Nope.

Alt-alt

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@RichardGrenell The lies he told in the early 1980s brought violence to our home. Having a family member with HIV was difficult enough w/o the little gremlin stirring up fear. Scared ppl do horrific things when "science" misleads them.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@dobbyloca @Kronykal wtf does Trump have to do with any of this? Not even apples to oranges here.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@SpaceCowboyX @mattvanswol If you were paying attention in the 1980s, this quack had zero reputation to stand on!

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@MarkRuffalo Vapid little pupet.

[Art @ZarkFiles]

The Shiloh Hendrix/Sharmake Omar confrontation:

Watch the video again with this in mind: every time Shiloh Hendrix tried to walk away, Sharmake Omar closed back in and escalated his demand. He didn't stop until she gave him the words he wanted, on camera, for his benefit.

Think about what her actual options were. She's holding an infant. She can't fight without setting him down and leaving him exposed. She can't run at any real speed while carrying him. That leaves compliance or retreat — and every time she chose retreat, he closed the distance again. A man who keeps pressing into that specific vulnerability isn't a neutral bystander asking a question. Whatever his intent, he was continuing to narrow a mother's options down to "give him what he wants."

She's since been convicted for the words he extracted from her that way. He's never been investigated for extracting them.

This is a free speech case, yes. It's also, as I see it, a case of coercion that nobody in the coverage has bothered to name.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@fattony310 @RobProvince Yep. Evil little elf killed so many ppl.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@RobProvince Being gaslight by management/administration was wild. So, y'all just want us to ignore every damn text book & CE for the last century? Sweet.

[Sama Hoole @SamaHoole]

Jeremy Clarkson made £144 farming a thousand acres in his first year.

In year six he lost five thousand.

His own words to his land agent: dispiriting enough to clear a hundred and forty-four quid at the start, and here we are six years on, down five grand. The harvest had been projected at thirty-seven thousand profit. Weather and prices took it.

Now look at what that thousand acres has behind it that yours does not.

One of the best land agents in the country. A farm manager who has worked that ground since he was a teenager. A farm shop with a queue down the lane, a pub, bestselling books, more than a quarter of a million in subsidy across three years, and a television production paying for the entire thing to be filmed.

It is the most commercially advantaged thousand acres in Britain, and the farming still loses money.

That figure should end every conversation about British agriculture, and it is the one number that never makes it onto a campaign graphic. Not the glyphosate. Not the pig housing. The margin.

Because everything people object to on a farm grows straight out of it. The field pushed to the very edge. The hedge that came out because the government paid to have it removed. The shed instead of the yard. The supermarket contract signed below cost because the alternative was no contract. Nobody intensified out of malice. They were priced into it over sixty years by a policy that decided cheap groceries mattered more than a countryside, and by a retail sector that kept the difference.

Britain now grows around sixty per cent of its own food. More than a third of British farmers are past sixty-five.

The man with the Amazon cheque cannot make a thousand acres pay.

The seventy-year-old with three hundred and no film crew is doing it anyway, and being told by people who have never sold a tonne of anything that he is the problem.

[Kim "Katie" USA @KimKatieUSA]

Never mind her insane guitar skills and amazing singing, why can this girl from Phuket, Thailand speak better English than millions of illegal aliens? What a talent.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@SlickmediaX Typical behavior for Sacramento cops.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@ChefReactions I can hear my Nona swearing from the great beyond. The horror.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@BudLightSadness Why you tryin' ta seduce me?

Now I need to go make a sammich.

[David M Friedman @DavidM_Friedman]

Apart from the question of whether @RoKhanna is lying (he is), his performative visit to Judea and Samaria broke the rules and undermined our Constitution.

I was US Ambassador to Israel for 4 years. During that time, the US Embassy facilitated the visits of hundreds of members of Congress. IN EVERY SINGLE CASE, the visit, including the itinerary, was coordinated with the Embassy, and usually with the State Department in DC as well.

This is not just a security driven protocol, although that is an important factor. It also is a reflection of the Constitutional mandate that the foreign policy of the United States is directed by the President through the Department of State.

When a US representative visits a foreign country, the Constitution says that the Executive Branch has the paramount interest in how that visit is achieved. That doesn’t mean that the representative can’t do his own fact finding or draw his own conclusions. But when the representative goes off undermining US foreign policy on foreign soil, that’s foul play.

@RoKhanna went rogue. He couldn’t have cared less about how his theatrics reflected upon our nation. He wanted his sound bites and his video clip, no matter how misleading, and he wasn’t going to let our Constitution get in the way.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@purplemamabear @Dem_Leaks @weimanadav And yet it means exactly shit. As it should.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@tylermorgan55 @G_CURLEY LOL! You fucking retard. Get back to mopping my floors.

[Lyndsey Fifield @lyndseyfifield]

I actually understand why Democrat leaders didn't take our stories seriously when the Times reported them in June but are taking them seriously now.

It was by design.

The line most shared from the piece was the claim that the Times “could not corroborate” my story despite talking to two of my friends.

I gave them the contact information for five friends.

They called the two who I clarified would not know about the abuse but would be able to affirm our relationship timeline, events, etc.

They simply did not call the other three.

I also gave them the names of all my former roommates who remembered him stalking our row house (which was about 5 houses down from his) and waiting for me to return. I gave them screenshots of messages between these roommates and I discussing it.

I gave them the names of other men I dated who might have remembered him following us around the hill and showing up on my stoop after we walked home from dates to confront us. I gave them emails to my landlord urgently ending my lease and moving to an apartment across town and diary entries talking about it - all time marked.

I told them that during pre-marital counseling I had spoken to my ex-fiance about the abuse because I had to explain to him why I reacted with such terror any time he lost his temper. They said oh NO we don't need to bother HIM (or my priest). Besides, I had written about it in my diary in detail, they reassured.

As the weeks dragged on I stopped trying to give them evidence because the amount I had already given them seemed to overwhelm them and I thought it meant they clearly had more than enough to verify my every claim.

My friends might not have known the details of the abuse, but they affirmed that yes, I had told them that he was abusive—long before he ran for Senate.

Besides, they assured, my part in their reporting would be small. I thought my details would only serve to affirm Jenny and the other anonymous woman.

Jenny and I - having never met or spoken - both shared with these reporters terrifyingly similar details of intimate partner violence, coercive control, and cycles of abuse/love bombing. The third unnamed woman in the story did as well.

But tell me again how they “could not corroborate.”

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@SkylarSkye3 Lol, not even in your wildest dreams babe.

[Nope. @SlightlySangria]

@TrueFactsStated Why is my lesbian aunt on the internet crying?

[Jim Hanson @JimHansonDC]

All former FIFA-certified referees raise your hands.
🙋
That's right I used to both play & ref soccer. Now I mostly just mock it. Until they mess w/ Team USA.

This picture of the collision between Balogun & the B&H player looks awful, but it's complete garbage.
Wrong angle to see what really happened.

Balogun was closer to the ball and the B&H player came from his right AND behind initiating the contact. He caused his own suffering.

The ref got it right initially as a no call. They were both playing the ball. Even in a sport known for pitifully lame flopping sometimes two dudes just crash into each other and do some actual damage. Doesn't mean there was a foul.

The replay guy then saw an opportunity to take the Americans down a notch and the ref bought in and made an egregious red card ejection.

If any call was made it should have been against the B&H player who came from behind and out of the sight line of Balogun.

The outrage now is "How dare the Americans get this absurd attempt to weaken them overturned".

Taking a player out of a once in a lifetime game and tournament should be an exceedingly high bar. This was not.

The people pretending to care about the rules are really mad the Americans aren't getting screwed over. It's a common sentiment and all around the world hating Americans for being the Biggest, Baddest and Best is as much a national sport as Soccer Ball.

I've lived overseas for six years and traveled to several dozen countries. Furriners love to hate on us. I'm not saying it's all underserved, I'm just saying it's not new and it's everywhere.

I can't blame them, we're barely 250 years old and we have accomplished more than any country in history. We have invented more amazing things, freed more people from tyranny and lifted more people from poverty and that stings, especially for the Euros who think they own our history.

They do, the part that we left and left behind. The part we are making now they can only watch and be chafed about. Because they can't even come close.

So they were salivating at knocking a US star out of play on a BS call. Sorry Jacques Belgique, you're going to have to take on a full US squad. Good luck, I hope we make you cry some more in the game tonight.

[Ellen Carmichael @ellencarmichael]

The most interesting part of the red card saga isn't the ruling. It's how differently Americans and Europeans process the idea that they might have been wronged.

Europeans are fundamentally different from Americans in one particular way: they expect life to be aggravating and at times unfair. It's just a fact of moving through the world. I joke that in Europe, the customer is always wrong. You didn't read the fine print. The only pharmacy in town is closed every other Tuesday for three hours, and even if the times weren't posted, that's still your problem. Too bad if you want the bill, because the waiter's on his union-mandated half-hour smoke break, and you're just going to have to wait.

To quote the great Mark Knopfler: sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug. There's something freeing in that. Things are less in your control, so there's less angst in managing your expectations.

In America, things couldn't be more different. We simply can't accept a wrong left unrighted.

The flight attendant sneezed handing you a drink on your one-hour flight? 15,000 frequent flyer miles. Didn't like your appetizer? A replacement is on the way, and the whole course comes off the bill. There's a reason our interstates are lined with trial lawyer billboards.

Europeans have turned complaining into a continental pastime with no expectation that the universe owes them a remedy for their grief. You gripe about the train being late, your friends nod solemnly and everyone goes back to their apéro. In America, we launch a full-blown investigation of the train system, sue the government (and its contractors) that allowed for the tardiness and hold a Congressional hearing on the state of national infrastructure.

So to an objective observer, the red card shouldn't have happened, and VAR was a travesty. To Americans, our star player shouldn't be unfairly banned from a match we couldn't afford to lose for a card he so obviously didn't deserve.

Who cares that FIFA used a little-used reversal to fix it. Who cares that other people are mad about it. We. Were. Wronged. It was unjust. It must be corrected. We would accept nothing less.

Europeans waxing poetic about the sanctity of the game are, of course, talking about a governing body whose last tournament host was decided via confirmed cash bribes — one that imposed dress codes on women, shrugged off widespread allegations of modern slavery and reconfigured the entire tournament calendar to suit the host country. Which is exactly the point. If you've made peace with all of that, at least enough to watch the tournament four years later, a probationary suspension isn't actually a scandal.

Maybe that's the real divide. Over millennia, Europeans have made peace with being the bug. Americans have never once considered it, and apparently, we're not about to start now.