#James Mattis

[makingdonalddrumpfagain]

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Matt Gertz at MMFA:

Prominent members of the right-wing media elite touted John Kelly’s ability as White House chief of staff to impose discipline on then-President Donald Trump and prevent the nation from falling into chaos.  The Wall Street Journal editorial board and commentators like National Review Editor-in-Chief Rich Lowry and Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich praised the retired four-star general as an “indispensable” and “unflinching” figure who “deserves the nation’s gratitude” for stopping Trump from exercising his worst impulses.  Now, Kelly is publicly describing the former president as a fascist bent on ruling the United States as a dictator if he returns to power — while Trump is making clear that he will not allow himself to be surrounded by similar figures who could act as guardrails in a second term — and the same figures are still backing his candidacy.

Elite right-wing commentators lauded Kelly for keeping Trump under control

For a segment of the right-wing press that likes Trump’s support for cutting taxes, banning abortion, dismantling the social safety net, and other traditional GOP positions — but dislikes the chaos he brings with them — Kelly’s July 2017 appointment as chief of staff was a godsend.

[...]

Kelly served at the highest levels of the Trump administration and says the former president is a fascist

The Journal editorial board, Lowry, and Gingrich were correct to worry about the prospect of an unhinged Trump unrestrained by a competent chief of staff. Mark Meadows, a former congressman who served in that role, oversaw the final chaotic months of Trump’s administration, during which Trump led a shambling response to the COVID-19 pandemic, threatened to use military force against protesters, and ultimately sought to subvert the results of the 2020 election and triggered the storming of the U.S. Capitol. Now Kelly, who served Trump as chief of staff for a year and a half, is speaking out about what he saw in the White House and the urgent danger he says the former president poses to the country.

In interviews with The New York Times, he said of Trump and his plans for a second term:

“Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure.��

“He certainly prefers the dictator approach to government.”

He “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, anytime he wanted.”

“I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it’s a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it.” 

“He’s certainly the only president that has all but rejected what America is all about, and what makes America America, in terms of our Constitution, in terms of our values, the way we look at everything, to include family and government — he’s certainly the only president that I know of, certainly in my lifetime, that was like that.”

Kelly is one of several high-ranking national security appointees in Trump’s administration who are warning the country that the former president is a fascist. Mark Milley, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Trump, has described him as “fascist to the core” and “the most dangerous person ever,” remarks reportedly echoed by Jim Mattis, Trump’s former secretary of defense.  And on Wednesday, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on CNN that “it's hard to say that” Trump “doesn't” fit the definition of fascist, adding, “He certainly has those inclinations, and I think it's something we should be wary about.”

[...] The defining feature of right-wing media during the Trump era has been that you either back the former president despite your better instincts and morality, or you get excommunicated from the movement. That incentive structure — and the right-wing commentariat’s craven responses to it — explains the resulting media ecosystem rallying behind a lying felonious racist and conman who launched an insurrection and whose own former top aides describe as a fascist.

During Donald Trump’s first term, right-wing media elites such as Newt Gingrich and Rich Lowry praised John Kelly as a restraint on Trump’s worst impulses.

[nikolasongsa]

"What keeps you awake at night?" "Nothing. I keep other people awake at night." - James Mattis

[hale-nathan]

Trump Weird News - Trump, Most Dangerous Person Ever!

Former Trump Defense Secretary Mattis Seconded General Milley's Assessment That Trump is "The Most Dangerous Person Ever"

Milley: Trump Is "Fascist TO The Core"

[wausaupilot]

Your letters: Writer 'sounding alarm' on Donald Trump

"In a retirement speech, Gen. Milley laid out his concerns regarding Trump: 'We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, to a tyrant or dictator or a wannabe dictator.'" - Joyce Luedke of Mahtomedi, Minnesota, formerly of Weston

Dear editor, Sounding the alarm! Retired Gen. Mark A. Milley is sounding the alarm as to how dangerous Donald Trump has become. Milley served as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for more than a year under Trump and continued in that role during President Biden’s presidency. General Milley served more than 40 years in the military and retired in September 2023. In a retirement speech,…

[cynicalclassicist]

And yet somehow his base think that as it's him it's ok, as they can't accept that Trump can ever be in the wrong.

tRump is unfit mentally and physically to be president

[mr-1961-blog]

Badass James “Mad Dog” Mattis Quotes! #history #quotes #marine

[joe-spookyy]

thinking about the star trek beastie boys paradox. the use of the hit song sabotage by the beastie boys in star trek (2009) raises many questions that go completely unanswered in the rest of the series. since the song is part of the scene and is being not only heard but intentionally played by captain kirk, this means that sabotage exists in the star trek universe. if this song exists, it implies that the remainder of the band’s discography also exists. but the issue here is that in several beastie boys songs, they directly reference star trek and its characters. examples include in intergalactic, where they mention “a pinch on the neck from mr spock”, or in the brouhaha, where they say “this is bones mccoy on a line to sulu.” the fact that captain kirk himself is listening to the beastie boys in this film and again, to one of their lesser known songs (a REMIX of body movin ON VINYL) in the sequel, gives the viewer an idea that he’s a pretty big fan of their music. does kirk simply not notice the fact that they’re literally talking about his friends and coworkers? they literally say HIS name in b boy bouillabaisse: stop that train. or am i meant to believe that he’s conveniently not heard some of their most popular music? intergalactic is their third top song on spotify. there’s no way he hasn’t heard it. is he just really really oblivious? or are the beastie boys just some sort of prophetic gods in this universe? director jj abrams, i applaud your music choices but by making the beastie boys canon in star trek you have opened up a whole can of worms and i don’t intend on letting you rest until you solve this mystery for me. WHAT IS THE TRUTH!

[stqrgirl3]

𝖒𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖘!!!

@celestialserenity24 - andrea⋆.˚🌕⋆⭒˚｡⋆

@ameliascreampuffs - ames˚˖𓍢ִ໋🌷͙֒✧˚.

@marshadowstea - marshiee ⋆｡°•☁️ (I LOVE YOU I SWEAR /gen)

@sxfiaaa - sof ⋆𐙚₊˚⊹ ᡣ𐭩

@buunnyb00 - bunny ૮꒰ ˶• ༝ •˶꒱ა ♡

@cherryswift13 - cherry🍪⁺˚⋆｡°✩₊

@vintagetee13 - aimee‧₊˚❀༉‧₊˚.

@edsbug - bug₊˚ʚ 🌱 ₊˚✧ ﾟ.

@sleepy-vix - vix｡𖦹°‧★

@daydream-of-a-wallflower - kat ˚˖𓍢ִ໋🦢˚𐚁๋࣭

@justafanbutcurious - duru!༄˚˖𓍢ִ✧˚.

@academic-vampire - jack ⋆.ೃ࿔ᵕ̈.𖦹📜ˎˊ˗

@sleepinginmygrave - jupiter˖°𓇼🐋⋆🫧

@thatswh3n - bee ⋆｡°•🌧️

@julyrivers - river 🌊⋆ ₊˚

@annie-one - annie ˚₊‧⁺⋆🌿

@dinosaurthecaliforniagirlanon - dino ༘ .⋆𖦹 🦕⋆｡˚

@andytheoverthinker -

@icanttalkimhavingacrisis - joy! 𖤓°⋆࿔*

@marylily-my-beloved - fatima ࿔𝜗𝜚˚⋆

@all-too-unwell-13 - rose!⋆౨ৎ˚🧣⟡˖ ࣪

@eef-stars - ethan ✧˚🪐♡

@prongsbitch - james!🦌๋࣭ ⭑☆｡

@definitionoffuckup - my starry night ‧₊˚𓇼 ⋆. 𓆝

@ravenwordss - raven✧˚⋆｡˚𓄿

@garden-of-carnations -

@glcive -

@seekmemystar - itar!˙✧˖°🪷🛺⋆｡˚

@bonsai-willis - bonsai𓇢𓆸 ₊˚🌱 ₊

@im-on-crack-send-help - riyanaa⋆⁺₊❄️.

@thatrandommatildafan - matty ✩°｡🧸

@sotiredimbored - kuko!·˚𓆉 ༘₊·

@czaixxrose - czai🦈๋࣭ ⭑˚˖𓍢ִִ໋

@inanan15 - naan౨ৎ˚⟡˖ ࣪💗ྀིྀི

(!!!these arent all my moots if i havent added u here i swear i love u soso much ofgskjfj ive only added the few ones i talk to alot this is mainly for me to keep track of the tags :( im srry if i didnt add u id love to talk more tho!!!! <333

uhhhh also i wasnt able to find a few of the tags for yall so like ??? i swear i will ksfjsjgj also also can yall give me ur tumblr names too if its like not on ur blog or smth ? :) thankuuusjd

[trumanbluee]

masterlist ⋆𐙚₊˚⊹

.ᐟ means there is smut / nsfw material !!!

marvel ˎˊ˗

you're the one that i want - deadpool / wade wilson .ᐟ

biting wade wilson

giving wade wilson head - (req) .ᐟ

squirting! with wade wilson - (req) .ᐟ

going out with wade wilson without his mask

wade wilson using your sex toy on you .ᐟ

lights out - deadpool / wade wilson .ᐟ

wade wilson p links .ᐟ

matty healy ˎˊ˗

an encounter .ᐟ

the only time i feel i might get better .ᐟ

if its not with you (part one) .ᐟ

if its not with you (part two) .ᐟ

marauders ˎˊ˗

how you get the girl - remus lupin

about time - james potter (req)

©trumanbluee - reblogs, comments, and likes are always appreciated! but i do not wish for my work to be republished, translated, or copied. thanks!

[pranklinfierce]

Since like 11* people on Instagram either commented or SU'd when I posted this in a story, this image proved compelling enough to share elsewhere.

This is a real video that you can watch here

I immediately had too many thoughts to keep to myself so these are my notes:

*it used to say 9 but then more people SU'd

[nikolasongsa]

"A good soldier follows orders, but a true warrior wears his enemy’s skin like a poncho.”

-James Mattis

[aithusarosekiller]

Is it bad to start planning a new Jegulus fic when I have a levels to revise for

Like I'm already writing several and now I have a new idea 😞😞

It started with this and now I'm brainstorming knowing I'll never logically be able to get it done:

Barty: Okay, speaking as a friend, I have do ask this...what are you gonna do when this all goes to shit? When he has enough and fucks off?

Regulus, casually: probably kill myself

Meanwhile James and Lily are having the same conversation on the other side of the city

[joe-spookyy]

something i find intriguing about re-animator (1985) and its sequel bride of re-animator (1990) is how truly similar they are to frankenstein (1931) and bride of frankenstein (1934), SPECIFICALLY in regards to their queercoding. the original re-animator stories were of course, according to lovecraft, written as a parody to mary shelley’s frankenstein. however in the cases of both films and their sequels, they differ significantly from the original source material. interestingly, though, it seems they have a lot in common with each other. sound interesting? read on.

obviously, there are base level similarities in the original frankenstein movie and original re-animator movie. both feature a classic mad scientist figure with the goal to conquer death. and both films end with the supposed death of their mad scientists, along with their creations. but where the real similarities, as well as the heavier queercoding comes in, is with bride of frankenstein, and of course, bride of re-animator.

so, to draw the comparisons and explain the queercoding, we first have to establish the characters, and who they tie to in the other film. first, we look at the classic queercoded mad scientist. in the first movie, herbert west is mirrored by henry frankenstein. however, in bride of frankenstein, the character that more lines up with his character archetype and plot line is dr. septimus praetorius. for those unfamiliar with the character, dr praetorius seeks out henry frankenstein, a former student of his, hoping for his assistance in creating life. although the relationship between dan cain and herbert west is not that of a teacher/student arrangement, we still see herbert seeking out dan’s help in building the bride. and of course, both west and praetorius are often read as queer. with west as praetorius, dan cain falls in as henry frankenstein. both are reluctant to return to the whole re-animating dead bodies business, clinging onto the life of “normalcy” they think they can have, and pushing back against the other man who is trying to draw them back in. dan and henry are both less often read as queer, but if you step back, it’s very easy to see.

now, we can look at the plot and how it influences a queer reading of the characters. aside from the similarities in name, there’s a lot in common in the two movies. early in the bride of frankenstein, praetorius tries to draw henry in with some of his own miniature creations - several small homunculi. this actually sort of mirrors the scene we all know and love from bride of reanimator, where herbert brings the finger/eyeball puppy to life. there’s a little more queercoding in the scene from re-animator. herbert reads almost like a proud father, showing the critter to dan, and it’s then followed by dan telling herbert that he’s “moving out”, coming across as almost a breakup/i’m leaving you moment, which is met with extreme dismay.

of course, in both cases, these small demonstrations aren’t quite enough to sway henry and dan to the cause. praetorius starts by promising henry his original creation, the creature, as long as henry helps him craft a bride, but ends up having to step things up and uses henry’s fiancée, elizabeth, as bait to convince him. sound a bit familiar? in bride of re-animator, herbert convinces dan to join in again on the reanimation with promises that he can return his dead fiancée meg to him. again, this scene plays out significantly more homoerotically, with herbert producing meg’s heart and offering it to dan. yeah. herbert offered dan his heart. and it works. dan’s sold. now, you’re probably thinking, what’s so homoerotic about joining forces with a man just to get your girl back? well. listen. it’s more, in this case on the part of herbert and praetorius. there’s something very homoerotic in using love to entice a man into creating life with you. and yes, technically it is heterosexuality being taken advantage of here. but there’s still a bit of seduction that’s happening. if herbert and praetorius can’t draw the others in the way they’d like to, they know they can take advantage of the emotions on dan and henry’s end.

additionally, we know west and praetorius are queercoded from more than just this specific scenario. it comes through simply in the way the actors portray them, their lines, and their actions. praetorius was intended that way, despite the movie being produced in an era where the hays code was enforced. actor ernest theisger was allegedly told by director james whale, an out gay man, to play the character as an “over the top caricature of a bitchy and aging homosexual.” which. is kind of hilarious. and herbert west is. well. where do i even begin. actor jeffrey combs chose to play him in a Way, and there are nods to herbert’s lack of interest in women throughout both films (to me beyond reanimator does not exist), most overtly shown when one of his coworkers asks herbert if a recently female deceased patient was attractive, and is met with the single most effective “are you fucking stupid” stare i have ever seen. this, in my opinion is clearer than if he would have just declared then and there that he was a homosexual. but i digress. he also shows nothing but disdain and frankly, a little jealousy, towards dan’s girlfriends, slinking away to sulk in the basement and reanimate some random limbs, or, in the first movie, pushing meg out of the frame and physically coming between her and dan in the shot, symbolic of how he promptly pushes her out of dan’s life entirely.

but what about dan and henry? as far as we’ve discussed, they don’t seem to be reciprocating any of herbert or praetorius’s advances. BUT when it comes time to create the titular brides, both dan and henry seem to finally give in to the temptations. of course, there’s the inherent homoeroticism of creating life with another man. and of course, dan choosing to stick with herbert despite what he’s been put through doesn’t make a lot of sense if you don’t consider there might be more than friendship involved there. but what really matters is how they both lean into it towards the end of their respective films, throwing away their chance at a “normal” heterosexual life with elizabeth (in henry’s case) or francesca (in dan’s) to stick with their own queercoded little mad scientists and continue the work. the moment where each of them finally gives in is clear. henry’s comes when the first heart they attempt to put in the bride is not worthy, and he makes an Active choice and asks for another heart. dan’s is in the final seconds before re-animating their bride, when he makes an Active choice, taking the syringe from herbert and asking that he himself be the one to start the process. both men finally go from passively following their counterparts, in dan’s case rather like a dog to its master, to finally making that active choice and turning to the other side. and the other side, represented by west and praetorius and blasphemy and evil science, can also be a symbol of that queerness. they really step into and embrace creating life with that other man, despite the perfectly fine and normal life that they Could have with their fiancées. it can sort of be read as an allegory for homosexuality alongside bisexuality - praetorius and herbert both only have the scientific way of creating life, and no chance at societal “normalcy”, if we read them both as gay. and they bring henry and dan into their queerness, who can be read as bisexual: they have the opportunity to pursue a societally “normal” life. but they also have the opportunity to do the very opposite.

and finally, in true bury your gays fashion, dan and francesca, as well as henry and elizabeth, escape unharmed, while herbert and praetorius along with their creations, are left to die as the building collapses. the creature leaves us with the haunting line “we belong dead”, referring to himself, his bride, AND praetorius. they’re all, in their own ways, a part of a world they don’t belong to. and the same goes for herbert and his creations. in both movies, heterosexuality triumphs, since that’s what we’re supposed to see as “good” and “normal”, fitting in with our good and normal protagonists who both make the last minute choice to save their girls and escape, abandoning the other men to die. despite being queercoded, the idea of being queer cannot be endorsed by the narrative, and so the story must end this way. even in 1975’s incredibly queer film The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which is another frankenstein esque story, the queer creator frank n furter and his creation rocky both die, while janet and brad, a “straight” couple, manage to survive. it’s an interesting take on the idea of being doomed by the narrative that seems to appear in a lot of frankenstein adaptations.

anyways. sorry for yapping so hard but bride of frankenstein and bride of reanimator are so similar to each other that they end up queercoded in very similar ways and follow the same pattern as many frankenstein adaptations. yeah.

[superseal76]

Toby Regbo Appreciation. Just Because😌😏

[trumanbluee]

woww 500 followers!!!! thank u guys !!! <3333 this is a representation of me every time i open tumblr;