Going
Going

Going

Takes
Takes

Takes

Thats
Thats

Thats

Puffer
Puffer

Puffer

Ÿ˜˜
Ÿ˜˜

Ÿ˜˜

Ã…¤
Ã…¤

Ã…¤

Take
Take

Take

Your
Your

Your

The
The

The

Bitching
Bitching

Bitching

🔥 | Latest

Gif, Girls, and Tumblr: Pee Pee vampycandy: daedricpince: sapphomets: kidzbopdeathgrips: anyone wanna go for a hike Me and the girls taking the trek from poo poo point to pee pee creek
Gif, Girls, and Tumblr: Pee Pee
vampycandy:

daedricpince:

sapphomets:

kidzbopdeathgrips:

anyone wanna go for a hike


Me and the girls taking the trek from poo poo point to pee pee creek

vampycandy: daedricpince: sapphomets: kidzbopdeathgrips: anyone wanna go for a hike Me and the girls taking the trek from poo poo poin...

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...

Advice, Af, and Beautiful: About an hour ago, I was in Walmart looking for my conditioner because today is wash day for my hair. As I'm looking for my product, this older white lady approaches me and she says, "Excuse me, miss. Please don't be offended by this." And usually when white people tell me not to be offended, 9 times out of 10, whatever they are about to say is going to be offensive af Anyway, she follows it up with, "My husband and I just recently won our custody battle with our foster daughter and she means the world to us. She's a beautiful African American girl and her hair looks a lot like yours. But I'm afraid because I don't know what to do with her hair It's a lot different from mines and our other children and we are at a total loss. l've tried looking up the YouTube videos and my husband went to the braiding shops so they can teach him how to properly braid her hair, but he's still pretty new and it will be a while before he gets used to it. Do you have any tips you can give me? If you don't have the time, it's okay, really! I just needed a little advice because I want her to look beautiful." Y'all. swear I almost started crying on aisle 6. So for the last 30 minutes, I spent my time talking to her and what products to use and how to properly detangle and comb her hair with the proper tools and what not to do with natural hair. And I showed her a bunch of easier to fol- low natural hair tutorials on YouTube and saved them for her. (I also had to create a YouTube account for her so she could save it for later.) but omfg, she was so sweet, and I could tell that she listened to every single thing I had to say and she took little notes on her little notepad. And what really filled my heart was the fact that her husband actually taking classes from African braiding shops. And she showed me a picture of him wearing a little sweater vest and loafers in a little shop surrounded by beautiful black women showing him how to braid black hair and even the lady he's braiding on is guiding his hands. And omfg. Bless these old white people and their black daughter who l know have new loving parents because they are willing to step out of their comfort zone just to make her feel and look beautiful. This is a little long but TOTALLY worth the read!
Advice, Af, and Beautiful: About an hour ago, I was in Walmart looking
 for my conditioner because today is wash day
 for my hair. As I'm looking for my product, this
 older white lady approaches me and she says,
 "Excuse me, miss. Please don't be offended by
 this." And usually when white people tell me not
 to be offended, 9 times out of 10, whatever they
 are about to say is going to be offensive af
 Anyway, she follows it up with, "My husband
 and I just recently won our custody battle with
 our foster daughter and she means the world
 to us. She's a beautiful African American girl
 and her hair looks a lot like yours. But I'm afraid
 because I don't know what to do with her hair
 It's a lot different from mines and our other
 children and we are at a total loss. l've tried
 looking up the YouTube videos and my husband
 went to the braiding shops so they can teach
 him how to properly braid her hair, but he's still
 pretty new and it will be a while before he gets
 used to it. Do you have any tips you can give
 me? If you don't have the time, it's okay, really! I
 just needed a little advice because I want her to
 look beautiful."
 Y'all. swear I almost started crying on aisle 6. So
 for the last 30 minutes, I spent my time talking
 to her and what products to use and how to
 properly detangle and comb her hair with the
 proper tools and what not to do with natural
 hair. And I showed her a bunch of easier to fol-
 low natural hair tutorials on YouTube and saved
 them for her. (I also had to create a YouTube
 account for her so she could save it for later.)
 but omfg, she was so sweet, and I could tell that
 she listened to every single thing I had to say
 and she took little notes on her little notepad.
 And what really filled my heart was the fact
 that her husband actually taking classes from
 African braiding shops. And she showed me a
 picture of him wearing a little sweater vest and
 loafers in a little shop surrounded by beautiful
 black women showing him how to braid black
 hair and even the lady he's braiding on is
 guiding his hands. And omfg. Bless these old
 white people and their black daughter who l
 know have new loving parents because they are
 willing to step out of their comfort zone just to
 make her feel and look beautiful.
This is a little long but TOTALLY worth the read!

This is a little long but TOTALLY worth the read!

Ash, Bruh, and Community: safetytank: steppsful: songofsunset: xdominoe: purplebloodedmajesty: walkinchicken: kotaku: The End, by Alister Lockhart. Bruh, if you don’t think that having historically significant events well documented from multiple perspectives is a good thing, then idk what the hell u doin. Besides, like, that is literally a Giant Monster Rampaging Through The Town. What the fuck is the everyday person gonna do other than Tweet/Instagram/Post about it going “It’s the apocalypse you guys! Eyyyy lmao #apocalypse #deathrising #nofilter”? #like come on your cellphone may not defeat the beast#but it can gain you like 50000 followers before the skies start raining blood so#who’s the REAL winner here? (via @purplebloodedmajesty) And heck, even if your own death is inevitable getting information out could help save other people, even if it can’t save you. ‘Here are 20 livestreams of the giant tentacle monster including how it moves and attacks, how can we beat it?’ is way more useful than ‘an entire city got wiped off the map and things smell vaguely of calimari idk man’ reblogging for this perfection: ‘an entire city got wiped off the map and things smell vaguely of calimari idk man’  Point #1 on this here article talks about Robert Landsburg, a photographer who realized he wouldn’t survive the eruption of Mt St. Helens (too close to outrun the ash cloud) and used his own body to shield preserve the photos and recordings he’d been taking during the explosion these surviving photographs are still CRAZY VALUABLE to this day for the rest of the volcanologist community, since actual recordings of an in-process eruption are so dang rare on-site documentation of any major disaster is gonna be VITALLY IMPORTANT to the people who are tryna figure out how to prevent that shit tl;dr have your phone out, make your death-by-kaiju worthwhile to the scientific community
Ash, Bruh, and Community: safetytank:
steppsful:

songofsunset:

xdominoe:

purplebloodedmajesty:

walkinchicken:

kotaku:

The End, by Alister Lockhart.

Bruh, if you don’t think that having historically significant events well documented from multiple perspectives is a good thing, then idk what the hell u doin.

Besides, like, that is literally a Giant Monster Rampaging Through The Town. What the fuck is the everyday person gonna do other than Tweet/Instagram/Post about it going “It’s the apocalypse you guys! Eyyyy lmao #apocalypse #deathrising #nofilter”?

#like come on your cellphone may not defeat the beast#but it can gain you like 50000 followers before the skies start raining blood so#who’s the REAL winner here? (via @purplebloodedmajesty)

And heck, even if your own death is inevitable getting information out could help save other people, even if it can’t save you. ‘Here are 20 livestreams of the giant tentacle monster including how it moves and attacks, how can we beat it?’ is way more useful than ‘an entire city got wiped off the map and things smell vaguely of calimari idk man’

reblogging for this perfection: ‘an entire city got wiped off the map and things smell vaguely of calimari idk man’ 

Point #1 on this here article talks about Robert Landsburg, a photographer who realized he wouldn’t survive the eruption of Mt St. Helens (too close to outrun the ash cloud) and used his own body to shield  preserve the photos and recordings he’d been taking during the explosion
these surviving photographs are still CRAZY VALUABLE to this day for the rest of the volcanologist community, since actual recordings of an in-process eruption are so dang rare
on-site documentation of any major disaster is gonna be VITALLY IMPORTANT to the people who are tryna figure out how to prevent that shit
tl;dr have your phone out, make your death-by-kaiju worthwhile to the scientific community

safetytank: steppsful: songofsunset: xdominoe: purplebloodedmajesty: walkinchicken: kotaku: The End, by Alister Lockhart. Bruh, if yo...

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...

Advil, Food, and News: When should I take: acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen? While both acetaminophen and ibuprofen provide relief these popular pain medications treat different ailments. Find out which remedy is best for you and how to take it correctly IBUPROFEN (Advil or Motrin) ACETAMINOPHEN (Tylenol) Pain Relief Best for Best for Muscle aches and joint pain Headaches Inflammation and swelling Lowering fever Menstrual pain Possible Side Effects . Upset stomach . Skin rash and blisters Heartburn . Stomach pain Warning: Stop taking immediately if a rash occurs. Tip: Take with food to help prevent upset stomach and ulcers. Toxicity . Increased risk of . Potential liver damage heart attack or stroke e Potential kidney damage Caution Be cautious of taking cold medications if you've already taken pain medicine. Many cold medications also contain acetaminophen, which may appear abbreviated as "APAP or "Acetam." Other over-the-counter products like naproxen (Aleve) are in the same class as ibuprofen and should not be taken WARNING Do NOT take Do NOT take: If you drink more than 3 alcoholic drinks per day If you have stomach ulcers or are taking blood pressure medication From the expert Both acetaminophen and ibuprofen are helpful for pain relief and reducing fever. However, ibuprofen also helps reduce sweling, while acetaminophen is generally safer and rarely has side effects. Remember that although both medications are available over-the- counter, each still carries risks Only take on an a basis and be careful not to exceed the recommended daily maximum dosage - Marwah Desoky, lead pharmacist at Sharp Coronado www.sharp.com/news 2016 Sharp HealthCare. All rights reserved SHARP medicalbasics: pain relief #nursingschool #nurse #rn #nursing #nurses #nursingstudent #resources #study #inspiration #school #tips - http://bit.ly/2ByDqHG According to my pharmacist mother some studies have shown that taking ibuprofen or another NSAID such as Aleve and then taking Tylenol a few hours later has the same pain killing power of narcotics without the addictive factor. That’s the combo I use when my cramps are really acting up.
Advil, Food, and News: When should I take:
 acetaminophen
 vs.
 ibuprofen?
 While both acetaminophen and ibuprofen provide relief
 these popular pain medications treat different ailments. Find
 out which remedy is best for you and how to take it correctly
 IBUPROFEN
 (Advil or Motrin)
 ACETAMINOPHEN
 (Tylenol)
 Pain Relief
 Best for
 Best for
 Muscle aches
 and joint pain
 Headaches
 Inflammation
 and swelling
 Lowering fever
 Menstrual pain
 Possible Side Effects
 . Upset stomach
 . Skin rash and blisters
 Heartburn
 . Stomach pain
 Warning: Stop
 taking immediately
 if a rash occurs.
 Tip: Take with food
 to help prevent upset
 stomach and ulcers.
 Toxicity
 . Increased risk of
 . Potential liver damage
 heart attack or stroke
 e Potential kidney damage
 Caution
 Be cautious of taking cold
 medications if you've already
 taken pain medicine. Many
 cold medications also contain
 acetaminophen, which may
 appear abbreviated as "APAP
 or "Acetam."
 Other over-the-counter
 products like naproxen
 (Aleve) are in the same
 class as ibuprofen and
 should not be taken
 WARNING
 Do NOT take
 Do NOT take:
 If you drink more than 3
 alcoholic drinks per day
 If you have stomach
 ulcers or are taking
 blood pressure medication
 From the expert
 Both acetaminophen and ibuprofen are helpful
 for pain relief and reducing fever. However, ibuprofen
 also helps reduce sweling, while acetaminophen is
 generally safer and rarely has side effects. Remember
 that although both medications are available over-the-
 counter, each still carries risks Only take on an a
 basis and be careful not to exceed the recommended
 daily maximum dosage
 - Marwah Desoky, lead pharmacist at Sharp Coronado
 www.sharp.com/news
 2016 Sharp HealthCare. All rights reserved
 SHARP
medicalbasics:

pain relief #nursingschool #nurse #rn #nursing #nurses #nursingstudent #resources #study #inspiration #school #tips - http://bit.ly/2ByDqHG

According to my pharmacist mother some studies have shown that taking ibuprofen or another NSAID such as Aleve and then taking Tylenol a few hours later has the same pain killing power of narcotics without the addictive factor. That’s the combo I use when my cramps are really acting up.

medicalbasics: pain relief #nursingschool #nurse #rn #nursing #nurses #nursingstudent #resources #study #inspiration #school #tips - http:/...

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: ...