Mins
Mins

Mins

Todays
Todays

Todays

The Truth Has Been Spoken
The Truth Has Been Spoken

The Truth Has Been Spoken

My Husband
My Husband

My Husband

Number
Number

Number

Honestity
Honestity

Honestity

Yalling
Yalling

Yalling

Sended
Sended

Sended

Deleters
Deleters

Deleters

Memeing
Memeing

Memeing

🔥 | Latest

America, Parents, and Respect: CITY NEW YORK'S PICTURE NEWSPAPER EX-GI BECOMES BLONDE BEAUTY Operations Transform Bronx Youth A World of a Difference Geare W wrved in the ArmY A] fr twe yeags and as dves loralle discharge in İNL New Gerga ls mere. atal leday ate s a photegnaher in Denrk Parents were in a eter Christine (thats dreamsofamadman: somethingaboutdelia: cryingalonewithfrankenstein: This photo always cheers me up a bit. It’s a front-page article from 1955 about Christine Jorgensen, one of the first women to have sex-reassignment surgery. Since the text is a bit small and I couldn’t find a larger copy, here’s what the small blurb says: A World of a Difference George W. Jorgensen, Jr., son of a Bronx carpenter, served in the Army for two years and was given honorable discharge in 1946. Now George is no more. After six operations, Jorgensen’s sex has been changed and today she is a striking woman, working as a photographer in Denmark. Parents were informed of the big change in a letter Christine (that’s her new name) sent to them recently. This article is 58 years old, and it’s more respectful of Christine’s pronoun choices and name than some publications are today. It makes me happy to see a newspaper be respectful of a trans person’s choice of name and pronouns like that :3 Say it again for the haters in the back who want to keep pretending that trans people, or even treating trans people with respect is even remotely anything new. 😎 It’s worth mentioning, that this was kinda celebrated as a wonder of the atomic age at the time. “Look at the power of our scientists! Look at what we can do!”You know, back when America was trying to be the leader in scientific advancement.
America, Parents, and Respect: CITY
 NEW YORK'S PICTURE NEWSPAPER
 EX-GI BECOMES
 BLONDE BEAUTY
 Operations Transform Bronx Youth
 A World of a Difference
 Geare W
 wrved in the ArmY A] fr twe yeags and as dves
 loralle discharge in İNL New Gerga ls mere.
 atal leday ate s
 a photegnaher in Denrk Parents were
 in a eter Christine (thats
dreamsofamadman:
somethingaboutdelia:

cryingalonewithfrankenstein:

This photo always cheers me up a bit. It’s a front-page article from 1955 about Christine Jorgensen, one of the first women to have sex-reassignment surgery.
Since the text is a bit small and I couldn’t find a larger copy, here’s what the small blurb says:
A World of a Difference

George W. Jorgensen, Jr., son of a Bronx carpenter, served in the Army for two years and was given honorable discharge in 1946. Now George is no more. After six operations, Jorgensen’s sex has been changed and today she is a striking woman, working as a photographer in Denmark. Parents were informed of the big change in a letter Christine (that’s her new name) sent to them recently.

This article is 58 years old, and it’s more respectful of Christine’s pronoun choices and name than some publications are today. It makes me happy to see a newspaper be respectful of a trans person’s choice of name and pronouns like that :3

Say it again for the haters in the back who want to keep pretending that trans people, or even treating trans people with respect is even remotely anything new. 😎

It’s worth mentioning, that this was kinda celebrated as a wonder of the atomic age at the time. “Look at the power of our scientists! Look at what we can do!”You know, back when America was trying to be the leader in scientific advancement.

dreamsofamadman: somethingaboutdelia: cryingalonewithfrankenstein: This photo always cheers me up a bit. It’s a front-page article from 19...

Af, Animals, and Bad: thefingerfuckingfemalefury: brookietf: thefingerfuckingfemalefury: drydrangea: association-of-free-people: cruzan-for-love: wethepotterheads0214: trashytoclassy: bunnywith: uleanblue: hermionxjean: maddeningmagic106: doctorsiggy: jitterbugjive: whoweargoldintheirhair: mememiya-anthy: #freshly peeled sheeps reblogging solely for that deeply unnerving caption @theosartisticthematics FRESHLY PEELED SHEEPS Fuck this. Does everyone just not see the blood scrapes on some of their backs and faces???!!! Anyone, seriously, correct me if I’m wrong because this is making me upset af Domesticated sheep need to be sheared because they don’t shed their coats on their own and it can be bad for their health if it gets too big. Also, it looks considering how close they cut that it went fairly well. I see like 2 nicks maybe, but with the photo it’s hard to tell. I mean, unfortunately, you’re going to nick a few animals because they don’t understand the order of “stand still” very well.  Sheep can die from heat exhaustion if they aren’t sheared.  Also, their skin secretes lanolin, which quickly soothes and heals any nicks they get during shearing.  in conclusion, it is good to peel the sheeps Please peel your sheeps They. Look. Like. Peeled. Potatoes Peel your sheep peeps! Remember when they found Shrek living in that cave and freed him he’s smiling in that last one HE HAS BEEN SAVED Anyone who has had a lot of hair then got a very close hair cut, that amazing feel of the breeze on your scalp? Imagine that for your whole body. Sheep LOOOOVE being sheared, especially in summer here in AUS. It saves them from MELTING!
Af, Animals, and Bad: thefingerfuckingfemalefury:
brookietf:

thefingerfuckingfemalefury:

drydrangea:

association-of-free-people:


cruzan-for-love:


wethepotterheads0214:


trashytoclassy:

bunnywith:

uleanblue:

hermionxjean:

maddeningmagic106:

doctorsiggy:

jitterbugjive:

whoweargoldintheirhair:

mememiya-anthy:
#freshly peeled sheeps
reblogging solely for that deeply unnerving caption

@theosartisticthematics

FRESHLY PEELED SHEEPS

Fuck this. Does everyone just not see the blood scrapes on some of their backs and faces???!!! Anyone, seriously, correct me if I’m wrong because this is making me upset af

Domesticated sheep need to be sheared because they don’t shed their coats on their own and it can be bad for their health if it gets too big.
Also, it looks considering how close they cut that it went fairly well. I see like 2 nicks maybe, but with the photo it’s hard to tell. I mean, unfortunately, you’re going to nick a few animals because they don’t understand the order of “stand still” very well. 

Sheep can die from heat exhaustion if they aren’t sheared. 
Also, their skin secretes lanolin, which quickly soothes and heals any nicks they get during shearing. 

in conclusion, it is good to peel the sheeps


Please peel your sheeps


They. Look. Like. Peeled. Potatoes


Peel your sheep peeps!


Remember when they found Shrek living in that cave and freed him


he’s smiling in that last one

HE HAS BEEN SAVED 

Anyone who has had a lot of hair then got a very close hair cut, that amazing feel of the breeze on your scalp? Imagine that for your whole body.
Sheep LOOOOVE being sheared, especially in summer here in AUS.

It saves them from MELTING!

thefingerfuckingfemalefury: brookietf: thefingerfuckingfemalefury: drydrangea: association-of-free-people: cruzan-for-love: wethepott...

Animals, Food, and Fucking: Banana - before and after Carrot-before and after Watermelon- before and after sprachtraeume: angryfishtrap: wordnerdworld: march27thoughts: cubern: thespectacularspider-girl: jiggly-jello-squid: art-angelsz: nunyabizni: trashcanbees: asapscience: Fruits and vegetables, before and after human intervention.  Source We did a pretty good fucking job, Jesus Christ Remember this the next time you want to complain about GMO’s, we may not have done it in a lab but they still are that. Bananas looked like lemons wtf Isn’t this more of a combination of selective breeding and GMOs? Not just GMOs? Yes.  But people talk about how GMO’s are “unnatural”, yet for centuries humanity has been exploiting mutations in animals and plants to produce food for themselves. GMO’s are simply the process of inducing these mutations reliably. People hear “Lettuce being modified with scorpion DNA” and think that we’re now eating scorpions.  But, in reality, they’re taking a tiny bit of scorpion DNA and splicing it into the plant.  Why?  So the plant will produce poison that is not harmful to humans but will deter insects, reducing the use of pesticide, which CAN be harmful to humans and the environment. GMOs are producing rice that can survive flooding, which makes rice more reliable yields and will prevent food shortages in poor nations that rely on said crops for staple food. GMOs are also creating spider-goat hybrids.  Why? So we can splice web production into the goat’s udders.  We’ll be able to spin huge quantities of spider silk, enough to reliably create spider silk cables and ropes, which have more tensile strength than steel. I for one am glad I live in a time where watermelons aren’t giant tomato abominations The issue with GMOs is that corporations like Monsanto are patenting GMOs and arresting indigenous farmers for cross pollinating with they seeds. But there is nothing dangerous about the science. ^This. The problem isn’t the science, it’s what capitalism does with that science. this should be in the largest letters we’ve got, plastered everywhere until it gets through people’s heads: The problem isn’t the science, it’s what capitalism does with that science. Did you just say spider goats? He said spider goats. Did you all read him talking about spider goats or am I hallucinating
Animals, Food, and Fucking: Banana - before and after
 Carrot-before and after
 Watermelon- before and after
sprachtraeume:

angryfishtrap:


wordnerdworld:

march27thoughts:

cubern:

thespectacularspider-girl:

jiggly-jello-squid:

art-angelsz:

nunyabizni:


trashcanbees:

asapscience:

Fruits and vegetables, before and after human intervention. 
Source


We did a pretty good fucking job, Jesus Christ

Remember this the next time you want to complain about GMO’s, we may not have done it in a lab but they still are that.


Bananas looked like lemons wtf


Isn’t this more of a combination of selective breeding and GMOs? Not just GMOs?

Yes.  But people talk about how GMO’s are “unnatural”, yet for centuries humanity has been exploiting mutations in animals and plants to produce food for themselves.
GMO’s are simply the process of inducing these mutations reliably.
People hear “Lettuce being modified with scorpion DNA” and think that we’re now eating scorpions.  But, in reality, they’re taking a tiny bit of scorpion DNA and splicing it into the plant.  Why?  So the plant will produce poison that is not harmful to humans but will deter insects, reducing the use of pesticide, which CAN be harmful to humans and the environment.
GMOs are producing rice that can survive flooding, which makes rice more reliable yields and will prevent food shortages in poor nations that rely on said crops for staple food.
GMOs are also creating spider-goat hybrids.  Why? So we can splice web production into the goat’s udders.  We’ll be able to spin huge quantities of spider silk, enough to reliably create spider silk cables and ropes, which have more tensile strength than steel.

I for one am glad I live in a time where watermelons aren’t giant tomato abominations


The issue with GMOs is that corporations like Monsanto are patenting GMOs and arresting indigenous farmers for cross pollinating with they seeds. But there is nothing dangerous about the science.

^This.
The problem isn’t the science, it’s what capitalism does with that science.

this should be in the largest letters we’ve got, plastered everywhere until it gets through people’s heads:
The problem isn’t the science, it’s what capitalism does with that science.


Did you just say spider goats? He said spider goats. Did you all read him talking about spider goats or am I hallucinating

sprachtraeume: angryfishtrap: wordnerdworld: march27thoughts: cubern: thespectacularspider-girl: jiggly-jello-squid: art-angelsz: n...

Amber Rose, Best Friend, and Bones: tumblr nly-johnny-dep # Believe!im 3. The op-ed's clear implication that Mr. Depp is a domestic abuser is categorically and demonstrably false. Mr. Depp never abused Ms. Heard. Her allegations against him were false when they were made in 2016. They were part of an elaborate hoax to generate positive publicity for Ms. Heard and advance her career. Ms. Heard's false allegations against Mr. Depp have benconclusivlrfed by two pndng polie offices, a litany of neutral third-party witnesses, and 87 newly obtained surveillance camera videos. With a prior arrest for violent domestic abuse and having confessed under oath to a series of violent attacks on Mr. Depp, Ms. Heard is not a victim of domestic abuse; she is a perpetrator. Ms. Heard violently abused Mr. Depp, just as she was caught and arrested for violently abusing her former domestic artner. In one particularly gruesome episode that occurred only one month into their marriage, Ms. Heard shattered the bones in the tip of Mr. Depp's right middle finger, almost completely cutting it off. Ms. Heard threw a glass vodka bottle at Mr. Depp-one of many projectiles that she launched at him in this and other instances. The bottle shattered as it came into contact with Mr. Depp's hand, and the broken glass and impact severed and shattered Mr. Depp's finger. Mr. Depp's finger had to be surgically reattached. Ms. Heard then disseminated false accounts of this incident, casting Mr. Depp as the perpetrator of his own injury odinoco: only-johnny-depp: “The thing that hurt me is being presented as something that you’re really as far away from as you could possibly get, you know?” – Johnny Depp for the British GQ, October/2018 I’m sorry for the long post, but I had to say something….On the last 24 hours, Johnny has been in the news again, but now showing more proofs that SHE, Amber, is the who committed acts of domestic violence towards him. For me (and I think ALL of his fans) was – and still is – disgusting to read all the things that Johnny suffered… It’s beyond shocking!    For the damage to his career, Johnny is suing Amber in $50 million for her “false allegations” against him: “an elaborate hoax to generate positive publicity” for her to “advance her career”, which made her a darling of the #MeToo movement, made her the first actress named a “Human Rights Champion of the United Nations Human Rights Office”, also was appointed “ambassador on women’s rights” at the American Civil Liberties Union, hired by L'Oreal Paris as its “global spokesperson and some people also believes that all of it opened the doors to her starring in “Aquaman”. While she was enjoying the attention, Johnny was, and still suffers consequences in his career, such as boycotts that some “haters” still makes. The whole new evidences are a rollercoaster of shocking things: The “eonline” revealed that he was dropped from his role on “Pirates of the Caribbean” days after she published her piece in the Washington Post in 2018.  The numbers of proofs against Amber, rose so much that from the at least 29 evidences, some months ago, now has at least 87 newly evidences. This numbers are just from surveillance camera videos. An employee of the building reviewed building surveillance videos three days after the alleged incident where Amber claimed that Johnny attacked her, and “testified under oath that she saw Whitney Heard pretend to punch her sister in the face. Then Ms. Heard, Ms. Pennington (Heard’s best friend), and Whitney Heard all laughed.” I think the biggest new lie that broke my heart was the “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales ” incident: If you can’t remember, back to 2015, everybody was caught up by surprise when Johnny had to head back to USA from Australia to make a surgery in his finger, caused (at that time) for “unknown reasons.” Some time before, Amber claiming that he “he was the perpetrator of his own injury” because he punched a wall and throw a glass during a quarrel. Now was revealed that SHE WAS THE ONE WHO F*CKING THREW A BOTTLE OF VODKA AT HIM!!! Due to the impact, the bottle shattered when he made contact with his hand, cutting his finger almost to the bone, which had to be surgically reattached, and delaying the filming of POTC in a month. At that time, she claimed that   Was revealed that Johnny has proofs that Amber was “spending some questionable time” with Tesla founder Elon Musk during their short marriage. While Johnny was working, he also claims Musk was given access to his home to spend the night with Heard on the same night she “presented her battered face to the public.”  Amber keep giving the excuse of “confidentiality restrictions”, due to a divorce agreement in August 2016 “which prevent her from assisting the defendants with evidence to support their case”, but, the British judge, Mr. Justice Nicklin, announced: “I am not satisfied on the current evidence that Ms. Heard’s concerns about the restrictions that the divorce agreement imposes on her are well-founded.” Mr Justice Nicklin said that Johnny had stated clearly in his evidence to the court that he expects Heard give evidence in the proceedings, and “he will not attempt to prevent that” and added “The fact that Ms Heard presently thinks that there is some impediment to her giving evidence for the defendants is nothing to do with Mr Depp. Even if she were right, there would appear to be a number of ways of resolving the issue that have not yet been explored adequately or at all.”Now tell me: How can Amber claims to be a victim if EVERYTHING goes against her and she didn’t even is defending herself? Her lawyer, Eric M. George, called Johnny’s lawsuit “frivolous” and accused him of being “hell-bent on achieving self-destruction,” and said: “This frivolous action is just the latest of Johnny Depp’s repeated efforts to silence Amber Heard. She will not be silenced.” But guess what! He didn’t even saw the papers! He only saw parts of the lawsuit release by media! (what a joke!) Until now she said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, but CONFESSED UNDER OATH to a series of violent attacks TOWARDS Johnny!!!Guys, I’m so sorry for a long post, but I’m still astonished after all of it. Again,  It’s not hard to understand what’s going on. It’s not hard to understand who is the abuser and the one trying to destroy a life. It’s not hard to choose the right side. Johnny only wants to stop all these false and defamatory publications and live his life. He just want to prove the truth, and has no fear of her “evidences”.Another proof we cannot forget of how Johnny is innocent, are his most recent movies. If Johnny had done what Amber says, do you believe that all the actors and directors who had work with Johnny since 2016, would still collaborate with him? Friendship is broken when a lie is told, so do you believe that his friends would still being his friends if it was true? That the Hollywood Vampires and his personal crew would still on his side? Don’t you ever thought how many times Johnny had to prove them that he is innocent, and how hard is he working to show the truth to the world? It’s sad that even after all of it, people still don’t believe him.If you read until here, I highly thank you, and I’d like you all to share your thoughts on your social media too. Show your support to Johnny!Please, for more information read these articles: E NEWS: Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Lawsuit Against Amber Heard BRITISH: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/johnny-depp-interview-2018 PRESS GAZETTE: Sun fails in bid to halt Johnny Depp libel action over ‘wife-beater’ claim BLAST: Johnny Depp Claims Amber Heard Started Improper ‘Relationship’ With Elon Musk 1-Month After Marriage BLAST: Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Amber Heard, Calls Her Abuse Claims an ‘Elaborate Hoax’ ET Canada:  Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Amber Heard, Actress’ Attorney Responds We Are Always With You Johnny! Oh look, the person who made a bunch of claims with little to no proof has been ousted as a liar What a FUCKING SHOCK, AIN’T THAT RIGHT?
Amber Rose, Best Friend, and Bones: tumblr
 nly-johnny-dep
 # Believe!im

 3. The op-ed's clear implication that Mr. Depp is a domestic abuser is categorically
 and demonstrably false. Mr. Depp never abused Ms. Heard. Her allegations against him were
 false when they were made in 2016. They were part of an elaborate hoax to generate positive
 publicity for Ms. Heard and advance her career. Ms. Heard's false allegations against Mr. Depp
 have benconclusivlrfed by two pndng polie offices, a litany of neutral
 third-party witnesses, and 87 newly obtained surveillance camera videos. With a prior arrest for
 violent domestic abuse and having confessed under oath to a series of violent attacks on Mr.
 Depp, Ms. Heard is not a victim of domestic abuse; she is a perpetrator. Ms. Heard violently
 abused Mr. Depp, just as she was caught and arrested for violently abusing her former domestic
 artner.

 In one particularly gruesome episode that occurred only one month into their
 marriage, Ms. Heard shattered the bones in the tip of Mr. Depp's right middle finger, almost
 completely cutting it off. Ms. Heard threw a glass vodka bottle at Mr. Depp-one of many
 projectiles that she launched at him in this and other instances. The bottle shattered as it came
 into contact with Mr. Depp's hand, and the broken glass and impact severed and shattered Mr.
 Depp's finger. Mr. Depp's finger had to be surgically reattached. Ms. Heard then disseminated
 false accounts of this incident, casting Mr. Depp as the perpetrator of his own injury
odinoco:

only-johnny-depp:

“The thing
that hurt me is being presented as something that you’re really as far away
from as you could possibly get, you know?” – Johnny Depp for the British GQ, October/2018
I’m sorry for the long post, but I had to say something….On the last 24 hours, Johnny has been in the news
again, but now showing more proofs that SHE, Amber, is the who committed acts
of domestic violence towards him. For me (and I think ALL of his fans) was –
and still is – disgusting to read all the things that Johnny suffered… It’s beyond
shocking!   
For the damage
to his career, Johnny is suing Amber in $50 million for her “false allegations”
against him: “an elaborate hoax to generate positive publicity” for her to
“advance her career”, which made her a darling of the #MeToo movement, made
her the first actress named a “Human Rights Champion of the United Nations
Human Rights Office”, also was appointed “ambassador on women’s rights” at the
American Civil Liberties Union, hired by L'Oreal Paris as its “global
spokesperson and some people also believes that all of it opened the doors to her starring in “Aquaman”. While she was enjoying the attention, Johnny was, and still suffers consequences
in his career, such as boycotts that some “haters” still makes. The whole new evidences are a rollercoaster of shocking things:

 

The “eonline”
revealed that he was dropped from his role on “Pirates of the Caribbean” days
after she published her piece in the Washington Post in 2018.  

The
numbers of proofs against Amber, rose so much that from the at least 29
evidences, some months ago, now has at least 87 newly evidences. This numbers are just from surveillance camera videos.  

An employee of the building reviewed building surveillance videos three days after
the alleged incident where Amber claimed that Johnny attacked her, and “testified under oath that she saw Whitney Heard pretend to punch her sister in
the face. Then Ms. Heard, Ms. Pennington (Heard’s best friend), and Whitney
Heard all laughed.” 

I think
the biggest new lie that broke my heart was the “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales

”
incident: If you can’t remember, back to 2015, everybody was caught up by surprise
when Johnny had to head back to USA from Australia to make a surgery in his
finger, caused (at that time) for “unknown reasons.” Some time before, Amber


claiming that he 

“he was the perpetrator of his own injury” because he punched a wall and throw a glass during a quarrel. Now was revealed that SHE WAS THE ONE WHO F*CKING THREW A BOTTLE OF VODKA AT
HIM!!! Due to the
impact, the bottle shattered when he made contact with his hand, cutting his
finger almost to the bone, which had to be surgically reattached, and delaying the filming of POTC in a month. At that time, she claimed that  


 

Was revealed that Johnny has proofs that Amber was “spending some questionable time” with Tesla
founder Elon Musk during their short marriage. While Johnny
was working, he also claims Musk was given access to his home to spend the night with Heard on the same night she “presented her battered face to the public.” 
 Amber keep
giving the excuse of “confidentiality restrictions”, due to a divorce agreement
in August 2016 “which prevent her from assisting the defendants with evidence
to support their case”, but, the British judge, Mr. Justice Nicklin, announced:
“I am not satisfied on the current evidence that Ms. Heard’s concerns about the
restrictions that the divorce agreement imposes on her are well-founded.” Mr Justice
Nicklin said that Johnny had stated
clearly in his evidence to the court that he expects Heard give evidence in the
proceedings, and “he will not attempt to prevent that” and added “The fact that
Ms Heard presently thinks that there is some impediment to her giving evidence
for the defendants is nothing to do with Mr Depp. Even if she were right, there
would appear to be a number of ways of resolving the issue that have not yet
been explored adequately or at all.”Now tell
me: How can Amber claims to be a victim if EVERYTHING goes against her and she
didn’t even is defending herself? Her lawyer, Eric M. George, called Johnny’s lawsuit
“frivolous” and accused him of being “hell-bent on achieving self-destruction,”
and said: “This frivolous action is just the latest of Johnny Depp’s repeated efforts
to silence Amber Heard. She will not be silenced.” But guess what! He didn’t
even saw the papers! He only saw parts of the lawsuit release by media! (what a
joke!) Until now she said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, but CONFESSED UNDER OATH to a
series of violent attacks TOWARDS Johnny!!!Guys, I’m so sorry for a long post, but I’m still astonished after all of it. Again, 

It’s not hard to understand what’s going on. It’s not hard to understand who is the abuser and the one trying to destroy a life. It’s not hard to choose the right side.


Johnny only wants to stop all these false and defamatory publications and live his life.
He just want to prove the truth, and has no
fear of her “evidences”.Another proof we cannot forget of how Johnny is innocent, are his most recent movies. If Johnny had done what Amber says, do you believe that all the actors and directors who had work with Johnny since 2016, would still collaborate with him? Friendship is broken when a lie is told, so do you believe that his friends would still being his friends if it was true? That the Hollywood Vampires and his personal crew would still on his side? Don’t you ever thought how many times Johnny had to prove them that he is innocent, and how hard is he working to show the truth to the world?
It’s sad that even after all of it,
people still don’t believe him.If you read until here, I highly thank you, and I’d like you all to share your thoughts on your social media too. Show your support to Johnny!Please, for more information read these articles: E NEWS: 

Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Lawsuit Against Amber Heard



 

BRITISH: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/johnny-depp-interview-2018

 

PRESS
GAZETTE: 

Sun fails in bid to halt Johnny Depp libel action over ‘wife-beater’ claim




 

BLAST: 

Johnny Depp Claims Amber Heard Started Improper ‘Relationship’ With Elon Musk 1-Month After Marriage




 

BLAST: 

Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Amber Heard, Calls Her Abuse Claims an ‘Elaborate Hoax’




 

ET Canada: 

Johnny Depp Files $50 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Amber Heard, Actress’ Attorney Responds

We Are Always With You Johnny!


Oh look, the person who made a bunch of claims with little to no proof has been ousted as a liar
What a FUCKING SHOCK, AIN’T THAT RIGHT?

odinoco: only-johnny-depp: “The thing that hurt me is being presented as something that you’re really as far away from as you could possib...

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: ...