All it does is leave me depressed that people like this exist — Maw

He doesn't really exist. He's just alt right copy pasta.

One of the things you mentioned, protests, isn't a problem and by law the people have a right to protest. The majority of the protests have indeed been peaceful. This brings me to another point, ANTIFA is an ideology, a statement you and I have both agreed with. So individuals who identify as ANTIFA, are not members of a group but are individuals espousing a belief in an ideology.

Pro-Life is also an Ideology. Do you think every pro-lifer spends their time outside of abortion clinics shouting profanities at employees and scared women seeking abortions? I'm Pro-Life, but I don't do that. I also identify as ANTIFA (Now don't rush to judge or throw the baby out with the bathwater because what I have to say is monumentally important and it would benefit you and everyone on all sides of all ideological debates to hear it) but I am not out Looting or burning or assaulting anyone and even if Trump wins a second term, I still probably won't be doing any of that. I'm human and I've been angry at times and when we get angry we think of doing stupid things, sometimes we do those stupid things to different degrees. I wouldn't judge you in the slightest if you told me that the thought hadn't crossed your mind to go out and assault people you see protesting. We all have those kinds of thoughts from time to time, especially about the things that mean a lot to us.

Why is this? Because the modal quality of my ANTIFA ideology and my Pro-life Ideology are personal and based on my individuality, just like ANTIFA who are out on the streets looting and burning, and the ones PEACEFULLY protesting... Or, like you. In the last few messages to me you have expressed ANTIFA ideology, yet you're not out looting and burning either. Instead you are having a collaborative, open, equal, equitable and honest conversation on the internet with people who disagree with you. On a philosophy forum no less. You might say that the Modal quality of our ANTIFA beliefs are like a super hard Titanium alloy, while the looters and burners are but lithium, a soft metal. — MSC

Yeah the protests are not a problem. I didn't mean it to appear that I thought the protests were a problem.

I believe antifa is both an ideology and a group, but not a centralized group as far as I can tell. It seems to be organized more on a regional/local basis. If we're going strictly by ideology then in the original sense of the word I'd consider myself an antifascist (as any decent person should be) - my issue is that the antifa of, say, the 1930s is not the same as the antifa of 2017-2020.

I think we need to be really careful in regard to whether we refer to it as an ideology or a group. My criticism is really geared towards the group - the (mostly) men who clad themselves in black and assault journalists and burn down stores and harass business owners. There's been many, many incidences where this has been documented.

but I am not out Looting or burning or assaulting anyone and even if Trump wins a second term, I still probably won't be doing any of that. I'm human and I've been angry at times and when we get angry we think of doing stupid things, sometimes we do those stupid things to different degrees. I wouldn't judge you in the slightest if you told me that the thought hadn't crossed your mind to go out and assault people you see protesting. We all have those kinds of thoughts from time to time, especially about the things that mean a lot to us.

Sure, I don't think anyone is to blame for their thoughts. You can certainly be blameworthy if you actually execute on those thoughts/fantasies though. To be perfectly honest, I've never fantasized about hurting the protesters though. I don't see anything wrong with protesting. I'm not mad at the protesters, but if you look at the facts of the destruction I think it's been pretty widespread. I know it's happened all across the country and now parts of my home city of Boston (entire blocks, many, many stores) have been destroyed. I don't even fantasize about hurting the rioters I just wish they would stop or maybe that there would be a stronger police response.

Instead you are having a collaborative, open, equal, equitable and honest conversation on the internet with people who disagree with you. On a philosophy forum no less. You might say that the Modal quality of our ANTIFA beliefs are like a super hard Titanium alloy, while the looters and burners are but lithium, a soft metal. — MSC

Yeah, this has been a surprisingly pleasant discussion. And I agree with you -- from a purely philosophical standpoint, I could very well be considered an anti-fascist. In the original sense of the word I think I am. However, I'd just really advise you to be careful identifying yourself with that movement because they are a group -- literature has been written on the group -- and they're not a democratic movement that supports open, free discussions. They very routinely shout down and try to shut down conservative speakers on college campuses. I honestly don't think the movement believes in free speech. They believe in de-platforming and not allowing conservative speakers to express their ideas because anything outside of their little box is labeled "fascist." I know you might just consider me
paranoid conservative, but I would encourage you to familiarize yourself with the group a little, not just the philosophy.

I've already answered what I thought about Ngo being hit. It's in my previous post.

My problem with your comments was, that you claim multiple journalists were assaulted by Antifa. I haven't seen one example of it and the one you did give is a bad example for various reasons. Meanwhile, there was a lot of footage of journalists being assaulted by police in the beginning of the BLM protests. — Benkei

You said that it was criminal which is not the same thing as saying that it was wrong. Do you think it was wrong and that it shouldn't have happened?

For multiple journalists you've got Ngo and I said the "colored conservatives" which is a small youtube channel of conservative journalists/reporters. Those are a few I can name off the top of my head but I'm sure there's more. Antifa also routinely shouts down and tries to shut down conservative speakers on college campuses so it really should be no surprise that they've got an anti-conservative journalist bent. I'm sure there are more journalists who have faced assaults or threats; it fits with their view of "fighting fascism."

We're not talking about the police either and I don't see how it's relevant to the discussion. The police doing bad things doesn't justify groups in opposition to the police also doing bad things.

With real partisan talking points; once you scratch the surface most of it turns out to be untrue. Andy Ngo does not deserve to milk this situation and he certainly shouldn't be lying about his injuries. The guy that hit him should be fined. The rest is just milkshakes and spaghetti spray which a provocateur and probable criminal like Ngo deserved. — Benkei

Have you seen the medical reports on Andy Ngo? How do you know that he's lying about injuries? I've seen interviews with him and his speech definitely seems off and likely indicates some form of brain or face damage. I don't know how you can immediately conclude that he's lying. I don't even know how Rolling Stones can conclude it unless they've seen the medical reports. There were actually two separate assaults on Andy Ngo, according to Andy Ngo, but then we go down this rabbit hole of you probably not believing Andy Ngo and etc. etc.

If you look on the video though there were numerous men who attacked him with fists and hit him with objects. You can't dispute that. I feel like we should move on from this point because it's not too important to our central discussion.

Your identification of people being clad in black being part of Antifa is problematic because likely to be wrong. — Benkei

I never said everyone clad in black is antifa, but some % of them are likely to be. The truth is we're just dealing with uncertainty and this makes plenty of people uncomfortable. I'm happy to extend the definition/our conception of antifa to militant far-left groups in general, here in the states we just mostly refer to that group or groups as "antifa." Would you be more satisfied if we referred to them as far left militants? There's also quite a bit of documentary footage and literature out there about these groups. I think the umbrella term used here is just the "antifascist movement." They consider themselves warriors, fighters.

While it's true that some lone wolfs may identify as Antifa, it is not the case that Antifa falls within either category the FBI is really worried about. — Benkei

Antifa isn't destabilizing the government anytime soon. I've never claimed them to be a massive threat to US national security. And yes, like you've said earlier they're often difficult to identify and we can doubt whether random people dressed in black and assaulting others are antifa - but whether we like it or not that's the clothing we've come to associate them with. It could be some other far left group, who knows. The crips and the bloods and other gangs have their own dress codes and we could see people in these dress codes committing crimes but we'll never know for certain whether it's them until much later after they've been arrested and interrogated. I don't think antifa's violence is a real security threat to the US, but the way they go after conservative speakers and try to shut down discourse is disconcerting.

You said that it was criminal which is not the same thing as saying that it was wrong. Do you think it was wrong and that it shouldn't have happened?

For multiple journalists you've got Ngo and I said the "colored conservatives" which is a small youtube channel of conservative journalists/reporters. Those are a few I can name off the top of my head but I'm sure there's more. Antifa also routinely shouts down and tries to shut down conservative speakers on college campuses so it really should be no surprise that they've got an anti-conservative journalist bent. I'm sure there are more journalists who have faced assaults or threats; it fits with their view of "fighting fascism."

We're not talking about the police either and I don't see how it's relevant to the discussion. The police doing bad things doesn't justify groups in opposition to the police also doing bad things. — BitconnectCarlos

They're comedians not journalists according to their own patreon page. We are talking about these guys right? https://www.facebook.com/TheColoredCons/

And we're not talking about the police but we should. You come up with journalists that aren't journalists to prove a point that doesn't exist. I'm pointing you to the actual problem--> a police force that's either dumb enough to attack journalists or so insulated from repercussions that they think they can get away with it. Probably a combination of both.

Have you seen the medical reports on Andy Ngo? How do you know that he's lying about injuries? I've seen interviews with him and his speech definitely seems off and likely indicates some form of brain or face damage. I don't know how you can immediately conclude that he's lying. I don't even know how Rolling Stones can conclude it unless they've seen the medical reports. There were actually two separate assaults on Andy Ngo, according to Andy Ngo, but then we go down this rabbit hole of you probably not believing Andy Ngo and etc. etc.

If you look on the video though there were numerous men who attacked him with fists and hit him with objects. You can't dispute that. I feel like we should move on from this point because it's not too important to our central discussion. — BitconnectCarlos

I saw one fist fly. The rest was milkshakes and spaghetti spray. Stop exaggerating.

And no I didn't see his medical records. But as I explained, if someone claims SHA and is up and about the next day, then he doesn't have SHA, he's simply lying. I don't need to see his medical records for that - all I need to do is google!

Once the diagnosis is confirmed, admission to an intensive care unit may be preferable, — Wikipedia

The guy is a troll a verified liar and a likely criminal. As a result, I'm on the fence as to whether it was wrong to hit him in the face. Seems fair play to me. The guy who hit him should pay a fine though because he broke the law.

I never said everyone clad in black is antifa, but some % of them are likely to be. The truth is we're just dealing with uncertainty and this makes plenty of people uncomfortable. I'm happy to extend the definition/our conception of antifa to militant far-left groups in general, here in the states we just mostly refer to that group or groups as "antifa." Would you be more satisfied if we referred to them as far left militants? There's also quite a bit of documentary footage and literature out there about these groups. I think the umbrella term used here is just the "antifascist movement." They consider themselves warriors, fighters. — BitconnectCarlos

You're happy to extend a definition to fit your preconceived conclusions. Check.

Antifa isn't destabilizing the government anytime soon. I've never claimed them to be a massive threat to US national security. And yes, like you've said earlier they're often difficult to identify and we can doubt whether random people dressed in black and assaulting others are antifa - but whether we like it or not that's the clothing we've come to associate them with. It could be some other far left group, who knows. The crips and the bloods and other gangs have their own dress codes and we could see people in these dress codes committing crimes but we'll never know for certain whether it's them until much later after they've been arrested and interrogated. I don't think antifa's violence is a real security threat to the US, but the way they go after conservative speakers and try to shut down discourse is disconcerting. — BitconnectCarlos

No. It's the clothing you associate them with, which as explained before is the wrong thing to do. Just stop.

FBI is clear on this: lone wolfs, white supremacists and ultra-nationalists are mostly responsible for domestic terrorism. I have problems associating "far left" with white supremacy and patriotism. Seems like a typical right wing thing to me.

You're chasing ghosts with Antifa.

You fill American’s heads with fear and nonsense about being killed by police for their skin color, when they are clearly being killed for resisting arrest. — NOS4A2

What are you saying!!? Do you think resisting arrest is sufficient reason to be killed?

What are you saying!!? Do you think resisting arrest is sufficient reason to be killed?

I am saying resisting arrest is wrong, illegal, dangerous and stupid. Had resisting arrest not occurred people would be alive today.

Except for the ones who could not breathe, or were asleep in their beds. Or several thousand lynched, hundreds massacred, and the run-of-the-mill ordinary racist murders. And that is called - just fyi if you have not heard the expression before - the tip of the iceberg.

There is a wide variety of reasons why an individual will resist arrest, starting with the situation when one perceives oneself to be innocent, and the arrest to be unjust. In no way does resisting arrest warrant being killed, irrespective of how stupid it may be.

There is a wide variety of reasons why an individual will resist arrest, starting with the situation when one perceives oneself to be innocent, and the arrest to be unjust. In no way does resisting arrest warrant being killed, irrespective of how stupid it may be.

It does warrant the use of deadly force or shooting when the officer believes his life or the lives of others is at risk. There are legal means to rectify unjust arrests, none of which involves putting the officer’s or your own life at risk.

Amazing how these small government fuckfaces all of a sudden become cop scrotum fondling simps as soon as it's black people being murdered by them.

The same snowflake cops who are so fragile that they'll have a mental health episode over a McMuffin are supposed to be in a position to rationally judge what is a threat to their lives.

Cops murder people wontonly and the idea that they do so because their lives are at risk is laughable bullshit peddled by authority loving wankers like NOS who want nothing more than to swallow whatever piss the State will dribble down their throats.

Two words: Elijah McClain.

Do you think resisting arrest is sufficient reason to be killed? — Metaphysician Undercover

I am saying resisting arrest is wrong, illegal, dangerous and stupid. Had resisting arrest not occurred people would be alive today. — NOS4A2

You don't have to beat around the bush, the answer here is clearly "yes" so just say it. Essentially your position is that the onus of personal discipline and self-restraint is situated squarely on civilians, regardless of context, and not the (ostensibly) trained officer carrying a deadly weapon. The only important, consequential word in your outright psychopathic response is "dangerous". How is it dangerous? How can resisting arrested be rendered dangerous? That responsibility lies in the reaction of the (ostensibly) trained officer, who, out of all other possible recourses, chose the most extreme and severe: termination. What you are justifying is the existence of a fascist comic book character, a "street judge" who can summarily arrest, convict and execute civilians with impunity.

Just to be clear: the whole 'resisting arrest' narrative is itself horseshit. While it goes without saying that resisting arrest does not warrant summary extra-judical execution, the overwhelming evidence is that twitchy, terrified, and mentally fragile cops simply murder people for so much as existing in the wrong way - usually for being black in their miserable presence.

I believe antifa is both an ideology and a group, but not a centralized group as far as I can tell. It seems to be organized more on a regional/local basis. If we're going strictly by ideology then in the original sense of the word I'd consider myself an antifascist (as any decent person should be) - my issue is that the antifa of, say, the 1930s is not the same as the antifa of 2017-2020.

I think we need to be really careful in regard to whether we refer to it as an ideology or a group. My criticism is really geared towards the group - the (mostly) men who clad themselves in black and assault journalists and burn down stores and harass business owners. There's been many, many incidences where this has been documented. — BitconnectCarlos

I can understand why you would think this. Unfortunately there is a problem with your reasoning on this. A big one. You've made an assumption that it's the Antifa Ideology as the problem in what it makes certain groups of Antifa do, looting and burning. The problem is one of certainty when it comes to knowing the contributing factors of ideology when it comes to predicting and explaining individual and group behaviour.

It's probably a given that we both subscribe to more than one ideology. Now fundamentally we are both Anti-Fascist and not racist, we both agree we have cultural biases and have the potential to be callously racist, let's imagine we are also both Pacifists with a self defence condition for violence. (Not going to talk about whether weapons are just, only talking about self defence and whatever that might mean legally where any given person is.)

Now lets say one of us is a black man and one of us is white. Doesn't matter if it's true or not I just want to demonstrate a deep contextual difference in something here.

We are both in our own cars, driving across the same state. This state happens to have gun rights which allows for both of us to have a legal firearm in our vehicle. We are both responsible gun owners who know the law and our rights.

We both get pulled over for speeding. We weren't dangerously so, just a few miles over the limit and got a bit careless.

Cop walks over to your window which you have opened.

Things contextually diverge here.

White Driver: Hello officer

Officer: License and registration please

WD: Of course, Also officer, I must let you know I am carrying a legal firearm.

Officer: Well if you can show me your permit for that also, and keep it holstered during this citation that would be great.
Driver shows license, registration and permit
WD: Why am I being stopped?

Officer: You're being stopped because you committed a speeding violation so I have to give you a citation. You can try to appeal it with the court but by law I have to give you the citation.

WD: Okay Officer. Once you give me the citation can I leave?

Officer: You can leave, just don't let me catch you speeding again. This is a family neighborhood.

WD: You take care now officer.

Now the Black drivers experience.

BD: Hello officer

Officer: License and registration please

BD: Of course, Also officer, I must let you know I am carrying a legal firearm.

Officer: Well don't take it out.

BD: I'm not going to take it out.

Officer: Don't take it out!

BD: I.. *BANG*...

The dialogue for the BD was real dialogue from a real killing. Where a black man was shot and killed for trying to exercise his second amendment rights. He did everything a responsible gun owner was supposed to do and where was the NRA? They pop up to help a white man use stand your ground to kill whomever he happens to feel like provoking but they were completely silent on this. Black people can't win. Their second amendment rights in pro gun states aren't respected, gun control laws in California where originally implemented by Regan when he was governor to target the black panthers. It was implemented in direct response to black people trying to exercise the rights they had recently "Won". Look at stop and search statistics in New York.

Now, I'm white. So it's partly my responsibility to know my own cultures history of racism. I have a long memory and my culture also has also experienced racism and slavery. My culture has perpetuated racism and slavery. Historically speaking there have now been oceans of blood spilled of unnamed slaves who's contributions to the rest of man kinds progress, at the cost of the stagnation of its moral progress, well let me make one thing completely plain. The waters are starting to taste stagnant again.

Rounding back to my point about ideology, since the dialogue obviously brought on a subsequent dramatic style which is making me want to kick my own ass.

The ideology you have identified as the problem, isn't the problem. It kind of all comes down to one Moral question. Is it justifiable to use proxies to express your justifiable anger toward others? Thereby using them as a means to your own ends?

I think me and you would probably say No, as evidenced by the fact that neither of us are doing that with looters and neither are we looting.

Maybe another way to think of it, is the accusations of White privilege levied at Lori Loughlin in the college admissions scandal at the recent news she will be allowed to pick her own prison.

While I agree most black men wouldn't be offered that, neither would most white people. The ideological problem isn't privilege by race it's privilege by class.

Can I ask, how familiar are you with Semiotics?

Sure, I don't think anyone is to blame for their thoughts. You can certainly be blameworthy if you actually execute on those thoughts/fantasies though. To be perfectly honest, I've never fantasized about hurting the protesters though. I don't see anything wrong with protesting. I'm not mad at the protesters, but if you look at the facts of the destruction I think it's been pretty widespread. I know it's happened all across the country and now parts of my home city of Boston (entire blocks, many, many stores) have been destroyed. I don't even fantasize about hurting the rioters I just wish they would stop or maybe that there would be a stronger police response. — BitconnectCarlos

Stronger man than I, I've fantasized about beating up Alt Right Armed Militia. In fairness though, the fantasies usually involve superhuman abilities because it's more like a proxy for a video game coping mechanism and there is little convincing evidence that violent video games increases violent crime.

Sad to hear about Boston! Used to live near JFKs house around Jamaica Plains.

I wish the riots would stop, I wish I didn't have to to juggle different news sources, bias indicators, which are next to useless at telling you individual reporter biases because outlet bias means less than people think, news reliability algorithms just to try and figure out which is a riot and which is a protest due to the potential for misdirection with cherry picked camera footage on both sides.

Apparently the troubles are back in Belfast too. But they are different. More random, angry, isolated and unpredictable.

literature has been written on the group -- and they're not a democratic movement that supports open, free discussions. They very routinely shout down and try to shut down conservative speakers on college campuses. I honestly don't think the movement believes in free speech. They believe in de-platforming and not allowing conservative speakers to express their ideas because anything outside of their little box is labeled "fascist." I know you might just consider me
paranoid conservative, but I would encourage you to familiarize yourself with the group a little, not just the philosophy. — BitconnectCarlos

Lots of literature is written but that doesn't mean the literature is correct.

I think most people do actually support open and free discussions, free speech and democracy. Where I think people are actually disagreeing, though they may not realise it, is appropriate venues. Unfortunately the platforms are actually falling prey to a psychological consequence of capitalism and the free market. Schools are businesses and unfortunately have to protect their bottom line. If a school looks like it provides a platform to fascism, that will threaten their bottom line. It doesn't matter if it's true or not, appearances matter to the consumer. No way around it.

For me, political correctness is no longer even being practiced by either side. Neither is emotional correctness.

Everyone seems to be losing their minds. Even philosophers are generalising and drawing up imaginary lines.

Ultimately I cannot do much about Looters, Police Brutality, Armed militia on the streets, blaming them won't help, hating them won't help, fighting them with violence won't help and may rob me of my chance to really help later.

I can just try to love and have faith in people. I'll forgive the sinner, do my best to examine the sin for what it truly is. If I love people a little more I can empathise more and understand the context a little more each day.

I think the reason why some individuals on this particular thread have lost site of the purpose of the forum, to discuss philosophy, is due to how polarising Donald Trump is. This thread though strikes me like its primary function for some is... Proxy for justifiable anger at a president who should never have been in office and his enablers. Proxy for anger at the people causally responsible for the riots, looting and the people protesting which ultimately are racists. Not just any racists. Dead racists who had the power to shape our culture to be systemically oppressive to the poor.

@Everyone. Instead of treating this discussion thread as your own personal form of therapy, using others as a proxy for your hurt, you wake up and remember why you are here. To discuss philosophy. Now, there is an election coming up and nobody is going to convince anyone of anything by treating this like a subreddit full of teenagers talking about who to vote for in the student council election.

What's with all the Ad Hom everyone? What is with all the generalisations? Why is this thread laced with thick concepts?

Let me just point out that tragedy, has been a driving force behind some of the most amazing intellectual works of humanity. We are all experiencing tragedy right now and it's happening on a scale of awareness (because of the technology we have.) That very few generations have experienced before.

The Vienna Circle got together just shortly after both a World war and one of the last great pandemics.

So I challenge everyone who reads this. Can you take a stand, then a stance and walk the walk instead of talking the talk on other threads that are probably less important than this one is, right now?

The work we do in times of comfort is boring and complacent. The work we do in times of upheaval, toil and trauma is so much more meaningful, impactful and most importantly memorable.

What does it mean to rise to this challenge, if you consider yourself to be a true philosopher? It isn't a degree. It's a mind set. You just, keep calm and do philosophy in as reasonable and charitable and meaningful way as you can muster in the time that is given to you.

... Gandalf?

My dear boy,

I will not say: do not weep; for not all tears are an evil

Now, fly, you fools.

Police often have to make split-second, life and death decisions. If he feels his or anyone else’s life is in danger, you’re going to get shot. Resisting arrest, assaulting the officer, going for his gun, chasing him with a knife, shooting at him—all are ways to increase your chance of being shot by police. That’s why suicide by cop is a thing.

That’s not to say that excessive force isn’t real, but while the delusional are off pretending, without evidence, that race figures into these split-second decisions, there are real things they could be teaching to mitigate that risk. Complying with police is the most obvious.

That’s not to say that excessive force isn’t real, but while the delusional are off pretending, without evidence, that race figures into these split-second decisions, — NOS4A2

Right. And remember, snacks at 11;00 and don't forget your meds.

Right. And remember, snacks at 11;00 and don't forget your meds.

In the absence of a confession, the only evidence you have of their thoughts is propaganda or projection. So which is it?

Senate GOP have released their findings in the Hunter Biden probe:

• In early 2015 former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, George Kent raised concerns to officials in Vice President Joe Biden’s office about the perception of a conflict of interest with respect to Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board. Kent’s concerns went unaddressed and in September 2016, he emphasized in an email to his colleagues, “Furthermore, the presence of Hunter Biden on the Burisma board was very awkward for all U.S. officials pushing an anticorruption agenda in Ukraine.”
  
• In October 2015, senior State Department official Amos Hochstein raised concerns with Vice President Biden, as well as with Hunter Biden, that Hunter Biden’s position on Burisma’s board enabled Russian disinformation efforts and risked undermining U.S. policy in Ukraine.
  
• Hunter Biden was serving on Burisma’s board (supposedly consulting on corporate governance and transparency) when Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky allegedly paid a $7 million bribe to officials serving under Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Vitaly Yarema, to “shut the case against Zlochevsky.” George Kent testified that this bribe occurred in December 2014 (seven months after Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board), and, after learning about it, he and the resident legal adviser reported this allegation to the FBI.
  
• In addition to the over four million dollars paid by Burisma to Hunter Biden and his business partner, Devon Archer, for membership on the board, Hunter, his family, and Archer received millions of dollars from foreign nationals with questionable backgrounds.
  
• Devon Archer received $142,300 from Kenges Rakishev of Kazakhstan, purportedly for a car, the same day Vice President Joe Biden appeared with Ukrainian Prime Minister Arsemy Yasenyuk and addressed Ukrainian legislators in Kyiv regarding Russia’s actions in Crimea.
  
• Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina. Ms. Baturina is the wife (widow) of the former mayor of Moscow.
  
• Hunter Biden had business associations with Ye Jianming, Gongwen Dong, and other Chinese nationals linked to the Communist government and People’s Liberation Army. Those associations resulted in millions of dollars in questionable transactions.
  
• Hunter Biden opened a bank account with Gongwen Dong that financed a $100,000 global spending spree with James Biden and Sara Biden.
  
• Hunter Biden also moved millions of dollars from his law firm to James Biden’s and Sara Biden’s firm. Upon being questioned about the transaction, Sara Biden refused to provide supporting documentation and information to more clearly explain the activity. The bank subsequently closed the account.
  
• Hunter Biden paid nonresident women who were nationals of Russia or other Eastern European countries and who appear to be linked to an “Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”
  

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/majority-media/johnson-grassley-release-report-on-conflicts-of-interest-investigation

So next tuesday there will be a Biden Trump debate.

So at least we will have some debates.

Thoughts?

Resisting arrest, assaulting the officer, going for his gun, chasing him with a knife, shooting at him—all are ways to increase your chance of being shot by police. — NOS4A2

Yes, your position is that trained professionals are actually baby brained individuals that require such immense coddling that we should consider it acceptable if they unload on a civilian if they are resisting arrest, regardless of how that manifests itself, and regardless of their mental state and capacity. Hope you don't startle a cop yourself!

In the absence of a confession, the only evidence you have of their thoughts is propaganda or projection. — NOS4A2

That is a commonly held false belief. Evidence of an individual's thoughts are patterns of their behaviour. Habits of thought directly influence how one acts during certain situations. Look no further than your child mind king of the playground. His racist belief system is put on clear display anytime and every time we look at a timeline of his own behaviour regarding racially relevant events.

With regard to whether or not individual police and law enforcement officers are acting based upon the color of one's skin, we need look no further than the patterns of police behaviour towards blacks, and actually policies and practices of departments across the land.

They most certainly do.

Yes, your position is that trained professionals are actually baby brained individuals that require such immense coddling that we should consider it acceptable if they unload on a civilian if they are resisting arrest, regardless of how that manifests itself, and regardless of their mental state and capacity. Hope you don't startle a cop yourself!

That’s not my position.

I wager that even you are lucid enough to comply with the LEOs for fear of what may come if you do not. Either way, the use of excessive force is routinely investigated and punished.

Senate GOP have released their findings in the Hunter Biden probe... — NOS4A2

All the while not addressing, not carefully considering, not eliminating the injury and harm that a pandemic has had upon millions and millions of Americans.

Great job! Easy to see what the priorities of the current GOP are. Slurp slurp...

That is a commonly held false belief. Evidence of an individual's thoughts are patterns of their behaviour. Habits of thought directly influence how one acts during certain situations. Look no further than your child mind king of the playground. His racist belief system is put on clear display anytime and every time we look at a timeline of his own behaviour regarding racially relevant events.

With regard to whether or not individual police and law enforcement officers are acting based upon the color of one's skin, we need look no further than the patterns of police behaviour towards blacks, and actually policies and practices of departments across the land.

They most certainly do.

Another mind reader. You might as well be reading from tea leaves. Your assumptions are just that, assumptions, and worse born of your own fantasies and projections.

...the use of excessive force is routinely investigated and punished. — NOS4A2

What a bullshit line.

Please. Support your claims here.

Show everyone here the actual number of blacks who died at the hands of police officers. Show the actual number of investigations of those events that led to criminal charges. Show the findings of the court regarding those charges.

Guess what you will provide us with by virtue of doing so.

:smirk:

Another mind reader. — NOS4A2

You'll have to do better than that.

No need to read Trump's mind, nor the mind of anyone who has operative racist beliefs governing their actions and words.

Please. Support your claims here.

I cannot be bothered to correct such an absurd claim that excessive force cases are not investigated.