Attention @StarTribune subscribers:

If they omit demographic information about criminal suspects, you already know to fill in the blanks based on “lived experience.”

Similarly, if the paper covers a foreign national, “lived experience” lets you assume undocumented status.

1/ As of November 2024, “lived experience” mandates that subscribers assume that any criminal suspect anywhere in Minnesota is a @MinnesotaDFL official, including at the local level.

I continue to e-subscribe to @StarTribune, but I question why.

@GrageDustin

@CrimeWatchMpls

2/

⁦@DavidAFrench⁩, para 24, here are specific examples.

via @NYTOpinionnytimes.com/2024/10/27/opi… Federal policy affects everyday Americans in the Mississippi Delta, but @mirjordan didn’t bother to ask @BennieGThompson about it.

Grossly disrespectful to our democracy.

nytimes.com/2021/11/12/us/…

@huskermitch @astroplainblain @gmg825 @AaronBlake @reedgalen @ChristinaPushaw inquirer.com/philly/news/vo… @huskermitch @astroplainblain @gmg825 @AaronBlake @reedgalen @ChristinaPushaw justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/f…

@SD50MNGOP @HC_Elections @EdinaMN @bloomington_mn @GOPMNCD3 @MNCD5GOP @46_SDRPM @thauserkstp @realakkamara @WalterHudson @BrianOSheaSPI State Rep @WalterHudson

Just as I thought.

@MNSecofState @MNSteveSimon is not telling the truth.

No @smartdeliverysv courier was “fired,” because - per smart-delivery.com, they’re all “independent contractors.”

@AGEllison, another example of mis-classification. @SD50MNGOP @HC_Elections @EdinaMN @bloomington_mn @GOPMNCD3 @MNCD5GOP @46_SDRPM @thauserkstp @realakkamara @WalterHudson @BrianOSheaSPI @MNSecofState @MNSteveSimon @smartdeliverysv @AGEllison Remember, an “independent contractor” is not an “employee” and, therefore, cannot be “fired.”

All Americans should be appalled that @Hennepin Auditor and @HC_Elections think so little about American Democracy that they would even consider hiring out this governmental function.

@FischerKing64 The original post: babe.net/2018/01/13/azi… @FischerKing64 And the best comment: nytimes.com/2018/01/15/opi…

@LTGHRMcMaster

I’m reading your book, great so far, but please review the bottom of page 97, “Generals (sic) Mattis and Dunford”.

Please, at least pretend, Secretary Mattis was a civilian while serving as @SecDef.

Please review. Thank you.

Please review page 154 at the bottom.

“Mueller Commission (sic)”.

I believe that he was the Special Counsel; there was no “Commission” involved.

@JimLaPorta @bkesling @JoeBiden @ArlingtonNatl Thank you.

Yes, I noted 1).

We both know that small-print disclaimers 2) merely check the box.

My only concern about using the 2010 official photo from Section 60 is that media choosing to report on other campaigns need to mention this example also.

Thank you again. @JimLaPorta @bkesling @JoeBiden @ArlingtonNatl Here’s another example of legacy media simply not understanding basic civics.

https://twitter.com/dolesbianstip/status/1828952256575660424

@FPWellman @Tim_Walz @MNNationalGuard So @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson are lying in para 5 here. Good to know. app.startribune.com/fact-check-wal… @FPWellman @Tim_Walz @MNNationalGuard @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson You are correct - and we are in agreement - that, looking back, it was just as well, and best for the unit, that Walz retired rather than deploy.

@GrageDustin Yes, @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson insist - see para 5 - that Walz submitted his retirement papers in May 2005; he retired May 16, 2005. startribune.com/fact-check-wal… @GrageDustin @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson In other words, Walz’ retirement was the fastest processed retirement ever in the history of @MNNationalGuard.

@Bepahmema @rochelleolson @Tim_Walz @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson - see para 5 - state, “Walz submitted his retirement papers in May 2005.”

app.startribune.com/fact-check-wal… @Bepahmema @rochelleolson @Tim_Walz @StarTribune @grove @MNNationalGuard claims not to have any record of when, exactly, Walz submitted his retirement packet.

@davis_winkie @mooshiscrazy @PookSpeaks @politico @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson @Tim_Walz @MNNationalGuard @GrageDustin @KamalaHQ Understood, but @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson have had multiple clarification / correction requests for several days now and continue to insist on their website that, “Walz submitted his Guard retirement papers in May 2005.”

MNNG needs to take another look.

@CynicalPublius @davis_winkie @mooshiscrazy @PookSpeaks @politico @StarTribune @grove @rochelleolson @Tim_Walz @MNNationalGuard @GrageDustin @KamalaHQ @CynicalPublius Anyway, last-minute submission has more credibility than the alternative of Walz having submitted in 2004 but not telling anyone.

The Walz campaign press release of March 20, 2005, would be consistent with last-minute submission because on March 20, 2005, he intended to deploy.

@stevesi28838948 @UnwashedWater @LuisMorenolg Well, if Chief Justice John Roberts couldn’t figure out who leaked the Dobbs (2022) opinion;

and if our great nation’s life-tenured independent judiciary couldn’t interpret “first impression” our Constitution’s two Emoluments Clauses in an entire presidential term,

Why care? @stevesi28838948 @UnwashedWater @LuisMorenolg brennancenter.org/our-work/analy…

@DefiantLs That’s your religion; I don’t follow your religion. @DefiantLs

@Nunyabidness2a @robdoar Transgenderism is a belief system fully protected by #1A which prohibits the government from endorsing or enforcing any belief system, including transgenderism.

@Nunyabidness2a @robdoar lims.minneapolismn.gov/File/2024-00311

@gareth_apdafydd @rachel_815 @henryrodgersdc @ComfortablySmug @DailyCaller Thank you; I think we’ll have to disagree on the specifics.

As @stoolpresidente exposed with @washingtonpost @emilyaheil, their hit pieces are already drafted - not just outlined- before they ask the subject for comment.

Thus, the request for comment is made in bad faith. @gareth_apdafydd @rachel_815 @henryrodgersdc @ComfortablySmug @DailyCaller @stoolpresidente @washingtonpost @emilyaheil If the narrative is already established, then nothing shared afterwards, including in response to a too-late request for comment, will change anything about the story.

Even if there’s genuine confusion about a factual matter, like a different person with a similar name.

@DBarkhuff Yes, I think that the other side just activated its longstanding mole working under @WHCOS to get @POTUS to issue the Presidential Proclamation for Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter.

Why issue it at all this year?

Biden needs a Sister Souljah moment, right, @BillClinton? @DBarkhuff @WHCOS @POTUS @BillClinton Meanwhile, of course, various levels of government are stealthily making Islam the State Religion.

Even @SFUnified @SFUSD_Supe has returned Prayer to Public Schools.

Transgenderism itself is a belief system fully protected by #1A which prohibits the government from

@ZachWLambert @PennerBrooks .stlouisparkmn.gov/Home/Component… @ZachWLambert @PennerBrooks lims.minneapolismn.gov/File/2024-00311

@SenChrisLarson @hawkeyetrev What’s the difference between science and a “social construct”?

If you believe a “social construct” overrides biological science, that’s part of your #1A-protected belief system. @SenChrisLarson @hawkeyetrev

@FrensWeMade @shagbark_hick @42cobras @shagbark_hick

You are quite correct that it is possible to be both compassionate and effective in securing our border and enforcing our laws.

America cannot welcome everyone in the world who wants to live here.

That’s reality.

Sadly, criminal human traffickers tell people @FrensWeMade @shagbark_hick @42cobras what they want to hear, not the truth:

They are not eligible to enter the United States without advance authorization and are better off staying home and working to improve their BIPOC-led sovereign independent home countries.

Poverty and general violence have never qualified

@What46HasDone So is this. @What46HasDone charismanews.com/51861-blasphem…

@realpeteyb123 It’s not wrong to offer individual contact information to someone whose individual (not work) communication would be welcome, but clearly she didn’t read the room.

“If you’re single, this is my information” but only if non-verbal communication supports that approach.

1/ @realpeteyb123 “May I offer you my phone number?”

In both of the above, it would be on paper.

The conversation retains some distance or ‘deniability.’

If the paper is accepted, that’s it.

The ball is in the recipient’s court and no follow-up, please.

The recipient can toss it.