Well i watched an interview with dennis rodman on CNN this morning … He thinks both Kim and Trump are nice guys.
Can this story obtain?
Two peas in a pod – giving nefarious Ego publicity to each other . #puke Obtain as an intransitive verb is still strange to me. I usually stop when I see it & throw the whole sentence away, but, enjoy!
do you also throw away the word “be” …
as in “What if this could could actually be?” …
or as in “What is?”.
anyway this is just a language convention … the actual proposition is quite objective …
(happenings exist) --- such that obtains → Story
In this case the story is the one Dennis Rodman is telling. It would go something like “Trump and Kim get together and bond and then Kim stops developing nukes and throwing missels into the sea”.
… lending credence to a murdering dictator – whatever – #IDC no need to believe the stories – Otto Warmbier was enough evidence.
okay, that is just you. but that story could obtain for some. and if it obtained for Trump and Kim, that would be enough for it to go viral such that it would obtain for more and more people. in your story you are stuck at “how evil Kim is” … in your story eventually we go to war.
You supplied “we go to war” – that’s your story; your #AlreadyAlwaysArguing flexing to obtain. I suggested using the UN human rights council in the body of this item.
Well every story i have heard involves this war … i did not just put that “war” into this context.
But okay, can you tell a creditable story where the human rights commission convinces Kim to stop his noxious behavior? Me, i can not make up such a story and believe it. A more credible story is the one that Trump is telling, that “China convinces Kim to stop believeing if they do not, America will bomb the fuck out of China’s neighbor and create even more problems for China’s economy”.
That’s your story (full of #birdies) about Trump? Did he tweet that? What’s your reference some CNN fake news?
yep, those are the stories i have heard … Trump’s, yes, he tweeted it … and Rodman’s as reported by CNN and several others. Beyond those obvious facts, what are you really asking *me* ? … er, if you are actually inquiring of me.
Which brings to mind the tapes tweets. If you read English (& most people don’t) his tweets do not say what the fake news purveyors like CNN say they mean. I read them literally & they are what they are!
9:55 AM - 22 Jun 2017
33,273 replies12,389 retweets49,742 likes
show the tweet! not CNN’s xor any by Rodman
yep he finally did need to “come clean” and admit that his initial tweet was a bluff. you need to quote that tweet to tell the entire story.
Where is it? quote it from twitter not some interpretation from CNN.
”come clean” is your #aug & slant. The original tweet on tapes language was suggesting that Comey had better tell the truth there might be tapes.
shucks i will go get it when i get a … it is perhaps the most famous tweet of all … it has been analized and interperted by so many on all the channels for the last couple of weeks that it is surpsinging that it is not already part of the story that you are telling.
Yep, I read ENGLISH! Don’t need much more.
well no doubt about you reading English … most of the stories that are told today are told in English.
Trump tweets are like that grammar school exercise of passing a sentence around the room of 30 children & see in what shape it comes back – with the additional biases of the M$M mixed in the middle for perfume & flavoring.
yep that is what we do …. we interpret others peopl’s stories … just as we tell our own. that is a broad generalization of what is happening. it is high time we accept that truth … and move on to what kind of world works best in that predicament.
huh? … i told you “what truth” right there in my “tweet” … don’t your understand English?
“rhetorical pellick” is just your peculair sign for a story you don’t understand or don’t like.
so no new matches and no new information in your “tweet” … hence my “huh?” in persuit of same.
There is no tweet even with quotes around it. I understand English, probably better than you because you just make shit up for meaning of your sentences regardless of what is in them. Hence pellick. My world is not your world of just stories. Maybe change that shit. Generalize so that no matter the English of what you said you are right, eh? Again you say accept the truth Ugg (#barf). You don’t believe in “the” truth. Assuming you have described some predicament (self made by you) you want to move on. That’s the World of your Pellick!
okay that is a transactional story between your ego and what you presume is mine. it is all the same pattern to me, i am a nail to you, “the hammer”, which must strike me down. it is not a story that interests me for obvious reasons … it does not bind with (#match) with any positive emotional energies in me … but even that does not inform you, you already knew it.
i am just saying that it is “high time” that people realized what was is happeing in contexts like this … and stopped looking for some “is is” kind of ultimate authority or unilaterally declariing themself to be that authority. transactional relative relivance is quite enough to carry us forward. I tweet, “learn to live with it and unfold its new possiblities!”
Your birdies are all cooked – bulling your way through without external understanding not in your selfie.