I'm watchinng in youtube : Waching daily Jan 28 2018

so you left Los Angeles and you're back in Washington what was the impetus for that

moving to Washington mm-hmm I just needed a new new scene you know

needed some more green I kind of liked the rain I'm going to do like beautiful

rain down on me there you go Oh fan yeah but at what point because everybody

talks about going somewhere else but a lot of people don't do it

what was it where you just said it's time and FA IIIi want to change the

course in my life well one of the pieces was I was young and probably twenty four

or five so when were younger we have more flexibility I think in our choices

and in our lifestyles and things like that so one of the things that I try to

get across to my college students I teach song writing and recording to

college students which other oh that's a job or you kidding me I love it but I

try to get them to understand the power and flexibility of their youth because

they don't really know it because they haven't been 15 years older yet right

they haven't been in the workforce and running around they're just getting out

of school or in school um so that was a piece of it being young and not you know

I knew where it's sort of where I wanted to go with my life but it just seemed

like it seemed like good place yeah another thing that I say a lot in these

interviews but I'm gonna say it again is that when you're 20 24 people give

you Pat's on the back and they give you add a girl at a boy you can do it when

you're 40 they don't do that and sometimes I think it's because there's

part of them that wants to do it and they can't and then that's all very real

thing in the adult world you have certain rules and obligations and so

then you don't get as many added girls that's true

maybe you can't drop everything and move to a different city but you always can

do something and that is the key right a huge difference and you know you got to

pay the rent whatever the deal is okay I get that you know of course but if you

if you want to be a screenwriter spend a half an hour a day or two hours on a

Saturday or whatever it is a little bit of time and you you absolutely can do

that it's just about prioritizing right are you watching TV or are you writing

on your screenplay right I mean let's get real going back to the image in the

beginning of your book yeah are you going to the bar or you practicing

guitar right so I mean there's a million ways to go there's a million things that

you probably don't need in your life you have to play video games for two hours a

day mm-hmm probably not you know you can do something productive with that if you

choose right what about that being a lonelier way because going to the bar

there's also 20 other people that can be part of what then this isn't my quota

ain't it awful Club it's from Peter McWilliams you know book and and and he

said there's one in every workplace there's one in every bar and and it's

great you can commiserate you can talk we know politics as a hot-button right

now but you go back home and you write that screenplay it's pretty much just

you it's lonely it is lonely life is lonely right but it's yours to

choose so if you wanna if you want to be in that Club go ahead but don't whine to

me about it right or yourself because we all have power right and perhaps it is

lonely writing by yourself but guess what there's a million writing clubs out

there writing meetups and things like that so join one of those that's true

and suddenly you're all writing by yourself but at least you at the same

table right I mean I've done that a million times is that why you're writing

coffee shops or maybe you don't I'm just assuming I do sometimes sometimes

not yeah I mean that's that's why half the people go to coffee shop in Seattle

you will see 40 people in a room four or five of them are talking to each other

and everybody else is on the computer doing something why do they do that

because they want to be together even though they're separate and I mean I'm

not saying it's the greatest thing in the world we do it together

you know I kind of want to be together but it's it's something

you

For more infomation >> An Advantage 25 Year Old Creatives Have Over Everyone Else by Jeff Leisawitz - Duration: 5:05.

-------------------------------------------

16 Signs To Tell If A Shy Guy Likes You - Duration: 4:31.

16 Signs To Tell If A Shy Guy Likes You

Sometimes, you think shy is cool.

Unfortunately, you just do not know whether he is interested in you.

After all, they often act differently a lot of the time they like someone.

So, it's quiet tricky to determine whether they like you or not.

Despite being unique, doesn't mean that you can't figure out if a shy guy interested

in you.

In fact, there are actually a lot of signs that appear to be more obvious than a guy

with more confidence.

Not only that, but here's another fact, shy guys are not the type that will likely

to play games or be subtle about liking you.

The reason is simple, if to simply walk up and ask you out he will need to muster all

of his confidence and courage, then he's not likely to have the confidence to play

hard to get or otherwise try to play games with you.

If you're interested to know whether a shy guy likes you or not, here are 16 signs to

help you answer that question.

If you're new to our channel, make sure to click the subscribe button below, and don't

forget to like this video if you find this information is helpful to you.

#1 - Looking at you

Don't turn your head but use your peripheral vision to look at the guy you are targeting.

A shy guy usually will look at you as long as you are not looking at him.

#2 - He always tries to talk to you

Shy guys are usually always within a group.

They do not like approaching girls even though deep inside they really want it.

When they step out from the group, you know they are up to something.

#3 - Different treatment

You will receive different treatment, and it is mostly positive for you.

It is just like he is going to serve you.

#4 - He opens up

Shy guy is usually introverted, and he does not talk a lot about himself.

If he starts to tells something, it definitely means something,

#5 - Annoyed when talking about other guy

Shy guy is sometimes jealous.

When you talk about someone else, his expression changes and it is quite creepy.

#6 - He shows interest

It is not too obvious.

However, it is seen when he tries to do new activity that you also like.

#7 - He tries to call you

It is important to note that shy guy does not like to be seen.

That is why he opts to call instead.

#8 - His friend teases him

Friends usually help in a weird way by teasing him when you are around.

#9 - Too shy to make a move

Sometimes, shy guy is just too shy to make the first move.

If you like him, be sure to tease him a little to make him open up to you more.

#10 - Stands up for you

Shy guy usually hides behind others.

However, he can step up in the front to make you feel comfortable.

#11 - Remember little things

You never realize that he actually remember small details that you do not even remember.

If he does, he really cares about you.

#12 - More sociable

He tries to approach you, and that is why he tries to be more sociable.

He tries to be active in a conversation and he even throws some jokes.

#13 - Confusion

Sometimes, shy guy is not sure whether he is worthy to be with you.

This confusion can lead to dangerous effect in long term.

#14 - Body language

Acting weird or clumsy is the character of shy guy when meeting you.

Pay attention to it, and you can guess whether he likes you.

#15 - He tries to talk to your friend

Just to know you better, he tries to befriend with your friend.

It is a great improvement from a shy guy into more talkative person.

#16 - He cares

He cares, listens, understands, and respects you.

More importantly, it is genuinely from his heart since he wants to know you better.

All in all, that's the 16 signs to tell if a shy guy likes you.

Really cool information isn't it?

Please share your thoughts and experiences in the comments below!

Don't forget to subscribe to our channel and watch all our other amazing videos!

Thanks for watching!

For more infomation >> 16 Signs To Tell If A Shy Guy Likes You - Duration: 4:31.

-------------------------------------------

REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUR EASY WAYS TO #RELEASETHEMEMO — AND THE EVI - Duration: 11:16.

REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUR EASY WAYS TO #RELEASETHEMEMO � AND THE EVIDENCE FOR IT

REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUR EASY WAYS TO #RELEASETHEMEMO � AND THE EVIDENCE FOR IT.

NOT DOING SO WILL PROVE THEM TO BE SHAMELESS FRAUDS.

ONE OF THE gravest and most damaging abuses of state power is to misuse surveillance authorities

for political purposes.

For that reason, The Intercept, from its inception, has focused extensively on these issues.

We therefore regard as inherently serious strident warnings from public officials alleging

that the FBI and Department of Justice have abused their spying power for political purposes.

Social media last night and today have been flooded with inflammatory and quite dramatic

claims now being made by congressional Republicans about a four-page memo alleging abuses of

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act spying processes during the 2016 election.

This memo, which remains secret, was reportedly written under the direction of the chair of

the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, GOP Rep. Devin Nunes, and has been read by

dozens of members of Congress after the committee voted to make the memo available to all members

of the House of Representatives to examine in a room specially designated for reviewing

classified material.

The rhetoric issuing from GOP members who read the memo is notably extreme.

North Carolina Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, chair of the House Freedom Caucus, called

the memo �troubling� and �shocking� and said, �Part of me wishes that I didn�t

read it because I don�t want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening

in this country that I call home and love so much.� GOP Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania

stated: �You think about, �Is this happening in America or is this the KGB?� That�s

how alarming it is.�

This has led to a ferocious outcry on the right to �release the memo� � and presumably

thereby prove that the Obama administration conducted unlawful surveillance on the Trump

campaign and transition.

On Thursday night, Fox News host and stalwart Trump ally Sean Hannity claimed that the memo

described �the systematic abuse of power, the weaponizing of those powerful tools of

intelligence and the shredding of our Fourth Amendment constitutional rights.�

Given the significance of this issue, it is absolutely true that the memo should be declassified

and released to the public � and not just the memo itself.

The House Intelligence Committee generally and Nunes specifically have a history of making

unreliable and untrue claims (its report about Edward Snowden was full of falsehoods, as

Bart Gellman amply documented, and prior claims from Nunes about �unmasking� have been

discredited).

Thus, mere assertions from Nunes � or anyone else � are largely worthless; Republicans

should provide American citizens not merely with the memo they claim reveals pervasive

criminality and abuse of power, but also with all of the evidence underlying its conclusions.

President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have the power, working together or separately,

to immediately declassify all the relevant information.

And if indeed the GOP�s explosive claims are accurate � if, as HPSCI member Steve

King, R-Iowa, says, this is �worse than Watergate� � they obviously have every

incentive to get it into the public�s hands as soon as possible.

Indeed, one could argue that they have the duty to do so.

On the other hand, if the GOP�s claims are false or significantly misleading � if they

are, with the deepest cynicism imaginable, simply using these crucial issues to whip

up their base or discredit the Mueller investigation, or exaggerating or making claims that lack

any evidentiary support, or trying to have the best of all worlds by making explosive

claims about the memo but never having to prove their truth � then they will either

not release the memo or they will release it without any supporting documentation, making

it impossible for Americans to judge its accuracy for themselves.

Anyone who is genuinely concerned about the claims being made about eavesdropping abuses

should understand why the issue of evidence is so critical.

After all, the House, Senate, and FBI investigations into any Trump collusion with Russia have

so far proceeded with many startling claims in the media, but to date little hard evidence

for the public to judge.

Nobody rational should be assuming any claims or assertions from partisan actors about the

2016 election are true without seeing evidence to substantiate those claims.

The good news is there are at least four easy ways for congressional Republicans and/or

Trump to definitively prove that all the right�s darkest suspicions about the Obama administration

are true.

If this memo and the underlying documents prove even a fraction of what GOP politicians

and media figures are claiming about them, then what could possibly justify its ongoing

concealment?

Any or all of these methods should be promptly invoked to ensure that the public sees this

evidence:

TRUMP CAN DECLASSIFY ANYTHING HE WANTS.

All classification by the U.S. government has no basis in laws passed by Congress (with

one tiny exception that is irrelevant here).

Rather, all classification is based on presidential executive orders, which rely on the president�s

constitutional role as commander in chief of the armed forces.

According to the Supreme Court, the presidential power �to classify and control access to

information bearing on national security � flows primarily from the constitutional investment

of power in the president.�

That means presidents can also declassify anything they chose to � for any reason

or no reason � as they have done in the past.

George W. Bush, under pressure in 2004, declassified the section of the 2001 presidential daily

brief headlined �Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.� Barack Obama declassified

the Justice Department memos produced during the Bush presidency on the legality of torture.

Thus if the House Intelligence Committee merely releases a version of its memo without the

supporting documentation, that won�t be just because they don�t want Americans to

see it � it will be because Trump doesn�t want us to see it either.

Note that GOP House members are insistent that releasing the memo and the underlying

source material would not remotely harm national security:

So what possible justification is there for Trump to continue to conceal this alleged

evidence of massive criminality from the American people by hiding it behind �classified�

designations?

Indeed, it is illegal to abuse classified designations to hide evidence of official

criminality: so not only can Trump declassify such evidence, one could argue that he must,

or at least should.

THE HOUSE (AND SENATE) INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEES CAN DECLASSIFY ANY MATERIAL THEY POSSESS.

According to the procedural rules of both houses of Congress, their intelligence committees

can declassify material in their possession if the committee votes that such declassification

would be in the public interest.

It is then declassified after five days unless the president formally objects.

If the president does object, the full chamber votes on the question.

It is true that � in a measure of how embarrassingly deferential Congress is to the executive branch

� neither the House nor the Senate intelligence committees has ever utilized this power, so

it�s impossible to know how this gambit would play out in practice.

But if Trump refused to release proof of the Obama administration�s misdeeds, congressional

Republicans should have a straightforward way to overrule him.

THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM PROSECUTION FOR �ANY SPEECH OR DEBATE

IN EITHER HOUSE.� Members of Congress have legal immunity for

acts they commit as part of the legislative process.

Article I, Section 6, clause 1 of the Constitution states that �for any speech or debate in

either House, [Senators and Representatives] shall not be questioned in any other place.�

It is this constitutional shield that protected Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska from legal consequences

in 1971 when he read sections of the Pentagon Papers during a meeting of the Senate Subcommittee

on Public Buildings and Grounds, and then placed the rest of the Pentagon Papers into

the Congressional Record.

It�s true that members could face legal consequences for ancillary acts � perhaps

if they unlawfully removed the relevant material from the congressional SCIF.

But they could go to the House floor and describe both the memo�s revelations and the underlying

evidence for it without any fear of legal consequences.

If the memo really proves what they claim, it would seem to be their patriotic duty would

compel them do this.

Ordinary citizens � like Daniel Ellsberg, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning � have

risked prison in order to expose what they believed were serious official crimes; these

members of Congress can do this without any of those consequences.

So what justifies their failure to do this?

REPUBLICANS CAN LEAK EVERYTHING TO THE NEWS MEDIA.

If for some reason Trump and the congressional leadership refuse to use any of the above

options to vindicate themselves, a brave member of Congress could turn whistleblower and transmit

the classified proof of the GOP�s claims about the memo to the news media.

Many outlets now have secure methods of sending sensitive material to them, such as Secure

Drop.

Those for The Intercept can be found here.

(All leaking entails risks, as we describe in our manual for whistleblowers.)

So that�s that.

All Americans, particularly conservatives, should ask every Republican making spectacular

assertions about this memo when they will be using the above ways to conclusively demonstrate

that everything they�ve said is based in rock-solid fact.

If they do not, Republicans will conclusively demonstrate something else.

They will prove conclusively that all of this is about them shamelessly making claims they

do not actually believe, fraudulently posturing as caring about one of the most vital, fundamental

issues facing the United States: how the U.S. government uses the vast surveillance powers

with which it has been vested.

For more infomation >> REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUR EASY WAYS TO #RELEASETHEMEMO — AND THE EVI - Duration: 11:16.

-------------------------------------------

🔴⚫洗濯機への関税は貿易戦争の始まり？(1/29/18) - Duration: 5:13.

For more infomation >> 🔴⚫洗濯機への関税は貿易戦争の始まり？(1/29/18) - Duration: 5:13.

-------------------------------------------

The Rise and Fall of Television News - Duration: 8:01.

The Rise and Fall of Television News

When network television news was created in the late 1940s, no one in charge knew how

to do it. It was a new creature.

Sponsors? Yes. A studio with a desk and an anchor? Yes. A list of top stories? Yes. Important

information for the public? Yes.

Of course, �important information� could have several definitions � and the CIA already

had a few claws into news, so there would be boundaries and fake stories within those

boundaries.

The producers knew the anchor was the main event; his voice, his manner, his face. He

was the actor in a one-man show. But what should he project to the audience at home?

The first few anchors were dry sandpaper. John Cameron Swayze at NBC, and Douglas Edwards

at CBS. But Swayze, also a quiz show host, broke out of the mold and imparted a bit of

�cheery� to his broadcasts. A no-no. So he was eventually dumped.

In came a duo. Chet Huntley and David Brinkley. NBC co-anchors from 1956 to 1970. Chet was

the heavy, with a somber baritone, and David was �twinkly,� as he was called by network

insiders. He lightened the mood with a touch of sarcasm and an occasional grin.

It worked. Ratings climbed. Television news as show biz started to take off. At the end

of every broadcast, there was: �Good night, Chet.� �Good night, David.� The audience

ate it up. They loved that tag.

However, rival CBS wasn�t standing still. They offloaded their anchor, Douglas Edwards,

a bland egg, and brought in Walter Cronkite, who would go on to do 19 years in the chair

(1962-1981).

Walter was Chet Huntley with a difference. As he grew older, he emerged as a father,

a favorite uncle, with an authoritative hills-and-valleys baritone that created instant trust. Magic.

A news god was born.

Despite many efforts at the three major networks, no anchor over the past 40 years has been

able to pull off the full Cronkite effect.

The closest recent competitor � until he was fired for lying and exiled to the waste

dump at MSNBC � was Brian Williams. Williams artfully executed a reversal of tradition.

He portrayed the youthful prodigy, a gradually maturing version of a newsboy who once bicycled

along country roads, threw folded up papers on front porches, and knew all his customers

by name. A good boy. A local boy. Your neighbor under the maple trees of an idyllic town.

Cue the memories.

By the time Williams took over the helm at NBC, television news was decidedly a team

operation. There were reporters in the field.

The technology enabled the anchor to go live to these bit players, who tried to exude the

impression they were actually running down leads and interviewing key sources on the

spot � when in fact they could just as well be doing their stand-ups from a hot dog cart

outside 30 Rockefeller Plaza, the home studio of the network � because most of their information

was really coming from inside that studio.

Nevertheless, the team was everything. The anchor was a manager, and his job was to impart

an authentic feel to every look-in, from the White House to Paris to Berlin to Jerusalem

to Beijing to a polar bear on an iceberg.

And local television news was blowing up to gargantuan proportions. Every city and town

and village and hamlet seemed to have its own gaggle of hearty faces delivering vital

info of interest to the citizenry. Branding and shaping this local phenomenon evolved

into: FAMILY.

Yes, that was the ticket. These bubbly, blown-dry, enthused, manic news and weather and sports

hawks were really �part of the community.� News was no longer shoveled high and deep

with an air of objectivity. �Aloof� was out.

Share and care was in. What that had to do with actual news was anyone�s guess, but

there it was. �Hi, we�re your team at KX6, and we feel

what you feel and we live here with you and we know when the roads are icy and the wrecks

pile up on the I-15 and our friends the cops arrest someone for cocaine possession and

when the charity bake sale is coming up to pay for [toxic] meds for seniors at the nursing

home and when your cousin Judy passes away we mourn as you do��

News for and by a fictional collective.

Disney news.

A caricature of a simulacrum of an imitation.

The discovery was: the viewing audience wanted news as a cartoon.

The problem is: this model deteriorates. The descending IQ of the news producers and anchors

and reporters undergoes a grotesque revolution.

Year by year, broadcasts make less sense. Even on the national scene, NBC hands its

prime anchor spot to Lester Holt, who plays the old Addams Family living corpse, Lurch.

ABC, always looking for a new face, goes all in with David Muir, a Sears underwear-model

type.

CBS counters with a youngish cipher, Jeff Glor, after ridding itself of Scott Pelley,

who, true to his on-camera persona, might show up on The Young and the Restless as a

lunatic surgeon doing operations without anesthetic.

The networks are losing it.

It�s a sight to behold.

Cable news is even worse. The longest surviving anchor is Wolf Blitzer at CNN. Wolf�s energy

level tops out as a man in a tattered bathrobe, in his kitchen, chatting with his cousin while

they play checkers.

Meanwhile, independent online news comes on like a storm.

Turns out it fills a need that has been there since the beginning of television.

You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but

between those two extremes, there are millions and millions of people who recognize the so-called

real news has been fake for a long time.

They�ve left that bubble.

The artfulness of network news has disintegrated and failed.

Pop goes the weasel.

Major media long ago built their wall. The wall protects everyone from bloated corrupt

government institutions, mega-corporate partners of government, and major banks, to street

thugs.

Now, as these media fail to magnetize minds as in days of yore, the wall is crumbing.

Therefore, what is behind it is being exposed.

More importantly, people are coming to see their thoughts and constructions of reality

are imports, not their own. The tonnage of pictures fed to them, along with voiceover,

were forgeries.

WHAT IS, was the business of the news. That business has lost its traction.

To some, this amounts to bubbling confusion. To others, it is a fresh clean breeze blowing

through an empty house, which imagination can remake in more bracing forms.

The future is open, unscripted.

A new day, if we recognize it.

For more infomation >> The Rise and Fall of Television News - Duration: 8:01.

-------------------------------------------

شرايها عليا؟ الخزعة والاستئصال 12 مع د. لودي Biopsy and Removal - Duration: 14:30.

For more infomation >> شرايها عليا؟ الخزعة والاستئصال 12 مع د. لودي Biopsy and Removal - Duration: 14:30.

-------------------------------------------

Un poco de amor francés - Los Redondos (L'etoile Disco, San Carlos, Santa Fe, 20-06-1992) CC - Duration: 3:38.

For more infomation >> Un poco de amor francés - Los Redondos (L'etoile Disco, San Carlos, Santa Fe, 20-06-1992) CC - Duration: 3:38.

-------------------------------------------

সত্যি ভালবাসা কি ? কেন সবাই পাইনা || true love vs false love || motivational video in bangla - Duration: 5:12.

For more infomation >> সত্যি ভালবাসা কি ? কেন সবাই পাইনা || true love vs false love || motivational video in bangla - Duration: 5:12.

-------------------------------------------

My Morning Skincare Routine [CC] // aGirlWithLyme - Duration: 2:44.

[Intro Music. Vincent Tone - New Summits]

Hi guys, in today's video I'm going to show you my morning skincare routine. So before we

get in the video please be sure to give this a thumbs up, subscribe if you're new.

Please be sure to check me out on Instagram and Twitter all my social media links will be in

the description below.

[Music. Diviners feat. Contacreast - Tropic Love [NCS Release]

Okay guys so the first thing I do is I wet my face cloth and I wash my face to

get my face nice and clean. I then take my St. Ives green tea blackhead scrub

and I scrub this all over my face. Sometimes when I wake up in the morning

my face feels kind of gunky so I like to do this just to make sure that my face

feels nice and fresh and clean.

I then go ahead and rinse that off

The next thing I do is just pat my face nice and dry so I can move on to my cleanser

The cleanser I use is the PHisoderm creamy cleanser for oily

skin. This really helped my skin and it's basically why my skin looks as good as

it does, even though my skin to look the greatest. I'm fully aware that my skin

has a lot of pimples has lot of acne scars - but my skin used to be so much worse

than this. I will then rinse off the cleanser and I

will pat my skin dry.

I will then move on to my sukin oil balancing mattifying facial moisturizer

and I make sure to rub this in very well.

And that is all of my morning skincare routine. Thank you so much for watching

this video, please be sure to give it a thumbs up, subscribe if you're new. Please

be sure to hit the notification button down below to get notified when I upload

new videos. All my social media links will be in the description below and I

hope to see you guys next time, bye!

[Outro Music. Vincent Tone - New Summits]

For more infomation >> My Morning Skincare Routine [CC] // aGirlWithLyme - Duration: 2:44.

-------------------------------------------

U23 VIỆT NAM - U23 UZBEKISTAN: LỒNG TIẾNG TRỌNG TÀI TRONG PHA ẨU ĐẢ CỰC HÀI HƯỚC - Duration: 1:12.

For more infomation >> U23 VIỆT NAM - U23 UZBEKISTAN: LỒNG TIẾNG TRỌNG TÀI TRONG PHA ẨU ĐẢ CỰC HÀI HƯỚC - Duration: 1:12.

-------------------------------------------

[ Tân Vua Hài Kịch ] Dragon Ball 💥 Bảy viên ngọc rồng ⚡️ Các trận đánh của khỉ con ☄️ Phần 10 - Duration: 1:05:30.

For more infomation >> [ Tân Vua Hài Kịch ] Dragon Ball 💥 Bảy viên ngọc rồng ⚡️ Các trận đánh của khỉ con ☄️ Phần 10 - Duration: 1:05:30.

-------------------------------------------