of why private Attorney was involved by the Sitting US President with Official Government business. To answer your question, as I don't know the exact reason.. I might assume it's because the Biden's are among a slew of typical greedy politicians who attempted to enrich themselves.. basically the same reason Trump acts shady.. he is. Is it really so hard for you to conceive that both the Bidens and Trumps are corrupt, and that Trump's corruption is happening on a VASTLY greater scale than Bidens because of the powerful position he is currently in, and therefore demands VASTLY greater scrutiny, and this in NOT to say that the Bidens do not deserve any scrutiny at all??

@Bodigger Maybe Obama isn't a partisan hack who feels the need to defend people simply for the reason that they were part of his Administration or political party? Maybe Obama's a Warren guy.. or a Sanders guy, and sees no pragmatic use in defending the Bidens?

@Bodigger It's possible... what exactly was Biden up to again? Remind me.

This is exactly the reason Trump's words are so damning. If Biden were a "regular citizen", do you think Trump would have singled him out in his call to the Ukrainian President? Where are all the other "regular citizens" Trump is asking about as "part of an ongoing effort to weed out or bring light upon large scale corruption." Why just Biden? Do you think Biden is the ringleader of Ukrainian Energy corruption? Are the Biden's the only corrupt people in Ukraine? What a coincidence that the guy who happens to be running against you for President is the same guy you decide to name, by name, as the place to start in your investigation into wide scale corruption which everyone knows exists and is rampant. Are you kidding me? If the current front runner to be the Democratic nominee to run against Trump in the next election isn't a 'threat to Trumps re-election chances' (AT ALL)... then I'm not even sure we're speaking the same language.

@samedm9 I disagree with so much of what you said. Why was Rudy Giuliani, a private personal Attorney involved? No explanation for this yet. Why was the actual transcript of the call 'locked down'? Why didn't Trump use the Official Government agencies at his disposal to root out the corruption? Also, nobody has said Biden is above the law or not worth looking into. There are just proper ways to do it. You can't root out lawlessnes with more lawlessness.

One thing I've noticed is that it takes exactly 0 effort by me, to 'be me'.

I'm not trying to be intentionally obtuse here, but I find this all rather silly, from a rational/logical/materialist perspective, since this is the paradigm in which this conversation is occurring.. (trying to make sense of senselessness) The 'coin flip' technique.. as it's referred to here, contains the notion that there is a 'you' who is 'flipping the coin'. There is the notion of a 'doer'. There is also the notion that there are 'choices'. As Serotoninluv pointed out (tongue in cheek or not), 'you' are never in a position to know why you 'chose to flip a coin' vs. say 'rolling some dice'.. What one begins to realize, is that notions of 'choice' fall outside the 'rational/logical/materialist' paradigm. From a 'rational/logical/materialist' paradigm, where there is a 'you' who is 'doing' the coin flipping as opposed to a more 'holistic' paradigm where there exists a 'you who flips coins sometimes', notions of 'choice' are nonsense/irrational/illogical.

@samedm9 two things. "if Biden was not running and was instead a regular citizen at the time. There’s zero problem here." Biden IS running. So there IS a problem. I'm sure the Biden's are not the only corrupt people in the world or in Ukraine. Why single them out? 2. Why did the president involve his PERSONAL Attorney in Official Government Business if it wasn't for 'personal' reasons? Why not use the agencies at his disposal? And still unanswered- Why was the transcript of the (perfect, beautiful) call moved to a super secure server meant for the highest security information like covert operations?

@Bodigger there was no 'rule' change. There was a change to the form, as the [Trump Appointed] ICIG explained. It doesn't make sense to ask if something that never happened seems fishy.

There are glaring questions that we should all be asking, which I have yet to hear satisfactory answers to: Why did the President of the US involve his PERSONAL attorney in an official state business capacity if that was indeed what he was doing? Why was the actual verbatim record of the phone conversation moved to a server normally reserved for the highest level security information such as covert operations, if indeed the phone call was 'innocent', and 'perfect'? Why didn't the President use the agencies at his disposal such as the FBI or CIA to investigate possible corruption if this was indeed his concern? It was these actions, along with the contents of the phone call, which prompted the Whistleblower. It was the release of the phone transcript BY THE WHITE HOUSE which prompted the Impeachment Inquiry, not soley the Whistleblower complaint.

@samedm9 which rule was changed? "Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute." - ICIG ( the inspector general of the intelligence community) "In fact," the ICIG's statement continues, "by law the Complainant...need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law."

@samedm9 says "you can’t claim to understand the true motivation of the mentioning of Biden in the call, without being very closely tied to the president." And then immediately claims to understand the true motivation of the mentioning of Biden in the cal without being very closely tied to the president... "Asking Ukraine to investigate corruption around the Bidens is not for electoral power (as one may interpret)."