Leaderboard

Its yo buta @Blackfire @Estoy Solito(JAJAJAJAJAJA)

my Problem is Solved thx to @Mr.Daniel ♔♔♔ / @pulse.exe / @Blackfire

ha nta rja3ti 3iw 3iw :VV

Congra v.i.p

Delete your Inbox messages (PM!) you are full @A Li Al Ayash Also is full

Welcome to Staff PGLZm

?

see my pm

who's still alive :3

you're in blacklist.✞Blacklist NewLifeZM✞ Rejected!

Bro Read Pm

Accepted. Send me pw in pm. T/C

?

Your name: Cibo Claimed Admin name: @d`Squad # pLay^b0y Date and time: 28/01/2019 - 20:55:11 Reason of complaint: he use slap commands 2:27 time Proof (screenshot or console or demo): MP4 .

Rejected T/C !

Finally back at community, how are you guys doing? ?

Banned for 2 reasons: you got 2 reports where I warned you to not create a multi account and you did that twice and now you are asking for likes. Sometimes people can't read some easy rules.

v1,blur

CARACAS, Venezuela -- President Nicolas Maduro faced increasing international pressure Saturday, as European governments threatened to recognize his chief opponent as Venezuela's leader unless a plan for new elections is announced within eight days. The statements from Germany, France, Spain, the Netherlands and Britain came as U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pressed the United Nations to throw its support behind Juan Guaido, the leader of the opposition-controlled National Assembly, who declared himself president on Wednesday. Your subscription supports journalism that matters. Subscribe now for unlimited access to The Democrat-Gazette The United States and most Latin American countries have recognized Guaido as interim leader in recent days, after Maduro was sworn in for a second term after elections riddled with fraud. But Russia, China and others have defended Maduro. Guaido's actions have represented the most significant challenge yet to Maduro, whose socialist policies have contributed to an economic meltdown in the oil-rich country. "After banning opposition candidates, ballot box stuffing and counting irregularities in a deeply flawed election it is clear Nicolas Maduro is not the legitimate leader of Venezuela," Jeremy Hunt, Britain's foreign minister, tweeted Saturday. Maduro responded to the U.S. recognition of Guaido on Wednesday by severing relations and giving American diplomats 72 hours to leave the country. Pompeo, however, declared that Maduro's orders were no longer legitimate and that the embassy would remain open. On Saturday, Venezuela's government backtracked on the deadline. Venezuela's Foreign Affairs Ministry said it is negotiating the establishment of a U.S. Interests Office and will allow U.S. Embassy personnel to remain in the country while talks take place. It said that talks about an interest section will have a 30-day limit and if no agreement is reached, embassy personnel will then have to leave. President Donald Trump's administration had refused to obey the directive and Saturday's decision puts off a potential conflict between the countries. Maduro has labeled Guaido's actions as part of a coup attempt and has ordered Venezuelan diplomats to shut down his country's embassy in Washington. It was unclear Saturday how many personnel remained at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas. A memo from the embassy obtained by The Washington Post in recent days said that 124 Americans, including 46 family members, were under its authority as of Thursday night. Retired diplomats said Maduro could respond to the U.S. defiance of his removal order in any number of ways -- including a military assault, which they said was unlikely. More probable, they said, was a siege of the facility, or an attack by pro-government mobs. Already, Maduro allies have threatened to cut off power to the complex. Diplomats and analysts said they could not recall a similar standoff involving U.S. diplomats. In his appearance Saturday at the U.N. Security Council, Pompeo warned the Venezuelan government again not to harm the American personnel in Caracas. "I want to be 100 percent clear -- President Trump and I fully expect that our diplomats will continue to receive protections provided under the Vienna Convention," he said. "Do not test the United States on our resolve to protect our own people." Some of Europe's most influential countries told Maduro on Saturday that if he did not call elections in eight days, they would recognize Guaido as interim president. They included Germany, Britain, Spain, France and the Netherlands, which has a naval presence at its island territories off Venezuela's coast. European Union members met Saturday to discuss the Venezuela crisis and issued a statement hinting that the entire 28-nation body could recognize Guaido if Maduro didn't announce elections soon, but didn't specify a deadline. Still, the action was an escalation by the EU, whose members have differed on how tough to be on the Venezuelan leader. "The EU strongly calls for the urgent holding of free, transparent and credible presidential elections in accordance with internationally democratic standards and the Venezuelan constitutional order," European foreign-policy chief Federica Mogherini said in the emailed statement sent Saturday in Brussels. "In the absence of an announcement on the organization of fresh elections with the necessary guarantees over the next days, the EU will take further actions, including on the issue of recognition of the country's leadership," the statement said. Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza dismissed the deadline. "Europe is giving us eight days?" he asked the Security Council. "Where do you get that you have the power to establish a deadline or an ultimatum to a sovereign people. It's almost childlike." Arreaza said Venezuela "will not allow anyone to impose on us any decision or order" and demanded that someone show him where in the country's constitution it states that an individual can proclaim himself president. As for possible military action to oust Maduro, Arreaza said, "we will not allow any government or any country to violate our sovereignty, and to give a pretext for Donald Trump to start a war." Guaido celebrated the European statements, telling a rally in a south Caracas park: "We have the EU support. They took a firm step toward our fight for democracy." Guaido promised not to abandon his effort to chase Maduro from office. He also took an informal vote among those present on a proposed amnesty law that he has promoted in the National Assembly. The majority there expressed support for the proposal to exonerate members of the police force and military who support the opposition's "restitution of democracy" while forcing the release of political prisoners. The immediate effect of an amnesty law is doubtful since a rival constitutional assembly Maduro formed in 2017 has taken over powers claimed by the freely elected National Assembly headed by Guaido. On Tuesday, Maduro's constitutional assembly declared null and void all legislative acts by the National Assembly, including Guaido's designation as president. At the U.N. Security Council meeting Saturday, the United States urged all nations to support Guaido while Russia accused the Trump administration of attempting "to engineer a coup d'etat" against Maduro. Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said that Venezuela doesn't threaten international peace and security and accused "extremist opponents" of Maduro's legitimate government of choosing "maximum confrontation," including the artificial creation of a parallel government. He urged Pompeo to say whether the U.S. will use military force. Pompeo later told reporters who asked for a response, "I am not going to speculate or hypothesize on what the U.S. will do next." The Security Council's five veto-wielding permanent members could not unite behind a statement on Venezuela, presenting widely differing texts. Opposition to Guaido was also reflected in the initial procedural vote on whether the 15-member Security Council should discuss the crisis in Venezuela, which is not on its official agenda. The United States barely survived the vote to go ahead with the meeting, receiving the minimum nine yes votes from the council's six Western nations along with Kuwait, Peru and the Dominican Republic. China, South Africa and Equatorial Guinea joined Russia in voting no while Indonesia and Ivory Coast abstained. Pompeo accused Russia and China of trying "to prop up Maduro while he is in dire straits ... in the hopes of recovering billions of dollars in ill-considered investments and assistance made over the years." He also said no country has done more to sustain "the nightmarish condition of the Venezuelan people" than Cuba. He said Cuba has sent "security and intelligence thugs" to sustain Maduro's "illegitimate rule." "Now is the time for every other national to pick a side," Pompeo said. "No more delays, no more games. Either you stand with the forces of freedom, or you're in league with Maduro and his mayhem." China's U.N. Ambassador Ma Zhaoxu said his government "firmly opposed" the U.S. accusations and doesn't interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. "We hope the country that accuses others can do likewise itself," Ma told the council. Russia's Nebenzia also rejected Pompeo's claims. Cuba's U.N. Ambassador Anayansi Rodriguez rejected "the deliberate" and "fake news" cast on the country not only by Pompeo but by Elliot Abrams, the new chief of U.S. policy on Venezuela who sat in the council after the secretary of state left. Abrams called Venezuela "a satellite of Cuba and Russia" -- which the three countries denied -- and said Saturday's meeting "is not about foreign intervention in Venezuela" but "about the right of Venezuelans to direct their own internal affairs and choose the future of their own country democratically." Information for this article was contributed by Mariana Zuniga and Mary Beth Sheridan, Rachelle Krygier, Andreina Elena Aponte, Michael Birnbaum, Anthony Faiola, John Hudson and Carol Morello of The Washington Post; by Edith M. Lederer and Scott Smith of The Associated Press; by Jonathan Stearns, Gregory Viscusi, Nikos Chrysoloras and Charles Penty of Bloomberg News; and by Tracy Wilkinson and Mery Mogollon of the Los Angeles Times.

Nick : ZZIIZZOU Name Of Server : StreetZM.CsBlackDevil.Com Picture of score :

❤️❤️❤️❤️

Hello Bro can Come facebook...

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, citing the government shutdown, urged President Donald Trump in a letter Wednesday to either reschedule his upcoming State of the Union address or to deliver it in writing to Congress. "He can make it from the Oval Office if he wants," Pelosi, D-California, later told reporters. In her letter to the president, Pelosi noted "security concerns" related to the partial shutdown's effect on the U.S. Secret Service, which is reponsible for security for the president's annual in-person address to a joint session of Congress. That speech, which is nationally televised, currently is scheduled for Jan. 29. "Both the U.S. Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security have not been funded for 26 days now — with critical departments hamstrung by furloughs," wrote Pelosi. "And since the start of modern budgeting in Fiscal Year 1977, a State of the Union address has never been delivered during a government shutdown," wrote the speaker, who also cited historical precedent for nearly all presidents delivering their address in writing prior to the early 20th Century. "Sadly, given the security concerns and unless the Pelosi calls on Trump to reschedule State of Union address 5:18 PM ET Wed, 16 Jan 2019 | 01:41 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, citing the government shutdown, urged President Donald Trump in a letter Wednesday to either reschedule his upcoming State of the Union address or to deliver it in writing to Congress. "He can make it from the Oval Office if he wants," Pelosi, D-California, later told reporters. In her letter to the president, Pelosi noted "security concerns" related to the partial shutdown's effect on the U.S. Secret Service, which is reponsible for security for the president's annual in-person address to a joint session of Congress. That speech, which is nationally televised, currently is scheduled for Jan. 29. "Both the U.S. Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security have not been funded for 26 days now — with critical departments hamstrung by furloughs," wrote Pelosi. "And since the start of modern budgeting in Fiscal Year 1977, a State of the Union address has never been delivered during a government shutdown," wrote the speaker, who also cited historical precedent for nearly all presidents delivering their address in writing prior to the early 20th Century. "Sadly, given the security concerns and unless the government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for your to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to Congress on January 29th." Hours after Pelosi's letter became public, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote in a tweet: "The Department of Homeland Security are fully prepared to support and secure the State of the Union." The current shutdown stems directly from a political battle of wills between congressional Democrats and Trump over his demand for funding for a wall on the border with Mexico. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told CNN — in comments during an interview that Hoyer's spokesman later had to correct — "The State of the Union is off." "As long as government is shut down we are not going to be doing business as usual," Hoyer, D-Md., said during his interview with CNN. "The government needs to be opened now, and it needs to be opened first." Hoyer's spokesman later said that the majority leader "hadn't read the actual letter and misunderstood." Hoyer now understands that Trump has not been formally disinvited by the House speaker. Pelosi separately later told reporters, "No, no, no" when asked if she was disinviting Trump. "It's on the strength of the statement of the secretary of Homeland Security about all of the resources that are needed to prepare for a State of the Union Address, which she calls an event of special security," Pelosi said. "And ... these people are not working." Asked if she hopes Trump sees her letter as "a consequence" of the shutdown, Pelosi also denied that was the case. "This is a housekeeping matter in the Congress of the United States so that we can honor the responsibility of the invitation we extended to the president," she said."He can make it from the Oval Office if he wants." Pelosi's letter noted that the Constitution "calls for the President to 'from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union.'" But Pelosi also pointed out that "during the 19th Century and up until the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, these annual State of the Union messages were delivered to Congress in writing." After President John Adams gave his State of the Union address in 1800, President Thomas Jefferson discontinued the practice of speaking directly to Congress in person. Wilson resumed the practice in 1913. It has been the norm for presidents since then to give their State of the Union address in person each year, with rare exceptions. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC about Pelosi's letter. Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-SD, said he did not think that Pelosi's request to Trump is "going to go over well with the American people." "I don't know how they do that. I mean, I can't imagine telling the president of the United States, one, they're not negotiating with them on the shutdown, and two, they're going to tell them not they can't come to the capitol to talk to them," Thune said. "That seems like pretty far-fetched." The shutdown is the result of Congress's inability to pass a short-term funding bill for the government that Trump would be willing to sign. The president has insisted that such a bill contain more than $5 billion in funding to build a border wall. Democrats have refused to agree with that demand.

Nick : ZZIIZZOU Name Of Server : StreetZM.CsBlackDevil.Com Picture of score :

Hunter =)

when ts3 my love?

usiness continues to be strong for Terry Hill, the Oak Brook Police Department community service officer who wrote 44 tickets in a three-month period in 2018 to people using someone else’s placard while parking in a designated handicapped space. He followed up writing 45 such tickets in the next three-month period, which ended Jan. 15. “I’m disappointed and surprised at how many people knowingly misuse disability parking placards,” said deputy police chief Jason Cates. He said the unlawful use of handicapped parking placards could result in a $600 fine and a suspension of driving privileges. “The parking program for persons with disabilities is a vital program for many Illinois residents,” Cates said. Hill wrote 44 such tickets, from July 14 to Oct. 15, 2018, and said about three-quarters were issued at Costco, 1901 22nd St., which has 17 designated handicapped parking spaces. He wrote 45 such tickets from Oct. 16 through Jan. 15. Cates said 13 of those were at Costco, and 17 were issued at Shops at Oak Brook, 2155 22nd St. Hill is the only Oak Brook officer who has written tickets for unauthorized use of a handicapped placard, something that has become a pet project for him. “I’m glad he’s doing it,” Cates said. “It really bothers me when someone who hasn’t been issued their own handicapped placard takes away a space from someone who has a placard and should be able to park there.” Hill said earlier that his motivation to begin writing the tickets came from an incident in July 2018 in which he saw someone at Oakbrook Center speed into a handicapped space and was able to tell by looking at the placard that it didn’t belong to the driver. A designation inside a box on the placard indicates if it was issued to a man or a woman. He also said that when he suspects a placard being used was not issued to the person using it, he asks that person if it belongs to them, and 99 percent of the time they say it does, when that is not the case. Several Oak Brook officers have written tickets for people without a placard parking in a handicapped space, which can carry a $250 fine. Oak Brook officers issued 49 such tickets in the three months ending Jan. 15, compared to 45 during the previous three-month period.

“She told me a couple of nice words when we met in the changing room. She said ‘you are young, you are very good and you will be a good player in the future’. It’s nice to hear those words from a legend. If she thinks so then maybe that’s true. What I’m trying to do is to go to the level that people are going to talk about me the same, that I have something special.” The top seed from Romania, who belatedly claimed her maiden major title at last year's French Open, downed Venus Williams 6-2, 6-3 on Rod Laver Arena on Saturday night. "I will play against a great champion and I have nothing to lose," said Halep after beating the elder Williams in a match lasting one hour and 16 minutes. "It's going to be a bigger challenge. I am ready to face it." While seven-time champion Williams looms large in the top section of the draw as the 16th seed, Yastremska, the conqueror of Sam Stosur in the first round here, is a name to write down for future reference despite the one-sided nature of the result. It was understandable if there was an element of stage fright about confronting her idol. As an eight-year-old she had cheered Williams on to an Australian Open title a decade ago from her lounge room in Odessa, even simulating the American’s strokes with her own racquet as she watched on television. There were early double faults, a lot of nervous glances at her father and coach Olek and a perusal of reminder notes at the change of ends. When Yastremska loosened up and became more comfortable with the setting, though, there were signs of what has made her a much talked about rising star. She has genuine firepower, particularly off the forehand, and may be back on such a stage before long if she can tidy up the loose ends and not be daunted by the occasion. On Sunday, the last remaining teenager in the women’s draw, Amanda Anisimova of the United States, will take on Czech eighth seed Petra Kvitova, fresh from a huge upset of Aryna Sabalenka, the Belarusian who some experts had tipped to win the title here. While the generational divide between Williams and Yastremska and Anisimova is enormous, the all-time great has clearly not forgotten from where she came. After comforting the world No.57 on court, Williams took her aside in the changing rooms to tell she had been hard done to have received a time violation during the match. “It’s important we all have each other’s back and support each other,” Williams said. Asked whether she had had the same emotional reaction as her rival after the match as a teenager, she replied: “Teenage self or adult self? Because both. “You go out there and you want to win. I liked that. It showed that she wasn’t just there to play the match, she was there to win. It really broke my heart. “When I was young I played against so many people like Lindsay Davenport, Martina Hingis and Monica Seles ... everyone I faced was in the hall of fame. Every match was intimidating and not easy but you just go out and do the best you can.”

Welcome

More than a decade after his release from jail over the 1983 kidnapping of the beer magnate Freddy Heineken – turned into a film starring Anthony Hopkins in 2015 – a 65-year-old man has appeared back in an Amsterdam court alongside his son on suspicion of planning an armed robbery. Frans Meijer is on trial after being shot and arrested last October following an altercation with a police officer who had been alerted by residents to the suspicious behaviour of two men near a security van carrying cash. The court heard on Wednesday that Meijer, who was wearing a fake moustache and had a stolen van nearby, was armed and carrying two bulletproof vests and a device to jam mobile phone signals, when approached. He threatened the officer but was shot several times as he fled the scene in the Staatsliedenbuurt district of Amsterdam, the court heard. Meijer’s 26-year-old son gave himself up. Advertisement A third suspect appearing in court for a first appearance relating to the charges was Laurens Boellaard, 35, the son of a second Heineken kidnapper, Jan Boellaard. All three men deny the charges. Boellaard was released on bail for the duration of the trial while Meijer and his son remain in custody. Heineken was one of the richest people in the Netherlands and chairman and chief executive of the family brewing company when he and his driver, Ab Doderer, were kidnapped on 9 November 1983 outside the firm’s offices in Amsterdam. As the kidnappers sought a £15m ransom, Meijer’s daily job was to feed the two men, who were tethered to a wall in a hut on an Amsterdam business park. Meijer would tell drinkers on leaving his favourite pub every dinnertime that he was “going to give Heineken something to eat”, comments erroneously thought to have been a joke about the story that was dominating the news. On 30 November, the men were released in exchange for 35m Dutch guilders (£15.7m), in what was the highest ransom ever paid at the time. The ransom given to the kidnappers was not recovered in full. Heineken died, aged 78, in 2002. The kidnappers – Meijer, Boellaard and William Holleeder, who is currently on trial in The Hague over unconnected cases of murder, manslaughter and attempted murder – fled on being paid their money. Meijer, however, gave himself up amid a massive manhunt. Ahead of his trial he was sent to a psychiatric observation clinic from which he escaped without trace in 1985. He was convicted in absentia the same year. He was tracked down in 1994 by the TV crime journalist Peter Rudolf de Vries in Paraguay, where he had married a local woman and had three children. Meijer was running a burger restaurant and claimed to both regret his crimes and to have converted to Christianity. After a complicated legal process to get him back to the Netherlands, Meijer was finally extradited in 2002. He was released from a Dutch jail in 2005, after which he was thought to have returned to Paraguay. The current court case is expected to resume in March. As 2019 begins… … we’re asking readers to make a new year contribution in support of The Guardian’s independent journalism. More people are reading our independent, investigative reporting than ever but advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our reporting as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important as it enables us to give a voice to those less heard, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical. Please make a new year contribution today to help us deliver the independent journalism the world needs for 2019 and beyond. Support The Guardian from as little as £1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.

Welcome

When I told author Allison Fallon that I felt my consistent writing practice in 2018 had made me happier, calmer, and more confident in all of my work, she wasn’t surprised. “Of course you are. Writing is the most predictable way to improve your mood, to find your voice.” Fallon would know, as the author of 12+ books and a sought-after book coach, she has made writing her way of life and inspired hundreds of people to embrace their inner storyteller. Fallon’s view that everyone is a writer is uncommon, yet absolutely true. We agreed that it’s one of the best ways to “level-up” to the next phase of your career or the next chapter in your life. If you’re looking for a new years resolution for 2019 that’s backed up by data, try incorporating 20 minutes of writing into your day. You will likely emerge more centered, focused, bold, and imaginative. Think of how it could impact your life at home and work! Laura Youngkin: You believe that everyone is a writer. Why do you feel this way? How can people who don’t consider themselves “writers” now learn to embrace the title? Allison Fallon: Most of us don’t think about ourselves as writers, but hear me out. Consider the sheer quantity of writing you do in a day. Think of the number of emails and text messages you send, the amount of times you have to write a caption to post a photo on social media, the amount of times you have to write something for or about your work. If you work for yourself or a small company, you are more than likely the marketing department. Even if you work for a massive corporation, chances are you have abundant opportunities to define yourself or what you do in writing. In the 21st century, writing is no longer an option for modern life, it’s a requirement. Writing is not some sort of “elite” activity reserved for the especially talented or trained. Writing is communication, it’s self-discovery, it’s self-therapy, it’s spirituality and meditation. If you feel insecure or confused about what you would say in your writing, if you find yourself staring at a blinking cursor not knowing what to type first, well - consider this your initiation. Everyone feels this way. This is what it takes to be a writer. Welcome. We’re pleased to consider you part of the club! Youngkin: Thank you! I’m so happy to hear that. The intimidation is real, but I do feel it gets easier to push through with practice. How can we all unlock the life-changing potential of writing? Fallon: Studies show that if you write for as little as twenty minutes per day for four days in a row, you will experience a measurable improvement in your mood. So that’s all it takes - 20 minutes. I always tell writers: “if you don’t have 20 minutes, start with five. Start with two.” You have to think of this like going to the gym, where at first it’s going to feel strange and uncomfortable, and you’re going to feel like you’re bad at it. You’re going to want to quit. Then, over time, you’ll learn to crave it. It will be the thing you want to do when nothing else makes sense. You’ll start pulling out a pen and paper when you are in a funk or when you’ve had a bad day, or when you need someone to talk to and no one is around. Think of writing like a constant companion and then follow your instinct when you have the impulse to write. I find most of us have this impulse at some point or another in our lives, and the only difference between “writers” and “non-writers” is that some of us follow the impulse. Trust that impulse. It’s a good one. Youngkin: What are the benefits of a regular writing practice? Fallon: Research shows a regular practice of writing can improve focus, concentration, sleep, motivation, confidence and even your love life! It’s true. People who write regularly are more likely to report being happy in their romantic relationships and they’re less likely to break up. Studies show those who write regularly visit the doctor half as often for things like cold, flu and upper respiratory infections. This statistic always stays with me because I think—if writing can have this kind of impact on our physicality, there isn’t anything it can’t touch! Dr. James Pennebaker out of University of Texas Austin did a study with a group of men who had been laid off from their jobs. The men were angry, hostile and “unpleasant to work with” according to Pennebaker. They were divided into two groups to do writing assignments. One group was asked to write about their deepest emotions and thoughts regarding the loss of their job. The rest wrote about time management. Eight months after writing, 52 percent of the emotional writing group had new jobs, as opposed to 20 percent of the time management group.The men who wrote about their feelings got jobs at twice the rate as those who didn’t! Without going to any more interviews than the time-management men. Those who write regularly navigate life’s challenges with more ease, if only because they are more likely to process difficult parts of life in a healthy way. Writing forces us to be honest about what we think about things, to sit with difficult feelings, and it challenges us to fully formulate a perspective. I could go on and on about the positive benefits of a regular practice of writing but as you can imagine, the point is there isn’t an area of your life writing can’t touch. Youngkin: For those who don’t journal or write regularly, where can they start? Fallon: You can start with a prompt I call the “Infinity Prompt” if only because you can use it over and over again, for literally any circumstance in your life. It goes like this: Choose a situation from your life that feels charged. You can use a tragic event, but it might be helpful to start small—like with a frustrating conversation with your significant other. Once you have your circumstance chosen, follow the next three steps. Write the facts of the situation. Who said what? Where were you standing? What was happening around you? Were there noises? Smells? What were you doing with your hands? What did your face look like? What did his or her face look like? What else happened? Write your feelings about the situation. See if you can use only feeling words here. “I was angry…” “Even now I feel furious…” “I am still sad about this…” “It’s frustrating for me when…” Write your thoughts about the situation. See if you can stick with thoughts here, although you may make connections to the feelings. “I think the reason I got so mad was…” “I think what he was thinking was…” “I think how he feels about me is…” “I think what needs to happen next is…” If you have a hard time separating facts from thoughts from feelings, amazing! You’re doing it right. That is the entire point of the exercise. In fact, you might find, as so many writers do, that you can write for far longer than 20 minutes as you try to figure out what happened, what you felt about what happened, and what you think now. Youngkin: I know so many people who are craving a way to tap into their own bravery. How can writing improve your confidence? Fallon: Writing helps you establish yourself and your voice. So, for example, if you find yourself being a people-pleaser (hand raised) maybe the only reason you seem to “go with the flow” only to realize later that you wish you hadn’t done that is because you didn’t know ahead of time what you wanted, needed, or thought about a thing. Writing can help you get to these answers faster, which gives you confidence in a circumstance where you need to speak up. So if you have job interviews coming up, for example, I might have you do some writing exercises ahead of time so that you feel totally solid about how you’re going to answer the questions you ask, what the non-negotiable are for you, and even practice negotiating for a pay increase. Writing is this amazing way to “practice” the words ahead of time so they don’t feel so foreign coming out of your mouth later. Youngkin: When I mentioned to you that I had written more this year than ever before, and found myself happier than ever before, you weren’t surprised. Why? Fallon: Because writing is a predictable way to improve your mood and because writing about the things you care about and want will increase the likelihood that you actually take risks for those things and bring them to fruition. It is common for writers to be people of incidence. In part I’m sure this has to do with feeling confident enough to speak up about your ideals, but also stop and think for a minute about who gets to control the narrative in the world around us: it’s writers. Writers literally write the history books. They frame reality for the rest of us. And the fact that publishing is dominated by white men doesn’t surprise me. Nothing against white men, but I know our world will change when more women, more people of color, and more women of color have their stories published so the rest of us can learn from their experience. Youngkin: Hear, hear! Absolutely. Owning the narrative is power. One of my former managers often encouraged me to focus on the story, but it took me years to understand fully what she meant by that. Now when I’m advising younger women, I often tell them to focus on crafting their own narratives at work - if you don’t manage your story, someone else will. How can writing help us us advance in our careers? Fallon: This is honestly some of the best career advice I’ve ever heard. One specific way women can do this is to write the hopeful story of their career trajectory. I find most women haven’t even considered what their ideal outcome would be as it relates to their careers. Of course this isn’t true for every woman, but so many women are just “hoping” something amazing will happen in their careers while men can be much more direct, strategic, and aggressive in their approach. So to get started—even asking a question like, “what would be my ideal outcome in my career?” and then writing it down can be enormously helpful. Now you have a vision of what you’re walking toward, rather than giving permission for someone else to plug you like a puzzle piece into a puzzle that fits their vision. When it comes to writing “ideal outcomes” I tell writers to write it like a scene from a movie. So imagine there is a climactic scene happening in front of you as it relates to your career. Who is there? What have you accomplished? What are people saying? How are you feeling and responding? What’s the expression on your face? Why does this accomplishment mean so much to you? There is so much more I could say here, but an activity like this will get just about anyone started. Youngkin: How can writing make us better leaders? Better colleagues? Fallon: Writing will force you to see yourself more clearly. As you execute that prompt I gave above, you’ll find yourself recounting a circumstance where you were certain you were in the right and find out there’s actually a way you could have worded things better, or a different approach you could have taken to be kinder, more compassionate, or even more firm where you needed to be. As you write regularly, you’ll start to notice patterns and build self-awareness — maybe you’re playing the victim, or bullying others, or rarely speaking up in public settings about what you believe, or that you regularly interrupt your colleagues with your own ideas. This kind of self-awareness can’t help but invite us to soften and learn to be more compassionate. Additionally, writing is an excellent way to come up with a totally unique idea about something—an idea that was always there with you, but that you didn’t have access to until you wrote it down. Often I have the experience while I’m writing like, “Wow, I didn’t even know I thought that…” and I know so many other writers who report something similar. So writing will make us better leaders, all around, by giving us access to our best ideas, making us more original and innovative, and teaching us to see ourselves and other people more clearly. Youngkin: I've heard you say before that you can write your way out of anything. Have you written your way to a better version of yourself? Fallon: I have! About three years ago I went through one of the biggest heartbreaks of my life (a divorce and the loss of my job)—a giant left turn, the kind of thing that makes you feel like giving up completely—and made the incredibly important decision to write about it. In writing about the tragedy, I discovered it wasn’t as big of a tragedy as I thought it was. In fact, I realized that what I had was an opportunity to get the things I had always wanted anyway, in the deepest part of myself. In my marriage, I had been out of touch completely with what mattered to me and writing allowed me to stand outside of my story and see myself as the hero of the story. Meaning I was the only one who could turn it into a story worth telling. I would say I’ve done that. I’ve built my own business, written and published a book, fallen in love and moved to a new state, and have a community of women who support me unequivocally in everything I do… all born from the “worst case scenario” of my life! Not a bad trade. The best part is - this opportunity is there for everyone; it’s all yours for the taking. This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity. Laura Youngkin is a producer, creative strategist, writer, and the creator of The Brave Millennial, a platform and movement dedicated to the advancement of millennial women.

SiliVeR you have a warning ... Rejected T/C