mentioned. Everything has become so normalized that anything less than the pee tape itself is just the status quo.

Edit: Some of you don't seem to understand how Twitter works, or just aren't reading the post, but blocking someone on Twitter makes it so the person you block cannot SEE your posts. Making it harder for a blocked citizen to gain access to the representatives public statements.

Tweets have become all but official press releases/public statements at this point. So does choosing who gets to view those statements constitute a violation of a person's right to express themselves? When a politician blocks somebody it is usually a response to that somebody offering a dissenting opinion, a view contrary to their own. So as the politician in question grows and grows their block list it effectively becomes a selection of who can and can't view information pertinent to the United States Government based on views, beliefs, and ideologies. Choosing who can and can't receive public information from their government, excluding those people from aspects of the government. I suppose state officials, congresspeople and senators would be able to get away with it by claiming they only want direct channels to their constituents, but I doubt federal appointees and office-holders would be able to do the same.

This is a very counter-clockwise view of the first amendment I know, many people would not immediately pick up on it, but I think it may apply nonetheless. Unless somebody can provide some kind of Supreme Court precedent that would refute my opinion (I'm sure people more scholarly will know one off the top of their heads and I'll have egg on my face).
Trump violated presidential record keeping laws by deleting Tweets, so the convergence between Twitter and federal law isn't so outlandish.

that forebodes the kind of generation we are to become. But no, fortunately humans have always been fucking idiots. Found this article about 19th-20th century dumbasses taking meme pics.



The irony is that the lens of history generally looks upon these people favorably as fearless rogues. Meanwhile I seldom imagine that many grandparents will earn the respect of their grandchildren after showing them a photo like this:

Snl's on fire tonight

because now they can appoint one even further right.

1. How do you get further right than Gorsuch?
2. What would've stopped them from doing that anyways? The filibuster? Why should it? They would've nuked it then too.

It only took a couple days after the speech. If he were smart he'd break his thumbs in advance.

-Trump is in trouble at home
-He is unable to shift policy in Syria to align with Russian interests without a catalyst
-Putin/Assad/Trump decide to put on a play
-Assad will use chemical weapons (that he doesn't need anymore thanks to Russian arms flowing in)
-Trump will launch missiles at buildings housing said chemical weapons
-Assad uses the U.S. as a demolition crew for illegal weapons that would only serve to hurt his regime internationally
-Assad apologizes: "sorry, I won't do it again. You're so amazing Trump wow"
-Trump is like "darn tootin, look at that folks. Now let's help you clean up ISIS without the use of those nasty gases"
-America's position is now pro-Assad
-Putin has distanced Trump from Russia, while also making him act in a way that benefits Russia

Keep your eyes peeled

Don't you think he'd be in a prison jumpsuit before lunch? I think it'd be funny if he got such a reality check.