😾  Grumpy Cat Memes

☺️  Cute Memes

πŸ’₯  Naruto Memes

πŸ’Ό  The Office Memes

🏈  Tom Brady Memes

⚠️  Edgy Memes

Deleting Memes

Out Of
Out Of
My Playlist
My Playlist
It Out
It Out
Everyone Thinks
Everyone Thinks
Thinks
Thinks
Fits
Fits
Have
Have
Official
Official
From
From
The
The 

    
                    

                

            
        
    

    
    
    






            

            
            

                

                    
                

                

                    
                    
                    

                        


	


    πŸ”₯ Popular | Latest






    

    
        
            
                

                    

                        
                        
                        
                    

                    
                    

                        
                            John Cusack blames 'a bot' after retweeting, deleting anti-Semitic meme
                        
                    

                    
                

            
        
    
    






    

    
    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            




    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        Ass, Lol, and Nudes: lweet
 A Boogie @BoogieBankss 22h
 I had a chick go behind my car and text
 her homegirl my plate number before
 she got in the car with me.
 58 163 415
 @saintcleopatra 17h
 Did you enjoy your date?
 O 1
 04
 A Boogie
 @BoogieBankss
 Replying to @saintcleopatra
 I left her ass there and went home lol
 Not taking no woman nowhere that's
 doin all that.
 7/17/17, 3:22 PM
 23 Retweets 25 Likes
itsgonnabeacoldwinter-soldier:

furbytheminx:

dandridgegirl:


adreamdeferred:


dynastylnoire:


blackgirloutrage2:

PAY ATTENTION! This is how you weed out the men who deserve your time and the ones that don’t. These dudes are literally telling you who they are, but y'all refuse to listen. Your safety comes first.

I’m in a FB group where dudes 30 and older were having full tantrums over this post. These are the same guys that admit:
Not deleting nudes post break up
Not believing when women that were sexually assaulted 
Not believing sex with a partner that is sleeping is rape
Etc. 
Please do not date people that take issue with your protecting yourself.


i deadass took a picture of my dates license and sent to my homegirls in the gc. and turned on my location. yea you cool but it’s always about me and my safety. 


Men who aren’t trash should already know this is commonplace. One of my last dates even offered to take a picture together for my safety text. 


Men who get mad when women try to protect themselves are just telling on themselves, nothing more. 


All you people out there talking about β€œspreading my private information” like you don’t drive around with your liscense plate out there for everyone and their mom to see all day every day. Sit down. Shut up. She didn’t ask for your social security number you absolute acorn. Your plates are public knowledge. 

        

            
            

                
                
                    Ass, Lol, and Nudes: lweet
 A Boogie @BoogieBankss 22h
 I had a chick go behind my car and text
 her homegirl my plate number before
 she got in the car with me.
 58 163 415
 @saintcleopatra 17h
 Did you enjoy your date?
 O 1
 04
 A Boogie
 @BoogieBankss
 Replying to @saintcleopatra
 I left her ass there and went home lol
 Not taking no woman nowhere that's
 doin all that.
 7/17/17, 3:22 PM
 23 Retweets 25 Likes
itsgonnabeacoldwinter-soldier:

furbytheminx:

dandridgegirl:


adreamdeferred:


dynastylnoire:


blackgirloutrage2:

PAY ATTENTION! This is how you weed out the men who deserve your time and the ones that don’t. These dudes are literally telling you who they are, but y'all refuse to listen. Your safety comes first.

I’m in a FB group where dudes 30 and older were having full tantrums over this post. These are the same guys that admit:
Not deleting nudes post break up
Not believing when women that were sexually assaulted 
Not believing sex with a partner that is sleeping is rape
Etc. 
Please do not date people that take issue with your protecting yourself.


i deadass took a picture of my dates license and sent to my homegirls in the gc. and turned on my location. yea you cool but it’s always about me and my safety. 


Men who aren’t trash should already know this is commonplace. One of my last dates even offered to take a picture together for my safety text. 


Men who get mad when women try to protect themselves are just telling on themselves, nothing more. 


All you people out there talking about β€œspreading my private information” like you don’t drive around with your liscense plate out there for everyone and their mom to see all day every day. Sit down. Shut up. She didn’t ask for your social security number you absolute acorn. Your plates are public knowledge. 

                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save

    



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            



        

    

    
    

        

            




    

        
        
        
        
        
        
        
    

    

        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, β€œhigh 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.





β€œ

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


β€œ






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 β€˜above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people β€œreproach” 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 saysΒ β€œmerits 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,Β β€œSo, 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,Β β€œOh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like,Β β€œBut 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 sayingΒ β€œbut 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.Β β€œSure 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, β€œhigh 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.





β€œ

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


β€œ






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 β€˜above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people β€œreproach” 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 saysΒ β€œmerits 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,Β β€œSo, 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,Β β€œOh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like,Β β€œBut 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 sayingΒ β€œbut 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.Β β€œSure 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
                    
                
            

            
            
        

    

    

        
Save