#WoofWednesday and Somewhat Offbeat: Ringing the Bell and Barking Over Which "Momma" Can't Hear And/Or Has To Shout

"Reilly, stop!"
"Reilly, quiet!"

Reilly persisted in ringing the bell to indicate that (and night-owl "Momma" got the point that) she wanted to go "night nights" last night (and "Momma"'s trying to be less of a night owl is a work in progress), and there've been other times when she's rung the bell instead of bark—not to mention that at quite a few times when she's wanted to go outside to see someone or something, she's both rung the bell and barked!

As for the barking by itself, it's still an inappropriate behavior in which Reilly engages—with her often going as far as to bark with Camille when Camille's inappropriately barked (including this morning), notwithstanding that she as alphess should be setting a good example for her younger cousin and betess! The barking also frequently gets loud enough for "Momma"/"Auntie Nicole" to be unable to tell her bad-example-setting "dogter" and her furniece to be quiet, especially when they're barking simultaneously and cacophonically—and often to the point at which she can't hear over it!

Of course, what can "Momma"/"Auntie Nicole" do about it particularly if they don't listen to "Be quiet or get down [from their beds from which they look out of the family-room window]!" and "Be quiet!"? She doesn't have anyone (not counting "Mom-Mom" and "Auntie Michelle"/"Mimi" in this context at all) to roll them over or chase them when they try to run and keep barking or be a firmer and stronger voice than she can be (and not that "Mom-Mom" or "Auntie Michelle" will always roll them over when "Momma"/"Auntie Nicole" asks them to do so, anyway). 

Somewhat Offbeat: A Cold About Did In Night-Owl "Momma"; Still Trying To Be A Better "Momma" To Reilly, Etc.

After a roughly-two-day cold about did in night-owl "Momma", she began to try to go "night nights" with Reilly earlier than before—and it's still a work in progress, and a lonely one at that in one way. At least, truth be told, she even observes that Reilly's mood in the morning and throughout the day seems better, even though her behavior often surely isn't better—as behaviors such as the inappropriate barking continue. As for "Momma"'s mood on the other hand, it's not so much better, especially when the inappropriate behaviors occur—and notwithstanding that Reilly is one reason that she keeps living, despite the paradox of Reilly seeming to want to kill her when she barks and causes her to have myclonous flareups that could affect fatal injuries.

However, at least "Momma"'s energy levels might be a little better at least at times, such as when she's able to take Reilly to go "potty" without having to use her rollator and put the loop of Reilly's leash around one of its handles—not to mention that the first occurrence of that, as "Momma" recalls, actually happened this morning, since "Momma" figured that she might as well try it. So, maybe she'll be strong enough one day to not have Reilly's inappropriate barking affect myoclonous flareups, given that she was strong enough to take Reilly to go "potty" without having to depend on the rollator—and she may even be able to take her on walks someday for all that she knows!

Nonetheless and as "Momma" mentioned, being a better "Momma" to Reilly is a work in progress.

PS On a lighter note: who couldn't find a puppy with a bandanna to be cute, let alone Reilly with a bandanna to be cute? Thus, "Momma" took the following pictures of Reilly in a bandanna:

Originally on LinkedIn: Commentary: Would Limiting Special Counselor Mueller's Testimony To Only A Few Hours Do Any Good?

The short answer is "Yes." The long answer is the following:

Since Speaker Pelosi summarized Special Counselor Mueller's report in roughly 75 times less pages, Special Counselor Mueller can give what would be a days- or even weeks-long testimony in a few hours. For his part, all that he needs to do is the following:

1. Commence and conclude well.
2. Concisely drive home especially the key points.
3. Be consistent.
4. Be clear.
5. Connect especially the key points to keep the testimony flowing steadily and smoothly.
6. Stand by his convictions.
7. Try to convince Congress of the veracity of his testimony.

In conclusion, then, Special Counselor Mueller needs to deliver his testimony in the same manner as Speaker Pelosi summarized his report: with what I call the Eight-C Method. In other words, he will testify will if he commences and concludes a concise, consistent, clear, and conviction-driven testimony with well-connected key points and the effect of convincing Congress to remove the barriers that prevent him from indicting an illegitimate POTUS.

After all, he needs to remind Congress that they should not give said illegitimate POTUS undue legitimacy by impeaching him, and they should not even hold him unaccountable for using Putin to help him be illegally elected. Besides, impeaching him would essentially be the same as not holding him accountable.

PS Not originally on LinkedIn: an alternative "c" for "connect[ed]" could be "cohesive[ness]", and "conscious" could be added as a ninth "c".

PPS "Conscious" was actually added as a ninth "c" on LinkedIn. What I catch once I look over what I write! 

Twitter Thread: Trumpism, Bernism, And a Slippery Slope

Everyone has the same minimum wage➡️ the same benefits, including the same type of health care➡️ an earnings cap➡️ a benefits cap➡️ certain kinds of professions in which one may work and/or employ others➡️ the same education, with types of schools & degrees chosen by the state...

— N.V. Mara Czarnecki (@Nickidewbear) July 22, 2019

Continued on Twitter...

Early #MemoryMonday and #MaltipooMonday Post

Bastille Day Card From Reilly

PS Stayed tuned for more updates on Reilly and Camille (whom was upstairs when the pictures were taken)! 

Open Letter To Anyone Whom Has Been Associated With Jeffrey Epstein, Especially His Accomplices

I urge you to please come forward for, if nobody else, the sakes of your and Jeffrey Epstein's victims, with the youngest being at least only 14 years old—and for all that I and the rest of the general public knows, maybe even younger. If you are one of the accomplices in question, you know whether any of your and Mr. Epstein's victims were even younger than 14 years old. My own suspicion is that some of them were younger than 14 at that time that you and Mr. Epstein victimized them, and some may even still be younger than 14—and again, you and he know; I don't, since I wasn't there.

Besides, I myself wasn't even close to 14 years old when one of the accomplices, a certain now-former POTUS named Bill Clinton by name, was elected POTUS—I was still a seventh of that age until three days after his inauguration—and so I couldn't have been there back then, anyway (and I thank God that I never was later). That said, I (literally) was not born yesterday and well know that Former POTUS Bill "Knows Nothing" (aka, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman...") Clinton is one of the obvious accomplices whom was there and does know (not to mention that everyone can see right through his "knows nothing" statement just as everyone saw through his "...with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" statement)—and I guarantee you that maybe even Former POTUS Clinton's associations with Jeffrey Epstein could end up going that far back.

Speaking of obvious accomplices, others are a certain illegitimate POTUS and Alan Dershowitz (and he was OJ Simpson's lawyer and is now defending a certain illegitimate POTUS; so, should we be surprised?). As for the ones that aren't so obvious, meanwhile, my thoughts about them are very similar to those of Christine Pelosi—and my heart breaks to think about who some of them could be¹.

Especially if any of the accomplices of Jeffrey Epstein are self-professed advocates for children and/or victims of abuse, particularly child victims of sexual abuse, and/or they have children of their own, I really urge them to come forward for at least the sakes of their own children if they can't come forward for the sakes of those whom they helped Jeffrey Epstein victimize—after all and frankly, how can they be trusted around their own children when they've victimized others' children; and how can they even look their own children in the eyes after what they've done?

In conclusion, then, I urge Former POTUS Clinton and the other two aforementioned obvious accomplices of Jeffrey Epstein as well as the other obvious ones to just come forward already, and the not-so-obvious accomplices to come forward particularly if they have children of their own and/or are self-proclaimed victims' advocates and are victimizers whom should probably not even be around their own children, let alone be unashamed to look their children in the eyes.

¹ It's like when I was heartbroken en re the Bill O'Reilly scandal—and remember that I even named my blog "The Nicole Factor" not knowing that an inspiration for my wanting to be a commentator and an analyst was in fact the very hypocrite about whom those like Andrea Mackris warned for a reason—and truth be told, I wouldn't be surprised if Bill O'Reilly or someone associated with him is or, like even the late Roger Ailes, was an accomplice of Jeffrey Epstein.