Gromnir

trump's brand is what is important. he can never admit weakness or failure, so every loss is transformed into a kinda win. literal day two o' the administration were gaslighting about inaugural crowd size. why would somebody double-down about a lie? triple-down? quadruple-down? Gromnir laughed, and we weren't alone in our laughter. nobody would buy trump's transparent deceptions, right? doesn't matter. never admit mistake. never surrender. fight, fight, fight. if the media points out facts, call it fake news or ridicule reporters for focusing on incidental issues when there is an immigration crisis to deal with. trump fighting and being outraged is what his base wants from him. beyond all reason, they see him as a warrior who never surrenders, so 'course every capitulation is magical transformed into an unparalleled 4d chess win, and now there is an entire media and political ecosystem which supports trump's gaslighting efforts. am admitting we gross underestimated trump in 2016... no, that ain't quite right. we overestimated everybody else. we thought more republican politicians would resist. we thought americans were less bigoted and angry than they are. we thought democrats were less o' a keystone cops sh!t show. etc. we saw trump for what he was and the dangers he presented since the day he did his muslim ban bit and the crowd cheered. however, without an intervening war or an economic collapse, we had expected more o' everybody else. edit: we ordinary watch markets when they have a guest who is intriguing, but we were interested 'bout the reaction to carney's davos speech. HA! Good Fun!

nope. wow, that were ez. + your opinion that the western media were seeking to embiggen pahlavi. is not meaningful context. also, grammerly explained why links and attributions is essential. your sources were most certainly not clear and given how you simple search-engine slap-jerked a rando list o' quotes sans attribution into your post (a fact we only learned afterwards,) you sure as heck didn't build trust with your audience. the fact that people could go and look up each individual quote source does not in any way diminish the need to link and attribute. why does students, doctors and lawyers need ever attribute quotes when search engines make it possible to look up and verify sources? message board posts didn't require the same academic rigor, but you are the joker who linked Grammarly. in any event, the rational for attributions is the same here as is for one o' hurlshot's students... is particular noteworthy 'cause as shown numerous times now, anybody who went through the actual effort to read your not linked and not attributed articles would realize your offerings did not embiggen pahlavi. is unlikely anybody but Gromnir would go through the effort to read each unlinked article, which am guessing is precise why you did not link or attribute. oh and the more we write, the more opportunities there are for you to show ignorance or deceit. as already noted, your lazy search-engine population admission were enlightening and will be remembered. your misunderstanding o' strawman were amusing to us. zor not realizing that 'course doing a targeted search for pahlavi is gonna necessarily result in a link population where pahlavi is disproportional relevant. duh. your bizarre lede and summary tangent revealed unbelievable ignorance and yet you did double down at every opportunity; am still baffled by your comical effort to conflate "essential facts" and "summary opinions." etc. you are a bottomless well o' ignorance and deception, each new lie and deception you provide us is indeed pathetic entertainment, but entertaining even so. and so we come to the final zor deflection? as noted from us continuing to link relevant western stories about pahlavi, Gromnir at least makes an effort to argue your original point o' contention, which you has abandoned in favor o' sophistry, deception and your ordinary practical admission o' ultimate failure where you try and transform your lack o' meaningful response as equating some kinda juvenile owned meme. congrats on staying true to form and repeating the cycle. HA! Good Fun!

shame is dead... and vance is justifiable becoming the daily hypocrisy punching bag. recall, vance were a never-trumper a few years past, so there is loads o' vance comments where he did a 180... but it doesn't matter since he had a road to damascus moment on trump and saw the light any issue where you may frame as us v. them removes reason and accountability from the equation. HA! Good Fun!

*chuckle* how many posts did you make going on and on about your search engine efforts (methodology. HA!) and the inherent definition o' ledes as providing the context for your list o' quotes? now, somehow an earlier and unreferenced post which is offering no more insight than providing a restatement o' your embiggen conclusions, is s'posed to enlighten a reader about the specific context o' the quotes you did not link or attribute? the context o' how those specific quotes were actual used in the story is limited to: the previous post in no way resurrects the moldering corpse o' your original ignorant, deceptive and lazy list o' quotes proof. regardless, it is difficult to take you serious about your sophistry complaint given just how deep down the rabbit hole am having been chasing you. again, we showed that many o' the quotes you shared in your rando list were from stories, stories you purposeful did not attribute nor link, that when read did not embiggen but were instead equivocal and ambivalent regarding pahlavi's influence. we had previous posted more than a half dozen western stories, linked and attributed, that expressed similar suspicion regarding pahlavi relevance. pahlavi, in spite o' a news conference and iranian tv being hacked and shut down in his name, is getting hardly any meaningful attention from western media, and as already shown, the attention he is getting is not overwhelming positive but is ambivalent at best. is it possible to find overwhelming positive stories about pahlavi? you ain't provided any, but we would be shocked if it were not true. of course there is gonna be somebody cheering for pahlavi and making him seem more relevant than he is. duh. 'course it wouldn't much matter if you did find such 'cause Gromnir has provided a whole bunch o' not positive western stories from prominent western sources, the existence o' which knee-caps considerable your generalization that western media as a whole is attempting to embiggen pahalavi. for funsies, from a today search specific for pahlavi, two returns from the first ten (none o' which is less than 2 days old btw, so...) "While some Iranians perceived Pahlavi as an opposition leader, others considered him an opportunistic figure with monarchical designs and a mixed track record." (a paragraph 3 lede) the concluding opinions and summary portion o' the article For the last 15 years, Pahlavi has intensified his efforts to unify the political opposition and gain greater exposure, culminating in him emerging as a central figure in the latest protests. Yet there remain questions about whether he is viable as an opposition leader or is simply an opportunist. His message about a democratic future for Iran has been largely consistent. However, his father’s repressive and imperial legacy, combined with his own royal pedigree and American and Israeli proximity, prevent him from finding favor with Iranians who oppose monarchy and prioritize sovereignty. Now, the prospect of Iranians across the country rallying around Pahlavi remains as much of an open question as whether they will succeed in creating the conditions for his return by toppling the regime. also, Reza Pahlavi says Iran is undergoing a revolution again, the summary and concluding opinions is equivocal at best. The man who would be king Diplomats fear the collapse of another Middle Eastern state. Democrats aspire to a constitutional assembly and wonder why they should trade one supreme leader for another. “Death to the satemgar (tyrant)," goes another chant in Tehran, “whether Pahlavi or the rahbar (leader)." Mr Pahlavi wants a perch above others, not a place beside them, says an academic who tried but failed to include him in a coalition. In our interview Mr Pahlavi emphasises that Iran’s fate is in the hands of Iranians: “Iran’s destiny is not sealed by what any other country does... Our fighting will not stop." From afar, he sounds confident that this is a revolution. But what his role will be remains unclear. already posted npr article remains a top ten return after weeks Who is Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince encouraging demonstrations across Iran? summary and concluding opinions? A leader for a future Iran? Pahlavi's efforts to position himself as a leader for a future Iran have prompted sometimes heated debates inside and outside the country. And while protesters have shouted in support of the shah in some protests, it is not clear whether that is support for Pahlavi himself or a desire to return to a time before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. His public support of Israel has prompted significant criticism in the past from ordinary Iranians and other members of opposition groups, particularly after the 12-day war launched by Israel in June 2025. He has sought to have a voice through social media videos, and Farsi-language news channels such as Iran International have highlighted his calls for protests. In press interviews, Pahlavi has repeatedly raised the idea of a constitutional monarchy, perhaps with an elected rather than a hereditary ruler, but has also stated it is up to Iranians to choose. An exiled crown prince says he can lead Iran to democracy, but Trump hasn't endorsed him concluding opinions Some opposition activists are wary of forging ties with Pahlavi due to what they say is the fanaticism of some of his followers. But other activists say there is no room for internal feuding at a moment when the regime appears so weak and adrift, and that Pahlavi has to be part of any opposition coalition. Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, head of the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, a think tank that studies Iranian politics, said there’s no doubt Pahlavi “is the most recognized leader within the opposition.” But he said Pahlavi, who has not set foot in Iran since his family was pushed into exile in 1979, lacked a genuine political organization inside Iran “that is able to provide leadership for the protests, not just on social media, but actually at the street level.” Such an organization would ensure that the protests are disciplined and sustainable over time, Batmanghelidj said. The way that Pahlavi and other opposition activists have approached the protests “raises questions about their readiness to really lead a political movement.” He drew a comparison to Maria Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader who despite years of experience mobilizing resistance to authoritarian rule could not secure President Trump’s support. “If Machado, with her deep organizing experience, couldn’t win the trust of the Trump administration, how can Pahlavi?” etc. perhaps you are dragging this bit o' zor intransigence and deceit out for so long 'cause you are hopeful a day will come when pahlavi sudden does gain relevance in western sources? maybe is not true today or yesterday, but the ever optimistic zor is waiting for his pure and beautiful tomorrow? ok, no source you has provided says such. slip in "opinions" don't make it so. also, you didn't even provide such context that you were taking ledes or summaries. all you did were post the list after saying you did a search... + now we are s'posed to believe your previous posts, which functional is a restatement o' your conclusion that the west is embiggening pahlavi, provides meaningful context to your unattributed and unlinked list o' quotes. we didn't have any idea where in the story those quotes came from or what the stories actual said about pahlavi. your context was, again, 'cause clear you need repetition for this to sink in... followed by a list o' otherwise random quotes that you conclude is revealing the western effort to embiggen pahlavi. you take it as self evident that that 'cause those quotes were provided by search engine efforts and that you personal read 'em as positive depictions o' pahlavi, that they reveal a generalized effort by the western media to embiggen pahlavi... in spite o' the fact same kinda quotes exist in non western media, that pahlavi is yet again nowhere to be seen in the first sixty western media returns for iran + protests, recognizing that numerous western media sources is clear suspicious o' pahlavi's relevance in spite o' the fact that some iranians is calling out his name, and... whatever, you never did show support for the contention that western media is providing pahlavi, other than a list o' out of context quotes from rando stories you failed to link and attribute. could keep going on, but you are just gonna clown yourself. do it s'more. HA! Good Fun!

the point is to trigger the libs. if you comment, then they laugh at you being owned. maga exists because trump gave people an outlet for their outrage and grievance. maga doesn't need grocery prices lowered or reasonable health care anywhere near as much as they want their neighbor's cow to die and for libs to be owned. HA! Good Fun!

possible more terrible than when we first began recommending boardies read fox story comments more than five years past, the maga movement has shifted distinctly... we were 'bout to say "right," but the truth is the direction taken is unhinged. fox remains the most popular news source for the US populace. period. however, much o' maga and other trump supporters consider fox too woke. most candice owns and nick fuentes content is too extreme for fox. benny johnson and matt walsh is fact-free and controversial enough so that their being given regular gigs on fox is current impossible. and, God help us, am wondering how many young trump voters is more influenced by the tate brothers than brett baier. in 2026, fox is the relative safe space for people attempting to gauge what maga believes as 'posed to what might be gleaned from polls. even so, at least once a week, or whenever something terrible happens (daily?) we go to fox and read stories. we then scroll through the comments following those stories to see how the issues is resonating with people who follow news at the country's most popular news outlet. disquieting. npr and pbs stories is all fake news and anybody who quotes those sources is sheeple... though am suspecting sheeple is now a boomer shibboleth. anybody know what is the genz version o' sheeple? HA! Good Fun!

pants on fire "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days," followed by a list o' quotes. that ain't context and it is all you said. well, the underlined part is true. he is getting almost no meaningful coverage whatsoever. iran+protests yields no pahlavi returns for lede or headline from the first 120 results. even when iranian tv gots shut down by hackers who support him, or when he gave an hour long news conferences, you wouldn't know about such unless you were active already looking for pahlavi. furthermore, fact that pahlavi is the only opposition leader who has received appreciable coverage doesn't mean he is getting the "embiggen" treatment from western media. after all, pahlavi is the only opposition leader getting appreciable coverage from non-wester media as well. duh. as already observed, as with blm and hong kong, these movements don't need leaders. pahalavi gets coverage (dwindling and pathetic as 'posed to an effort to embiggen,) 'cause there aren't other options. the coverage he is getting (as evidenced in the articles you failed to link and attribute) is equivocal and ambivalent about pahlavi's real relevance to the current iranian movement, a reality you purposeful and deceitful ignored... a fact apparent if you bothered to read the articles you generated with your search. so, lazy or liar? and around we go. HA! coming from the clown who has been focused on your idiotic (and objective wrong) lede and summary definitions schtick for how many posts? serious, this is always entertaining, even if the returns diminish quick. HA! Good Fun!

that is a concern, but am gonna point out that the administration's gaslighting efforts has been so successful, they may not feel any need to rely on ai or make ai claims as a defense. https://www.facebook.com/RiseUpAndResist/videos/bash-you-said-he-wanted-to-massacre-law-enforcement-what-evidence-do-you-have-th/1532399077827566/ trump supporters watching fox, oan, news max and countless maga sites is seeing video and they is glomping onto the narrative offered by trump, steven miller, kristi noem and greg bovino. have mentioned previous how reading stories at fox doesn't provide much insight, but reading the reader comments following the stories does. us v. them. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna admit to being pleasant surprised that at least a few (admitted too few) o' the no compromise second amendment advocates has been more reasonable than our more notorious board pundits. and HA! Good Fun!

Federal agent secured gun from Minn. man before fatal shooting, videos show

trump's immigration efforts are becoming less popular. however, The New York Times/Siena poll 11% o' all respondents believe ICE tactics have "not gone far enough." 24% o' republican respondents believe ICE tactics have "not gone far enough." the large % o' republicans who is ok with the current situation, and the significant % who want more o' the ultraviolence is problematic. those extreme republicans vote, and they is overrepresented in primaries where candidates is chosen. edit: please recall that in trump 1.0, the administration gave up on their family separation policy because republicans were repelled by the cruelty. only 25% of americans (or less) supported the family separation policy. today, routine violations o' first amendment and civil rights don't bother most republicans anymore than did cecot, and near a quarter o' republicans is disappointed that immigration enforcement is too cautious and polite. ... we are fundamentally broken, and a mid-term loss for the republicans ain't gonna fix the problems.

if this ain't legit, am gonna be extreme disappointed. mr. Page is a soft-spoken man of keen intellect and unquestioned integrity; my respect for him as a jurist and as a human being is profound and sincere. a recipient of the Presidential medal of freedom, the nflpa honors its members with an award named after the former judge and notre dame all-american. oh, and the dude is 80ish. edit: our original source. HA! Good Fun! ps am thinking somebody at the nflpa has a sense o' humor, 'cause previous to 2018, their community mvp award were named for byron "whizzer" white.

"you're wrong about that." we never denied that the quotes were genuine. why would we? as we noted, you will find qualitative same quotes from al jazeera. our complaint were that the quotes were lacking meaningful context, were unattributed, unlinked and that you misrepresented the conclusions and findings o' the article, a position which unlike zor, we supported with quotes and links + attributions. we posted more than a half dozen western news stories, proper linked and attributed, which most certain did not "embiggen" pahlavi but instead revealed equivocation and ambivalence regarding pahlavi relevance. also, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, the lede does not necessarily include "summary opinions." "or if you prefer" is not somehow transforming your lead into gold and you are again purposeful misrepresenting. lede is a hook + essential facts. converse, distinct from facts, opinions is part of the analysis o' the writers which you purposeful avoided... is no doubt why you failed to link and attribute so that others wouldn't realize your obfuscations. if a writer summarizes their own article, it is most likely gonna happen in the conclusion. and funny you should mention machado, 'cause we did an anonymous search for venezuela last friday as we wanted to see just how relevant the idiotic nobel prize story were. all too often the algorithm feeds us what it thinks we want to see. of course if we had searched for machado + venezuela, every story returned would be 'bout machado. duh even so, more than half the stories returned were 'bout the ridiculous nobel prize nonsense in spite of everything else going on in venezuela. one such headline, from a source you did not link or attribute but which was the origin o' one o' your supplied quotes, mentioned the "swag bag" she carried with her after leaving the white house. is the world we live in that trump signature gift bags is news. today? not so much. machado is hardly front page at many/most western news sites available to a US reader. the thing is, pahlavi never got anywhere near the attention as did machado. even when he held a news conference, and on the day when iran tv were hacked in his name, the first +60 western stories on iran+ protests failed to mention pahlavi in the headlines or ledes more than once. "you are wrong." grammerly, your source pointed out why your failure to attribute and link were wrong and self defeating. your conclusory statement that, "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days," (you realize that ain't meaningful context, yes?) were the kinda supplied "methodology" (lordy) which magical obviates the need summaries as well as real links and attributions is a laughable response with zero support save zor's says-so. well, at least you are learning about strawman, how to meaningful summarize news articles, the error o' relying on mindless search engine populations, the existence o' a variety of flavor o' ledes, the fact that the first paragraph of an article is not always a summary, etc. unfortunately, am suspecting you ain't never gonna understand how your mindless list o' quotes generated via a search engine sans meaningful context did not reveal some kinda proof o' the western media's efforts to embiggen pahlavi. so go ahead, deflect s'more, and then wish into existence new defenses for your initial lazy misrepresentation. is what you do. you do poorly, and am admitting we do derive embarrassing entertainment in revealing your reflexive frauds, but am knowing you cannot help your self. HA! Good Fun!

Man shot and killed by federal officers in Minnesota was an ICU nurse, his parents say https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/24/us/minneapolis-shooting-federal-agents-video.html https://www.facebook.com/KARE11/photos/breaking-news-this-is-alex-pretti-the-man-shot-and-killed-by-a-federal-agent-in-/1443651944471241/

a wizard of earthsea is one o' our favorite fantasy works, so we read every couple of years. HA! Good Fun!

battletech extended (BEX) have been playing battletech advanced and rogutech since those mods were released, but never played BEX. am shocked by how much we enjoy bex. is more stable compared to bta and roguetech. the bex mech lab offers fewer options, and initiative and evasion is handled more like the base game than the other mods mentioned, but am near completing a full merc career and am just about to start fighting the clans; start year for our career is 3047. am likely gonna play until am able to field as many dire wolves and warhawks as we please, although am disappointed the bex omnimechs is nevertheless having hardpoints. one thing we especial miss from roguetech is the inability to be able to choose where am dropping on a map. bex frequent drops us in the middle o' multiple enemy lances with the back o' our out-of-cover stalkers typical pointed at least a half dozen mechs with better initiative. whatever. point is that am having more fun than expected. admission: other than fritz (chess,) is few computer games am having invested more hours into than battletech. sux that hairbrained weren't able to do a sequel. HA! Good Fun!

clarification: as vulgar as this is, it is legal... for now. a domestic terrorist database created by collecting public available and non-private information, is not prohibited by law. unless and until there is a specific Congressional law prohibiting government databases created by collecting public available and non-private information, we gotta rely on scotus decisions to articulate the scope o' privacy contemplated by the Constitution. scotus Justices is tending to be luddites--not only are they old, but their job is to see patterns in the law by looking backwards (oftentimes centuries) in search o' meaningful legal precedent. also, acknowledging that the US Constitution don't specific mention privacy, the Court is reluctant to push further the boundaries o' a penumbral fundamental right. use domestic terrorist to label a database which includes peaceful protesters exercising their first amendment rights should be political and moral repugnant, but it isn't illegal... yet. until such a time the label becomes material in a case or controversy, until a person is denied a government benefit or legal protection 'cause o' their existence in the domestic terrorist database, the courts don't have any kinda power to require the dissolution o' such a database. am assuming a pre 2024 Court would put the kibosh on a domestic terrorist database that were used to deny rights and privileges to those who did exercise their First Amendment rights, but... HA! Good Fun!

and Not opening the door to ICE may no longer stop officers Most immigration arrests have been carried out under administrative warrants, documents issued by immigration authorities that authorize an arrest. Traditionally they do not permit officers to enter private spaces without consent. Only warrants signed by independent judges have carried that authority. there is no basis for dhs creating new authority for law enforcement. claiming it is proper to keep relying on administrative warrants 'cause o' some kinda self granted power ginned up in a dhs memo is something jd vances knows is not Constitutional. nevertheless, am having little doubt feds will continue to enter homes/residences up until scotus tells 'em they cannot do so. how many people were sent out o' the US before scotus said there needs be some kinda due process review? once those people were out o' the US, as a practical and legal matter, courts could not force the US to bring those improperly "deported" persons back to the US. scotus has been using the shadow docket to undermine lower court TROs without providing rationales for overturning district and appellate courts. as far as we can tell, the scotus majority has decided that only scotus has the authority to enjoin the executive branch... although am needing mention the curious lisa cook exception. Since Trump took office last year, the court – on its interim docket – has allowed him to remove members of the National Labor Relations Board, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Merit Systems Protection Board. The justices also heard arguments in December in the case of Rebecca Slaughter, a member of the Federal Trade Commission whom Trump fired in March. They are expected to decide by summer whether a federal law that bars him from removing members of the FTC except in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office” violates the constitutional separation of powers. explain why a fed appointee is legal different than an ftc board appointee is difficult 'cause scotus has provided no explanation. however, if scotus treats the dhs memo authority same as most other fed actions, it could be a long time before they get around to telling vance that administrative warrants don't fulfill 4th amendment requirements. how many US residents get "deported" before scotus decides to observe that water is wet and ice is cold... although following the Presidential immunity case, am no longer certain what constitutes legal unthinkable for this Court. ... sure this is wrong, but kamala harris woulda' done... something. HA! Good Fun!

so, still focusing on the sophistry you complained 'bout? color us not surprised. hypocritical and deceptive. telling us you used a search engine is not linking and is not meaningful attribution. you quoted grammerly as a source and grammerly made extreme clear why you should include attribution and links. "Remember to attribute your quotes properly to maintain transparency and build trust with your audience. Make sure the source is clear, and use their exact words to avoid misrepresentation." you are the joker who observed earlier that people rare read beyond the first paragraph or two as some kinda lazy-arsed defense o' your own lazy-arsed search engine efforts. ("Every single quote I picked was in the first few lines of the articles. Most (all but one?) of them were in the lead or second paragraph. ie the part people actually read, and which gets summarised by search engines.") but failure to link and attribute makes it far less likely people will catch your deceit, yes? and we both know it is misrepresentation; "you're wrong about that." is why we did link the stories you failed to attribute and shared the conclusions and analysis from the stories which made clear the equivocation and ambivalence o' the authors regarding the significance o' pahlavi. we also revealed qualitative same quotes from al jazeera, which kinda undercuts your complaint o' some kinda western skew. oh, and if we put words into a search engine and it provides a long list o' results, it don't mean that western media is making efforts to "embiggen" whatever it is we were searching. duh on same day you did your mindless search engine population, you coulda' gone instead with madonna + iran and seen dozens o' results. seems you don't know how to use a search engine after all. again, do a search for iran + protests and see how frequent you get results for pahlavi in headline and ledes. if the west were so hot to embiggen, would we not see pahlavi showing up in ledes and headlines o' the foremost returns? using an anonymous search, so as to avoid algorithm issues, we again did a search today for iran + protests and get zero results for pahlavi in the ledes and headlines produced in the first sixty western stories. of course if you do a targeted search for pahlavi, you will generate numerous results, but the mere existence o' results will often be misleading. unless you are specific searching for pahlavi, there is a good chance you would see him as irrelevant, 'cause he is getting only the most infrequent mentions in the headlines and ledes o' western news stories regarding the iranian protests. again, you were the guy stressing how little o' articles people read as some kinda defense o' your sloth and decption. oh and again, the first paragraph o' a story is not "always a summary" as you claimed. heck, the first paragraph don't always include a summary lede, which is not but a hook + essential facts. your grammerly link didn't say what you claim it did any more than your mindless quote list, but since you put so much in search engine results... ai result from google for "summary of a news article: A summary of a news article is a concise, objective overview that captures the central message and key facts of the original story without including personal opinions. Core Elements of a News Summary An effective summary typically addresses the "5 Ws and H" to provide a complete picture of the event: Who: The primary people, groups, or organizations involved. What: The central event, topic, or main conflict. Where: The specific location where the event occurred. When: The timing or date of the events. Why: The reason, cause, or purpose behind the event. How: The process or methods described in the story. Essential Steps for Writing Survey the Article: Read the headline and the first paragraph (the "lede") first, as these often contain the most critical information. Identify Main Points: Note the author's thesis or main claim and the major arguments or evidence supporting it. Draft in Your Own Words: Write the summary using your own phrasing to avoid plagiarism, typically keeping it to about one-third the length of the original article. Acknowledge the Source: Begin by identifying the article's title, author, and publication in the first sentence. Maintain Objectivity: Stick to the facts presented in the text and avoid adding your own analysis or critique. Structure of a Summary Introduction: A single sentence introducing the article and its main argument. Body: A series of sentences explaining each supporting point in the same order as the original article. Conclusion: A final statement that summarizes the thesis and explains the overall significance or implications of the story. your search engine generated quotes, which you failed to link and attribute, (naughty) typical weren't even fulfilling the requirements o' summary ledes as described by grammerly, but nowhere near reaching the level o' meaningful summaries. your primary school edumactaion were lacking if you believe your mindless search population results were meaningful summaries, but we do not believe you are so ignorant... 'bout summaries. clown show shenanigans, but please, don't stop. HA! Good Fun!

trump's most successful diplomatic and trade efforts is tacoing. tariffs is most noteworthy for trump delays, exceptions and implementation fails. ukraine had to compromise by thanksgiving... but maybe he meant next thanksgiving? am suspecting the new greenland deal is gonna be near indistinguishable from the old greenland deal, which is good news for everybody. etc. the problem is that trump is unlikely to taco if the bond market fails to react. blowing up boats in the caribbean didn't move the needle and so trump decided a coup would be a fun thing to do in venezuela. regardless, this "concept o' a deal" 'tween nato and trump is a real life application o' sun tzu's advice: build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across. am thinking the nobel committee should keep a medal for trump in their pocket just in case it looks as if the very stable genius is about to start ww3. ... we got at least three more years o' this insanity. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

ironic. *chuckle* you never offered a meaningful argument in support o' your conclusion, but you did complain a fair bit about sophistry and semantics in spite o' you being the clown to invoke grammerly ('cause that meaningful bolstered your contention that there is a western media effort to "embiggen" pahlavi. HA!) and your impotent attempts to redefine ledes. is repetitive buffoonery and includes more than a little o' your trademark deceit where you misrepresent sources. and 'cause you got a predictable misunderstanding o' logic, is no shock you use strawman wrong, though am thinking this is one o' your ignorance fails as 'posed to deception. strawman is a fallacy where an individual false attribute an argument to another, and then proceeds to knock the stuffing out o' the imagined argument. is not a fantasy that you are bozoing an argument that ledes = meaningful summaries, and that, "The first paragraph of an article is always a summary." is nothing made up about our description o' your argument. you keep doubling down on those points although they don't meaningful advance your material conclusion. wait, you don't genuine think that 'cause we crafted the old man and the sea lede it counts as strawman, 'cause that would be HI-larious. so much for your grasp o' your primary school english lessons, eh? once again, you posted a bunch o' quotes, without links or attribution. naughty. furthermore, the stories from which you lifted the quotes, relying on nothing save a mindless search engine population, undermine your conclusion that western media were attempting to embiggen the relevance o' pahlavi, while ignoring the fact non western media such as al jazeera were making near identical quotes about pahlavi, and how in spite o' his recent news conference and the hacking efforts interrupting iranian tv, there is extreme few pahlavi stories showing up in a search o' iran + protests. so much for the western embiggen scheme. serious, zor needs musical accompaniment for his... contributions. counting on most people to be unaware when you fib or expecting 'em not to go through the effort o' checking your sources is your schtick. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna suggest that's the portion o' the letter which resonates most with hardcore maga. the maga movement has been so successful 'cause it channels outrage and grievance o' white americans, particular white and working class americans. is the folks living in rural america who feel as if they has been marginalized and ridiculed for decades while the libs talk about reparations for slavery and the "feminazis" push dei programs. their manufacturing jobs go to mexico, vietnam and china and all the libs wanna talk about is white privilege? now the real trick is that trump has managed to convince maga that his personal grievances is theirs. whenever trump is mocked for saying something ignorant, or he is investigated for business fraud, the ultimate motivation behind those efforts by the deep state and george soros to diminish trump is the destruction of maga. it's not 4d chess. as long as trump is channeling outrage and grievance, the maga base will cheer for him. HA! Good Fun!

am clear not gonna complain about getting drawn into a tangential discussion, particular when is more intriguing than the ones am having indulged recent. HA! Good Fun!