Covfefe

see more What Is Covfefe Memes, Covfefe Tweet Memes, Trump Covfefe Memes from Instagram, Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter & More. 
Related to:  Covfefe Trump Memes, Cov Fe Fe Memes, The Covfefe Memes

šŸ”„ | Latest

Covfefe: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, Iā€™m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didnā€™t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell ā€¦ actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Donā€™t read that with a tone, donā€™t read that as an attack. Thatā€™s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesnā€™t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the authorā€™s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesnā€™t convince you, thereā€™s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. Heā€™s broken literally every one of those rules. Heā€™s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isnā€™t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasnā€™t his to distribute. Thatā€™s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and thatā€™s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, thatā€™s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so thatā€™s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, heā€™s on the hook for contempt, if he doesnā€™t then heā€™s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesnā€™t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago heā€™s committing grand larceny by fraud, because heā€™s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, ā€œhigh crimes and misdemeanorsā€. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And heā€™s failing that job. Trumpā€™s supporters probably believe heā€™s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didnā€™t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and theyā€™ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. ā€œ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And heā€™s failing that job. ā€œ I like how Bogleech doesnā€™t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters Itā€™s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. Thatā€™s what ā€˜above reproachā€™ means. An impossible standard, considering people ā€œreproachā€ Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, Iā€™ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that saysĀ ā€œmerits thisā€. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenetsā€¦ Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You donā€™t need to know the context, or any other point, when youā€™re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trumpā€™s execution, weā€™re 5 paragraphs in and you havenā€™t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, Iā€™m guessing, because Iā€™m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-ā€concoctingā€ a response, and yet youā€™re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isnā€™t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesnā€™t mean theyā€™re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trumpā€™s execution. Thatā€™s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of,Ā ā€œSo, click-bait subtitle that you donā€™t see until youā€™ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, hereā€™s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,ā€ could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. Itā€™s likeā€¦ itā€™s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like,Ā ā€œOh, seems you made a typo,ā€ youā€™d jump in like,Ā ā€œBut what about theyā€™re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. Theyā€™re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates itā€. You and whatā€™s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, yā€™all keep sayingĀ ā€œbut what of the context?ā€ when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken.Ā ā€œSure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.ā€ Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Covfefe: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, Iā€™m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didnā€™t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell ā€¦ actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Donā€™t read that with a tone, donā€™t read that as an attack. Thatā€™s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesnā€™t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the authorā€™s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesnā€™t convince you, thereā€™s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. Heā€™s broken literally every one of those rules. Heā€™s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isnā€™t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasnā€™t his to distribute. Thatā€™s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and thatā€™s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, thatā€™s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so thatā€™s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, heā€™s on the hook for contempt, if he doesnā€™t then heā€™s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesnā€™t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago heā€™s committing grand larceny by fraud, because heā€™s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, ā€œhigh crimes and misdemeanorsā€. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And heā€™s failing that job. Trumpā€™s supporters probably believe heā€™s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didnā€™t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and theyā€™ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. ā€œ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And heā€™s failing that job. ā€œ I like how Bogleech doesnā€™t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters Itā€™s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. Thatā€™s what ā€˜above reproachā€™ means. An impossible standard, considering people ā€œreproachā€ Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, Iā€™ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that saysĀ ā€œmerits thisā€. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenetsā€¦ Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You donā€™t need to know the context, or any other point, when youā€™re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trumpā€™s execution, weā€™re 5 paragraphs in and you havenā€™t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, Iā€™m guessing, because Iā€™m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-ā€concoctingā€ a response, and yet youā€™re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isnā€™t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesnā€™t mean theyā€™re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trumpā€™s execution. Thatā€™s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of,Ā ā€œSo, click-bait subtitle that you donā€™t see until youā€™ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, hereā€™s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,ā€ could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. Itā€™s likeā€¦ itā€™s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like,Ā ā€œOh, seems you made a typo,ā€ youā€™d jump in like,Ā ā€œBut what about theyā€™re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. Theyā€™re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates itā€. You and whatā€™s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, yā€™all keep sayingĀ ā€œbut what of the context?ā€ when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken.Ā ā€œSure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.ā€ Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate...

Covfefe: People Are Mad About Colin Kapernick Being Named GQ's "Citizen of the Year" L. @balleralert People Are Mad About Colin Kapernick Being Named GQā€™s ā€œCitizen of the Yearā€ ā€“ blogged by @MsJennyb ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Just hours after GQ announced that ColinKaepernick would be recognized as one the magazineā€™s ā€œMen of the Year,ā€ specifically coined this yearā€™s ā€œCitizen of the Year,ā€ the Twitterverse nearly drowned in whitetears. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Many took to the social media platform to express their disapproval with GQā€™s decision to feature the former 49ers quarterback. Others even called for a boycott of the magazine, using the hashtag BoycottGQ. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œI guess itā€™s time to BoycottGQ since @GQMagazine named Colin Kaepernick ā€œCitizen of the Year.ā€ A divisive, anti-American, Racist jackass that single-handedly destroyed the @NFL isnā€™t a citizen, heā€™s a traitor,ā€ Twitter user Hans Auf wrote. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Last year, Kaepernick led the league in a protest against police brutality and racial injustices by kneeling during the national anthem. His movement sparked a widespread discussion about the former quarterbackā€™s purpose, his subsequent extended unemployment and the leagueā€™s handling of the protests. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œ BoycottGQ magazineā€¦how dumb can you get GQ? Colin is a whiny rich spoiled crybaby and hates America. DO YOU hate America too GQ? Apparently,ā€ Cup of Covfefe & Me wrote. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œSeems GQ magazine has awarded @Kaepernick7 ā€œMan of the Yearā€ award. In doing so, they agree that it is perfectly fine to insult our nationā€™s flag, national anthem and our nationā€™s heroes,ā€ Adorable Deplorable tweeted. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € However, others were pleased with GQā€™s decision. In fact, many praised the magazine for recognizing such a courageous man, who risked his career to make a difference in the world.
Covfefe: People Are Mad About Colin Kapernick Being Named GQ's "Citizen of the Year" L. @balleralert People Are Mad About Colin Kapernick Being Named GQā€™s ā€œCitizen of the Yearā€ ā€“ blogged by @MsJennyb ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Just hours after GQ announced that ColinKaepernick would be recognized as one the magazineā€™s ā€œMen of the Year,ā€ specifically coined this yearā€™s ā€œCitizen of the Year,ā€ the Twitterverse nearly drowned in whitetears. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Many took to the social media platform to express their disapproval with GQā€™s decision to feature the former 49ers quarterback. Others even called for a boycott of the magazine, using the hashtag BoycottGQ. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œI guess itā€™s time to BoycottGQ since @GQMagazine named Colin Kaepernick ā€œCitizen of the Year.ā€ A divisive, anti-American, Racist jackass that single-handedly destroyed the @NFL isnā€™t a citizen, heā€™s a traitor,ā€ Twitter user Hans Auf wrote. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Last year, Kaepernick led the league in a protest against police brutality and racial injustices by kneeling during the national anthem. His movement sparked a widespread discussion about the former quarterbackā€™s purpose, his subsequent extended unemployment and the leagueā€™s handling of the protests. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œ BoycottGQ magazineā€¦how dumb can you get GQ? Colin is a whiny rich spoiled crybaby and hates America. DO YOU hate America too GQ? Apparently,ā€ Cup of Covfefe & Me wrote. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā€œSeems GQ magazine has awarded @Kaepernick7 ā€œMan of the Yearā€ award. In doing so, they agree that it is perfectly fine to insult our nationā€™s flag, national anthem and our nationā€™s heroes,ā€ Adorable Deplorable tweeted. ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € However, others were pleased with GQā€™s decision. In fact, many praised the magazine for recognizing such a courageous man, who risked his career to make a difference in the world.

People Are Mad About Colin Kapernick Being Named GQā€™s ā€œCitizen of the Yearā€ ā€“ blogged by @MsJennyb ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā €ā € Just hours after GQ an...

Covfefe: DONA RE DEL UST for LIES SAINTHOAX 'Lust for Lies' is now available worldwide featuring the hit single 'Covfefe' šŸŒø
Covfefe: DONA RE DEL UST for LIES SAINTHOAX 'Lust for Lies' is now available worldwide featuring the hit single 'Covfefe' šŸŒø

'Lust for Lies' is now available worldwide featuring the hit single 'Covfefe' šŸŒø

Covfefe: SCHOOL INFORMATION www.rosevillepride.org ress Code: A student's dress should not interfere with the learning environme The following a prohibited Tank tops/muscle shirts Spaghetti straps Bare midriff tops Spandex/underwear as outerwear Inappropriate slogans and emblems Pajamas Slippers Sagging pants See-through clothing Sunglasses ear S. Fla irts Exposed undergarments Bandanas Questions (A G): Mr. Gary Scheff gscheff@roseville k12.mi us (H- O): Mrs. Monica Gabriel mgabriel@roseville k12 mi.us (P - Z): TBD Drop Off/Pick-u Morning . There are two areas to drop off students in the morning . Southbound Normal Street in front of the school on the sc side only (signs posted) Curb side in the North Lot using the driveway from Normal .No drop-offs in South Lot ATTENTION Uncle Sam's Misguided Children there is a picture of Roseville High School informational booklet being shared where it says Shirts with flags are prohibited. They have since added "no flags in a demeanor manner", no example as to what this really means really! Tag Your Friends & Follow us @unclesamsmisguidedchildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡øFB page Fb.Com-UncleSamsChildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡øYouTube Channel youtube.com-c-UncleSamsMisguidedChildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø Visit our website for AlternativeMedia www.UncleSamsMisguidedChildren.com šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø unclesamsmisguidedchildren MisguidedLife USMCNation AmericanProud veteranowned Murica Merica USMC secondamendment patriotic NRA pepethefrog guns covfefe conservative 2ndamendment maga republican trumpmemes tactical igmilitia donaldtrump Backtheblue cnnfakenews gop 1776 freedom
Covfefe: SCHOOL INFORMATION www.rosevillepride.org ress Code: A student's dress should not interfere with the learning environme The following a prohibited Tank tops/muscle shirts Spaghetti straps Bare midriff tops Spandex/underwear as outerwear Inappropriate slogans and emblems Pajamas Slippers Sagging pants See-through clothing Sunglasses ear S. Fla irts Exposed undergarments Bandanas Questions (A G): Mr. Gary Scheff gscheff@roseville k12.mi us (H- O): Mrs. Monica Gabriel mgabriel@roseville k12 mi.us (P - Z): TBD Drop Off/Pick-u Morning . There are two areas to drop off students in the morning . Southbound Normal Street in front of the school on the sc side only (signs posted) Curb side in the North Lot using the driveway from Normal .No drop-offs in South Lot ATTENTION Uncle Sam's Misguided Children there is a picture of Roseville High School informational booklet being shared where it says Shirts with flags are prohibited. They have since added "no flags in a demeanor manner", no example as to what this really means really! Tag Your Friends & Follow us @unclesamsmisguidedchildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡øFB page Fb.Com-UncleSamsChildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡øYouTube Channel youtube.com-c-UncleSamsMisguidedChildren šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø Visit our website for AlternativeMedia www.UncleSamsMisguidedChildren.com šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø unclesamsmisguidedchildren MisguidedLife USMCNation AmericanProud veteranowned Murica Merica USMC secondamendment patriotic NRA pepethefrog guns covfefe conservative 2ndamendment maga republican trumpmemes tactical igmilitia donaldtrump Backtheblue cnnfakenews gop 1776 freedom

ATTENTION Uncle Sam's Misguided Children there is a picture of Roseville High School informational booklet being shared where it says Shi...