🔥 | Latest

Birthday, Tumblr, and Best: WHAT THEy DON'T UNDERSTAND ABouT BIrtHDAYS AnD wHAT they never tell you is that when you're eleven, you're also ten, and nine, and eight, and seven, and six, and five, and four, and three, and two, and one. And when you wake up on your eleventh birthday you expect to feel eleven, but you don't. Yotu open your eyes and everything's just like yesterday, only it's today. And you don't feel eleven at all. You feel like you're still ten. And you are-underneath the year that makes you eleven Like some days you might say something stupid, and that's the part of you that's still ten. Or maybe some days you might need to sit on your mama's lap because you're scared, and that's the part of you that's five. And maybe one day when you're all grown up maybe you will need to cry like if you're three, and that's okay. That's what I tell Mama when she's sad and needs to cry. Maybe she's feeling three. Because the way you grow old is kind of like an onion or like the rings inside a tree trunk or like my little wooden dolls that fit one inside the other, each year inside the next one. That's how being eleven years old is You don't feel eleven. Not right away. It takes a few days, weeks even, sometimes even months before you say Eleven when they ask you. And you don't feel smart eleven, not until you're almost twelve. That's the way it is. lose-in-my-world: aseaofquotes: Sandra Cisneros, “Eleven” the best thing i read today
Birthday, Tumblr, and Best: WHAT THEy DON'T UNDERSTAND ABouT BIrtHDAYS AnD wHAT
 they never tell you is that when you're eleven, you're also ten,
 and nine, and eight, and seven, and six, and five, and four, and
 three, and two, and one. And when you wake up on your
 eleventh birthday you expect to feel eleven, but you don't. Yotu
 open your eyes and everything's just like yesterday, only it's
 today. And you don't feel eleven at all. You feel like you're still
 ten. And you are-underneath the year that makes you eleven
 Like some days you might say something stupid, and that's
 the part of you that's still ten. Or maybe some days you might
 need to sit on your mama's lap because you're scared, and that's
 the part of you that's five. And maybe one day when you're all
 grown up maybe you will need to cry like if you're three, and
 that's okay. That's what I tell Mama when she's sad and needs
 to cry. Maybe she's feeling three.
 Because the way you grow old is kind of like an onion or like
 the rings inside a tree trunk or like my little wooden dolls that
 fit one inside the other, each year inside the next one. That's
 how being eleven years old is
 You don't feel eleven. Not right away. It takes a few days,
 weeks even, sometimes even months before you say Eleven
 when they ask you. And you don't feel smart eleven, not until
 you're almost twelve. That's the way it is.
lose-in-my-world:

aseaofquotes:
Sandra Cisneros, “Eleven”

the best thing i read today

lose-in-my-world: aseaofquotes: Sandra Cisneros, “Eleven” the best thing i read today

Amazon, Bad, and Be Like: krista (030) y@cherryblushed i used to read 3-4 full sized novels in middle school. now i see anything longer than a paragraph and bounce. i'll miss u brain cells, can't believe u peaked at age 12 15/9/18, 1:04 pm 68 Retweets 238 Likes takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights: dewdrop156: memecage: It do be like that. I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister recently and I was talking about how one of the reasons I don’t read as much as I used to is because I don’t have the same resources I did when I was a 4th grader. When I was a kid, I could sit and read all I wanted, all I had to to was exist and go where people took me. I didn’t have to feed myself or pay bills or keep track of things, which of course now I have to deal with all of those things so I can’t read as much and tend to read pretty easy to read books. My sister brought up the really good point that, of course I want to read easy books, I’m a young adult, in a very tumultuous phase of life, constantly being thrown new information, my brain doesnt want a classical novel, my brain wants something readable and immersive. tl;dr don’t feel bad for not reading as much as you used to, it’s okay. Read what you can when you can and don’t stress about the rest But nowadays, there are so many more resources for reading that you can gain access to. Even though you’re busy and stressed out my life, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t continue to strive to read whenever possible. I’ve compiled this basic list of super accessible ways to read in the modern age.1. LibbyLibby is a library app, and it free to use. If you have a library card (which you can either pick up at a branch or online, depending on where you live), you put in your information, and you have access to your library’s ebooks and audiobooks. Generally, you can check ebooks out for two to three weeks, and it gives you the option to renew (if someone isn’t waiting in line for that book) or return early. It’s super user- friendly. If you want to scam the system a little bit, a lot of libraries give you 30 to 60 days after making a card online to come in and actually get a physical card and show your ID. If you are looking for a specific book that your library may not have, make library cards at other locations with fake addresses and check out their supply. I personally have about eight library cards, so I always can find what I’m looking for unless it’s super rare. 2. KindleWhile you can buy the actual Amazon e-reader, you can also just use the free app. There are a bunch of ebooks you can read for free, or for a low price. If you have Kindle Unlimited ($10/month), you can borrow up to ten KU books at a time for as long as you want. A lot of authors have KU books, so it’s a good way to go. 3. NookBarnes and Noble’s Nook is similar to the Kindle—comes in a physical e-reader, but is also usable as a free app. I will say I find that their selection generally costs more than Amazon’s selection, but it’s an option if you prefer to stay away from Amazon products. One thing they do sometime around the end of the year is send you out a refund check for all the books that you purchased through them that were at a higher market price then they would’ve been elsewhere. I’ve gotten like three of these, so I figure it’s a regular thing. 4. AudibleFor people who are sight-impaired or have difficulty sitting down and reading a book, audiobooks are SO the way to go. When you sign up, you can receive up to two free audiobooks, and whatever plan you decide to go with gives you two free audiobooks a month (from a specific selection) in addition to your credits! If you have Kindle ebooks, there is sometimes an option to purchase the accompanying Audible audiobook for a super discounted rate. If you don’t like an audiobook, you can call in to return it at any time. I have something like forty or fifty audiobooks from them, and I’ve exchanged another twenty. These options are all in addition to physical books from your local library, and discount bookstores. The nice thing about ebooks is that generally they have the option to highlight and bookmark pages, change the font size and type, and even change the color of the page if you prefer.I always thought audiobooks were for old people until a few years ago when I was commuting about three hours a day for work. I wasn’t reading nearly as much, and as an avid reader, that distressed me greatly.Finally, I looked into audiobooks and it was a huge life changer. Instead of wasting three hours a day in traffic, I was reading for three hours a day that I would’ve otherwise not been able to. Not only does it make a trip go faster, but it makes it much more enjoyable.And even if you don’t want it for the commute or for the gym, audiobooks are a really good option for people who have vision problems. I have migraines when I stare at screens too much, so I pop on an audiobook and just crochet or do the dishes. I have a friend who has very bad eyesight, and he has not been able to read in something close to a year. I set him up with a library card and a Libby account, and all of a sudden, he was able to catch up on all the books he had been wanting to read!I’m just saying, I promote reading because no matter what you read, you’re learning something. Even though life is stressful and crazy and distracting, there are still ways you can find to sit down and curl up with a good book. “My brother has his sword, I have my books. And a mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone.” -Tyrion Lannister
Amazon, Bad, and Be Like: krista (030)
 y@cherryblushed
 i used to read 3-4 full sized
 novels in middle school. now i see
 anything longer than a paragraph
 and bounce. i'll miss u brain cells,
 can't believe u peaked at age 12
 15/9/18, 1:04 pm
 68 Retweets 238 Likes
takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights:

dewdrop156:
memecage:
It do be like that.

I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister recently and I was talking about how one of the reasons I don’t read as much as I used to is because I don’t have the same resources I did when I was a 4th grader. When I was a kid, I could sit and read all I wanted, all I had to to was exist and go where people took me. I didn’t have to feed myself or pay bills or keep track of things, which of course now I have to deal with all of those things so I can’t read as much and tend to read pretty easy to read books. My sister brought up the really good point that, of course I want to read easy books, I’m a young adult, in a very tumultuous phase of life, constantly being thrown new information, my brain doesnt want a classical novel, my brain wants something readable and immersive. 
tl;dr don’t feel bad for not reading as much as you used to, it’s okay. Read what you can when you can and don’t stress about the rest


But nowadays, there are so many more resources for reading that you can gain access to. Even though you’re busy and stressed out my life, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t continue to strive to read whenever possible. I’ve compiled this basic list of super accessible ways to read in the modern age.1. LibbyLibby is a library app, and it free to use. If you have a library card (which you can either pick up at a branch or online, depending on where you live), you put in your information, and you have access to your library’s ebooks and audiobooks. Generally, you can check ebooks out for two to three weeks, and it gives you the option to renew (if someone isn’t waiting in line for that book) or return early. It’s super user- friendly. If you want to scam the system a little bit, a lot of libraries give you 30 to 60 days after making a card online to come in and actually get a physical card and show your ID. If you are looking for a specific book that your library may not have, make library cards at other locations with fake addresses and check out their supply. I personally have about eight library cards, so I always can find what I’m looking for unless it’s super rare. 2. KindleWhile you can buy the actual Amazon e-reader, you can also just use the free app. There are a bunch of ebooks you can read for free, or for a low price. If you have Kindle Unlimited ($10/month), you can borrow up to ten KU books at a time for as long as you want. A lot of authors have KU books, so it’s a good way to go. 3. NookBarnes and Noble’s Nook is similar to the Kindle—comes in a physical e-reader, but is also usable as a free app. I will say I find that their selection generally costs more than Amazon’s selection, but it’s an option if you prefer to stay away from Amazon products. One thing they do sometime around the end of the year is send you out a refund check for all the books that you purchased through them that were at a higher market price then they would’ve been elsewhere. I’ve gotten like three of these, so I figure it’s a regular thing. 4. AudibleFor people who are sight-impaired or have difficulty sitting down and reading a book, audiobooks are SO the way to go. When you sign up, you can receive up to two free audiobooks, and whatever plan you decide to go with gives you two free audiobooks a month (from a specific selection) in addition to your credits! If you have Kindle ebooks, there is sometimes an option to purchase the accompanying Audible audiobook for a super discounted rate. If you don’t like an audiobook, you can call in to return it at any time. I have something like forty or fifty audiobooks from them, and I’ve exchanged another twenty. These options are all in addition to physical books from your local library, and discount bookstores. The nice thing about ebooks is that generally they have the option to highlight and bookmark pages, change the font size and type, and even change the color of the page if you prefer.I always thought audiobooks were for old people until a few years ago when I was commuting about three hours a day for work. I wasn’t reading nearly as much, and as an avid reader, that distressed me greatly.Finally, I looked into audiobooks and it was a huge life changer. Instead of wasting three hours a day in traffic, I was reading for three hours a day that I would’ve otherwise not been able to. Not only does it make a trip go faster, but it makes it much more enjoyable.And even if you don’t want it for the commute or for the gym, audiobooks are a really good option for people who have vision problems. I have migraines when I stare at screens too much, so I pop on an audiobook and just crochet or do the dishes. I have a friend who has very bad eyesight, and he has not been able to read in something close to a year. I set him up with a library card and a Libby account, and all of a sudden, he was able to catch up on all the books he had been wanting to read!I’m just saying, I promote reading because no matter what you read, you’re learning something. Even though life is stressful and crazy and distracting, there are still ways you can find to sit down and curl up with a good book.

“My brother has his sword, I have my books. And a mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone.” -Tyrion Lannister

takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights: dewdrop156: memecage: It do be like that. I was having a surprisingly good conversation with my sister r...

Alive, Beard, and Children: feniczoroark: minority-cubed: princemetalthunder: skrill-cosby: drucila616: How Do Court Reporters Keep Straight Faces?These are from a book called Disorder in the Courts and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place.ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?WITNESS: He said, ‘Where am I, Cathy?’ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?WITNESS: My name is Susan!_______________________________ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?WITNESS: No, I just lie there.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?WITNESS: July 18th.ATTORNEY: What year?WITNESS: Every year._____________________________________ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can’t remember which.ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?WITNESS: Forty-five years._________________________________ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?WITNESS: I forget..ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning?WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?____________________________________ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how old is he?WITNESS: He’s 20, much like your IQ.___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?WITNESS: Are you shitting me?_________________________________________ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?WITNESS: Getting laid____________________________________________ATTORNEY: She had three children , right?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: How many were boys?WITNESS: None.ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?____________________________________________ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?WITNESS: By death..ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?WITNESS: Take a guess.___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beardATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I’m going with male._____________________________________ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.______________________________________ATTORNEY: Doctor , how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight._________________________________________ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?WITNESS: Oral…_________________________________________ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PMATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?______________________________________And last:ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?WITNESS: No..ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law. oh my god these are great fuck this is like reading a jokes and not actual quotes The last one is how I feel about all my schoolmates I can feel the frustration
Alive, Beard, and Children: feniczoroark:

minority-cubed:

princemetalthunder:

skrill-cosby:

drucila616:

How Do Court Reporters Keep Straight Faces?These are from a book called Disorder in the Courts and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place.ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?WITNESS: He said, ‘Where am I, Cathy?’ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?WITNESS: My name is Susan!_______________________________ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?WITNESS: No, I just lie there.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?WITNESS: July 18th.ATTORNEY: What year?WITNESS: Every year._____________________________________ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can’t remember which.ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?WITNESS: Forty-five years._________________________________ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?WITNESS: I forget..ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning?WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?____________________________________ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how old is he?WITNESS: He’s 20, much like your IQ.___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?WITNESS: Are you shitting me?_________________________________________ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?WITNESS: Getting laid____________________________________________ATTORNEY: She had three children , right?WITNESS: Yes.ATTORNEY: How many were boys?WITNESS: None.ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?____________________________________________ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?WITNESS: By death..ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?WITNESS: Take a guess.___________________________________________ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beardATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I’m going with male._____________________________________ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.______________________________________ATTORNEY: Doctor , how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight._________________________________________ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?WITNESS: Oral…_________________________________________ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PMATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished.____________________________________________ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?______________________________________And last:ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?WITNESS: No..ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

oh my god these are great

fuck this is like reading a jokes and not actual quotes


The last one is how I feel about all my schoolmates

I can feel the frustration

feniczoroark: minority-cubed: princemetalthunder: skrill-cosby: drucila616: How Do Court Reporters Keep Straight Faces?These are from a...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...