Elect a shit circus, get a shit show

There is SO. MUCH. TO. UNPACK. HERE.

Where to start?

1. What's the fucking point of this whole rage tweet?
2. There is no hyphen used or implied anywhere in this entire alphabet soup.
3. What the hell is "Liddle" supposed to mean?
4. Is it supposed to be some kind of colloquial abbreviation for "little"?
5. Are you trying to make "Little" happen as your attempt to create yet another puerile, wannabe-demeaning nickname for someone whose superior intelligence you resent?
6. Note to trump and trump supporters: "Colloquial" means "not formal or literary."
7. Note to trump and trump supporters: "Puerile" means "childish or trivial."
8. See: trump
9. See also: trump supporters
10. The standard abbreviation for "little" is "li'l."
11. With an APOSTROPHE.
12. NOT A HYPHEN.
13. HOW DO YOU EVEN REMEMBER THE PROCEDURE FOR WIPING YOUR OWN ASS EVERY DAY?
14. People who graduated reasonably sober from third grade know that you put an apostrophe where letters have been removed in an abbreviation.
15. NOT A HYPHEN.
16. Don't get me started on why "little" isn't abbreviated as "li'l'."
17. "Liddle" is just substituting d's for t's and doesn't require an apostrophe.
18. And it's actually almost beneath your limited intellectual capacities.
19. Which have no bottom.
20. So never mind.
21. Instead of those non-essential apostrophes, however, "Liddle" does require a marriage to a cousin.
22. And griddled possum at the wedding reception.
23. Or maybe grittled.
24. WHY IS THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO YOU TO RAGE TWEET ABOUT AT 4:02 AM WHEN YOU'RE LITERALLY BEING IMPEACHED FOR TREASON?
25. DO YOU EVEN FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING TO YOU?
26. DO YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU DID?
27. DO YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION?
28. Clearly not.
29. You don't even understand rudimentary punctuation.
30. Note to trump and trump supporters: "Rudimentary" means "limited to basic principles" or "an immature, undeveloped form."
31. And I'm sure the irony is completely lost on you.
32. Because it's not even hyphenated.

Good night!

It’s official!

Achomlishments

Alexa, LOUDER!

To impeach or not

Read the article HERE.

I took advantage of my suddenly commitment-free evening to clear out some articles I’d saved to read for a wintry day. This one is epic in scope—block out A LOT of time to read and fully absorb what it says—but it’s a fascinating primer/refresher on the contextual and procedural mechanics of impeachment and how they’ve played out historically to act as potential case law today.

I didn’t realize the Constitution’s complete listing of impeachable offenses is just “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes & Misdemeanors”—which, as you might imagine, leaves itself open for a frustratingly vast ocean of interpretation. I’m also embarrassed to admit I didn’t realize that impeachment is just the indictment half (coming from the House) of the proceedings, which continue with a hearing in the Senate and culminate in removal from office if there’s a guilty verdict. (Also: Of the country’s three impeachment attempts to date—Andrew Johnson, Nixon and Clinton—none resulted in formal removal from office; Nixon resigned before the House vote and Johnson and Clinton weren’t found guilty by the Senate.)

According to this article, trump is beyond the point of needing to be removed from office but so far may not have done enough that can measurably be considered “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes & Misdemeanors”—at least not enough worth formally opening up the Pandora’s box of impeachment hearings. I don’t know anything about the author so I can’t account/discount for political bias, but I feel immensely more informed on the foundational elements of impeachment from reading it.

As an additional primer/refresher, the article’s contextual sidebars on the Andrew Johnson impeachment after the Civil War—along with a bit of Wikipedia reading on my own—gave me a more nuanced (and more chronological) understanding of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, Plessy v. Ferguson, and the “separate but equal” doctrines that extended to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

This is a fascinating—albeit long—read, and I encourage you to block out some time to really digest it if you’re at all curious/unclear about the prospect of facing our country’s fourth attempt at impeachment.

Don’t forget to turn your clocks forward tonight to get us all one hour closer to the impeachment and incarcerations

And Newt knows a thing or two about obstruction

Dude.

You're so desperate for any shred of proof that you're not a catastrophic implosive failure that you not only watch accredited political analyst Geraldo Rivera handicapping the inevitability of your impeachment on a fake news channel -- not even pausing long enough to comprehend the subtext that EVERYONE IS TALKING ABOUT YOUR IMPEACHMENT -- but you immediately retweet the story as some sort of de facto A-List celebrity endorsement of your honor and integrity and innocence without comment, context or insight, as though that's all you need to do to end the discussion once and for all.

Do you ENJOY being made fun of by a big ol' gay guy every day on Facebook, Twitter and his blog? Because I can keep this up longer than you can.

Delight savings time

Remember to turn your clocks ahead tonight to hasten Trump's impeachment by one hour.