The Downward Spiral of Deception

An old journal entry from my college years.

David Nyberg Discusses the morality of deception in “The Varnished Truth: Truth telling and deceiving in ordinary life.” I concluded from his book that deception is the rule in survival and deception is only tempered by empathy to a very small degree. Some people can bury themselves under a flurry of deceptions and get caught in an ever deepening chasm of lies until they one day face one truth that sends them over the edge.

The degree to which one will go to deceive in an extreme case is Mark Hacking who was featured on an A&E Network special called “Deadly Deception: The Mark Hacking Story” which aired at 8:00 P.M. on September 13, 2004. He married his high school sweetheart, Lori. He dreamed about being a doctor and dreaded the thought of letting Lori down. The impression by some close friends was “she wanted him to be a doctor” and “failure was not an option”. He was living a lie. He dropped out of college before finishing his Bachelor’s degree. His mother called the University of Utah to pay his tuition and discovered that he was no longer registered for any classes. Upset, she called him and left a message on his machine. Lori got the message first. After a tumultuous period he went back to school, but only for a short while. He wriggled his way back into deception. Dropping out of school again.

To avoid arousing suspicion, he pretended to attend classes, he spread books around at home to appear as though he were studying, he bought papers on the Internet and gave them to his Mother-in-Law to proof read as though he wrote them. He kept up this ruse for over a year. He even sent foil embossed invitations for his graduation, to his family and friends, but decided at the last minute not to walk with his graduating class.

Mark Hacking continued the fakery by setting up interviews for medical school for the fall of 2004. Lori made all the travel arrangements for his interviews all over the country. He claimed he was finally accepted at the University of North Carolina. Lori wife was overjoyed and made arrangements to move. She quit her job and started packing up the apartment. She even made arrangements to rent an apartment in North Carolina.

Lori’s friends speculated that she discovered she was five weeks pregnant and decided to call the University of North Carolina Medical School to find out about health benefits. North Carolina knew nothing of Mark Hacking. She may have remembered the previous deception. She left a note that stated “I can’t imagine a life with you if things don’t change.”

Instead of becoming exposed as a fraud and being shunned by everyone he knows in his life, including his own family, he took a gun and shot his wife in the head while she slept. He thought she was the only loose end. With her missing, he would not have to go to North Carolina, and he would get all the sympathy.

Mark Hacking’s deception was created out of some kind of fear that he would be perceived as a bad person by those he loved. Some how he came to the conclusion that he could get away with murder, but only because he was surrounded by people who are highly religious and have faith in their fellow man. Surrounded by people who believe that a person is inherently good. Without cynicism somewhere in a community, some deception will be allowed to go unchecked until it gets out of control. Unfortunately, there is a large majority of people in this country who are not cynical enough to see the Machiavellianism in their leadership.  I am currently studying “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli and I am attempting to create a test by which Machiavellianism can be detected in contemporary leadership, however, his terms like “virtue”, and “greatness” have a different definition than that which we are accustomed to.

Robert Mueller's Press Conference Transcript

The reason I typed this transcript was to make clear what was said, because there are people posting videos on YouTube and Tweeting who heard what they wanted to hear instead of the truth. Selective listening is a huge part of the inhumanity.

Date: 05/29/2019
Source: The Report Is My Testimony:' Watch Full Statement By Robert Mueller | NBC News

00:00 Two years ago the acting Attorney General asked me to serve as Special Counsel.

00:05 and he created the Special Counsel's office.

00:08 The appointment ordered the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.

00:16 This included investigating any links, or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.

00:27 Now I have not spoken publicly during our investigation.

00:31 I’m speaking out today because our investigation is complete,

00:36 the Attorney General has made the report on our investigation largely public,

00:41 we are formally closing the Special Counsel’s office,

00:45 and as well, I’m resigning from the Department of Justice to return to private life.

00:52 I’ll make a few remarks about the results of our work.

00:57 but beyond these few remarks it is important that the office’s written work speak for itself.

01:04 Let me begin where the appointment order begins.

01:08 and that is the 2016 Presidential election.

01:13 As alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, Russian intelligence officers who were part of the Russian military,

01:22 launched a concerted attack on our political system.

01:25 The indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber techniques,

01:30 to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign.

01:34 They stole private information and then released that information through fake -eh- online identities, and through the organization WikiLeaks.

01:45 The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election, and to damage a presidential candidate.

01:52 And at the same time a grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, 

01:58 A private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation,

02:03 where Russian citizens posed as Americans

02:06 in order to influence an election.

02:10 These indictments contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any defendant.

02:20 Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

02:25 The indictments allege and the other activities in our report are describe efforts to interfere in our political system.

02:33 They needed to be investigated and understood

02:37 and that is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office.

02:42 That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation.

02:48 The matters we investigated were of paramount importance.

02:52 It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned.

02:59 When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators 

03:06 it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrong-doers accountable.

03:12 Let me say a word about the report.

03:17 The report has two parts addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate.

03:23 The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election.

03:31 This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity

03:36 as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.

03:43 And in a second volume the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the President.

03:53 The order appointing me Special Counsel, authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation.

04:03 We conducted that investigation and we kept the office of the acting Attorney General apprised of the progress of our work.

04:12 And as set forth in the report after that investigation 

04:16 If we had confidence that the President did not commit a crime we would have said so.

04:22 We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.

04:28 The introduction to our volume 2 of our report explains that decision.

04:34 It explains that under long-standing department policy, 

04:39 a [present?] President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office.

04:44 That is unconstitutional. 

04:47 Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view,

04:51 that too is prohibited.

04:53 The Special Counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice, and by regulation

04:59 it was bound by that department policy.

05:02 Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.

05:09 The departments written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points.

05:16 that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation.

05:20 Those points are summarized in our report, I will describe two of them for you.

05:26 First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President

05:33 because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available.

05:40 Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.

05:46 In second the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system.

05:54 to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.

05:59 And beyond department policy we were guided by principles of fairness.

06:05 it would be unfair- it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime 

06:13 when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

06:17 So that was just a department policy, those were the principles under which we operated,

06:24 and from them we concluded that we would- would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the President committed a crime.

06:33 That is- That is the office’s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.

06:43 We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the Attorney General as required by department regulations.

06:53 The Attorney General then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to Congress and to the American people.

07:01 At one point in time I requested that certain portions of the report be released,

07:07 and the Attorney General preferred to make the entire report public all at once,

07:13 and we appreciate that the Attorney General made the report largely public,

07:19 and I certainly do not question the Attorney General’s good faith in that decision.

07:24 and I hope and expect this to be the only time I will speak to you in this manner.

07:28 I am making that decision myself. No one has told me whether I can or should testify, or speak further about this matter, 

07:39 There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress,

07:43 Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report.

07:47 It contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made.

07:54 We chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. 

07:59 And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.

08:09 In addition, access to our underlying work product, is being decided in a process that does not involve our office.

08:19 So beyond what I’ve said here today, and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department, or Congress.

08:34 And it’s for that reason I will not be taking questions today as well.

08:38 Now before I step away I want to thank the attorneys and the F.B.I. agents, the analysts, the professional staff that helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner.

08:53 These individuals who spent nearly two years with the Special Counsel’s office are of the highest integrity.

09:01 And I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments.

09:06 that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election.

09:13 and that allegation deserves the attention of every American. Thank you. Thank you for being here today.

Free Speech versus Qualified Speech

Free Speech: Everyone has a right to their opinion and the freedom to express it.

Qualified Speech: Must earn its right to be featured at venues by the following qualifications:

• All claims must be proven valid and supported by evidence.
• An efficient balance between comprehension and conciseness. 
• No logical fallacies allowed.
• No cognitive biases allowed.
• No myths or superstitions.
• No restating a phrase ad nauseum.
• No weasel words (glittering genealities).
• No jargon or arcane words or phrases (for public venues)

Disqualified Speech: Hate Speech

• Language that dehumanizes, disparages, marginalizes, or otherwise lends to ostracizing other people.
• Language that elicits incorrect inferences or implies a call to commit crimes or violence against other people.

Score Keeping Political Rhetoric

Candidates running for various offices in the 2020 election cycle must validate the emotions of the voter (pathos), confirm the understanding of the voter's suffering (ethos) and provide a real solution to the voter's problems (logos). Seems reasonable, right? Why doesn't it happen? Easy, the pathos, ethos and logos are substituted for other rhetoric.

• Pathos: Demonstrate empathy, affirm and validate the feelings of voters.
• The candidate tries too hard to look "local" instead of owning his or her class status.
• The candidate has more photo ops with famous celebrities in a bid for popularity, but popularity is not the same as affinity.
• Ethos: Demonstrate context, understand the technical details of the problems.
• The candidate responds by referring to a problem as "the problem" or "your pain."
• Logos: Use critical thinking skills and logic to arrive at a solution for the problems.
• The candidate speaks in "glittering generalities" or platitudes.
• The candidate focuses on one or two specific issues that can be easily solved already.
• The candidate avoids an issue on which he or she is known to equivocate or an issue he or she voted against that is supported by most voters.

Or, the candidate simply lies.

For a complete list of Rhetorical terms, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_rhetorical_terms

Your Mental Answering Machine

I've been around people who get frustrated with family and friends who suffer from Alzheimer's and Dementia. They show visible symptoms of pain and increasing blood pressure. They do this to themselves unnecessarily. They can choose not to be upset, but they don't realize this.

Most people typically blame others or their situation for the way they feel. Seasonal Affective Disorder is apparently a real thing, but I don't buy into it because I have Generalized Anxiety Disorder across the board. The difference though, is that I am keenly aware of it. I didn't get diagnosed until I was over 45 years old.

People who are not aware of, or diligent about their own mental states are highly susceptible to cognitive biases and certain logical fallacies, beginning with the Fundamental Attribution Error or Attribution bias, or Misattribution of Arousal. (Arousal in the sense of something getting one's attention, not sexual.)

We are all guilty of saying someone or something makes us angry, or the weather makes us sad, or we allow ourselves to feel loneliness in the absence of loved ones. The key is that we allow ourselves to feel mental anguish. Our brains only receive sensory input, what we do with it is up to us.