# data[].attributes.body
After gossiping about somebody else and their decision to abolish a friendship, I described them as the quote. My friend understood my quote but did not acknowledge that it was Shakespeare.

# data[].attributes.body
My mom asked me how the outcome of the election was possible. I answered the quote back to her (to describe those who did not vote), and she ignored my comment.

# data[].attributes.body
One of my peers understood the quote, but thought it was a joke.

# data[].attributes.body
The importance behind this quote is simple: you cannot trust anybody. A look of endearment isn't enough to determine the intentions that lie behind the smile. Shakespeare taught us that the true value of a person is what is in their heart and to always exercise our caution when we want to put out trust into them.
Today, the world is filled with deceitful individuals. While there is no one way to determine that they are out to harm us by just giving them a look, it is in our best interest to look out for ourselves and exercise our fair judgment.

# data[].attributes.body
Many people experience throughout the course of life people who have crossed them, and do not owe up to their actions. It is difficult to discover as their face does not reveal the true intentions that lay behind it. An example of this is Macbeth who murders his only friend Banquo in order to ensure he keeps the crown.

# data[].attributes.body
On Tuesday, 11/8, Donald Trump won the presidential election against favored candidate Hillary Clinton. Some experienced outrage, for others, victory. For President Obama, it is difficult to tell how he feels, as appearances can fool the eyes. Nonetheless, Obama kept calm and professional demeanor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Body Language Expert Just Got a Look at Trump & Obama Together and Says It's All in the Eyes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jim Watson/Getty Images Things may have looked amiable enough during Donald Trump and President Obama's White House meeting Thursday, but a body language expert says things weren't quite as they seemed. The president-elect said that the longer-than-expected meeting was "fantastic": A fantastic day in D.C. Met with President Obama for first time.

# data[].attributes.body
Ultimately, what defines a person is not what is seen from the outside, but what is inside their heart, even though it is difficult to see. In the play, Macbeth often refers to God, and how God is always judging him. The Lord Himself does not judge from appearance, but looks and judges on the heart.

# data[].attributes.body
Ads are the most accessible kind of deception that is practiced today. Through its visual means, it is easy to trick the viewer with its aesthetically pleasing features with heavy lighting and photoshop, which lures viewers to purchase the burger to later be disappointed.

# data[].attributes.body
Behind that sweet face and voice, Taylor Swift represents the "snake" (animal of deception) among her own family and friends. Swift has been known for playing the victim and suing those who have crossed her, even if they helped her in her career, for example, her own guitar teacher. Similarly, Macbeth murdered his own friend Banquo, out of fear that his sons with succeed Macbeth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NIGHTMARE DRESSED LIKE A LAWSUIT

The pop tycoon has a long history of sending lawyers after anyone who dared sully her meticulously crafted image-from her ex-guitar teacher to independent artists. Will Kimye be next?

Taylor Swift has faced her fair share of adversity: Katy Perry was mean to her, that Kennedy kid didn't propose, and it took boys in high school way too long to notice that she was adorable. But all that pales in comparison to the days that followed Swift's Sunday social media outing -Taylor Swift's worst week ever.

For months, Kim, Kanye, and Taylor had been feuding over "Famous," with the Kimye kamp claiming that Swift had approved the rapper's explicit lyrics. Swift, who low-key (but maybe high-key?) has been tapping into virginal white victim tropes her entire career, allegedly threw Kanye under the bus for favorable press. In olden times (2010), this story might have ended at "he said, she said." Luckily, Kim Kardashian eventually came to her senses and remembered that she literally films her entire life for a living (meanwhile, Kanye just endlessly records himself because he can). Once Kim sorted through her receipts, it was only a matter of time before she leaked the incriminating footage on Snapchat. With Taylor Swift's reputation permanently punctured, the internet collectively danced on the grave of America's former sweetheart to the tune of a Katy Perry Spotify playlist.

The story of Kim exposing Taylor will go down in history as a true Hanukkah in July: the tea, which only looked like enough for one or two 24-hour news cycles, miraculously kept spilling. Swift's squad, her first line of defense, got totally annihilated on Twitter-at least the ones who bothered showing up. (Et tu, Cara Delevingne?) Next, Calvin Harris finally stopped crying into his ab rivulets long enough to go to Nobu with his new gal pal, Tinashe. Then rumors began circulating that Swift was in the running to pen the Olympics theme, but lost out to her nemesis Katy Perry's "Rise"-even though stringing together inspiring pop songs through vague aphorisms and three chords is Swift's specialty! Miranda Kerr got engaged to Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel, an alleged Taylor Swift ex-even though love and marriage are totally Swift's thing! Lastly, Chloë Grace Moretz, who got tons of attention for self-righteously attacking Kim Kardashian this week, somehow managed to parlay her non-celebrity into a DNC gig -even though annoying people with her inexplicable success/cloying sincerity is the entire foundation of Taylor Swift's brand!

Thank you, Chloë, Miranda, Katy, Calvin, and miscellaneous squad members. It truly takes a village.

In all likelihood, Swift took one look at this shitshow and decided to take an extended vacation. And while we don't know the geographic coordinates of Taytay's wartime bunker, we do know that she brought her lawyers with her. Ever since Sunday's Snapchatgate, everyone's been wondering if/when Taylor will sue the Wests, in keeping with the claim that her phone call with Kanye was surreptitiously and illegally recorded. If Taylor was truly unaware of being on speakerphone-which many think is an outright lie, given Rick Rubin's presence in the room-then Kanye might be criminally liable under California's Invasion of Privacy Act. Of course, the crucial evidence was also blasted out to the entire world via Snapchat, an app that destroys content the day after it goes live. So there's not a lot of legal precedent for this one. It's a case that's left entertainment bloggers in a frenzy of confusion, with legal experts doubtlessly wondering what Snapchat law is, and what they ever did to deserve this.

Rumors of a pending lawsuit seem legit in light of Taylor Swift's history of Trump-ian litigiousness. Her various suits, trademarks, and legal grievances are as numerous and insubstantial as the members of her squad. While surface-level tabloid surfers might claim that Swift's only public reaction this week was an Instagram, that's not exactly true. According to one Australian graffiti artist, Swift was passing out cease and desists as recently as Wednesday. The story comes out of Melbourne, where street artist Lushsux installed a mock memorial to Taylor Swift, "1989-2016." The macabre portrait of the face that launched a thousand memes is technically labeled as "Taylor Smith"-fans suspect that this typo was Lushsux's attempt to dodge a defamation lawsuit. But according to an Instagram posted by the artist, "Taylor Smith's attorney has emailed me with a threat of legal action if I do not remove my wall relating to her." Luckily, Melbourne street art has a short life span, and the mural was quickly tagged over by an anonymous artist. (Tom Hiddleston, is that you?)

This is only the latest in a long line of overly vigilant image policing. Back in 2015, Swift was first outed by her own childhood guitar teacher. To hear Swift tell it, her transformation from plucky tween to pop-country sensation was a "magical twist of fate": "I was doing my homework [when the tech fixing my computer] looked over and saw the guitar in the corner. And he said, 'Do you play guitar?' I said, 'Oh. No. I tried, but...' He said 'Do you want me to teach you a few chords?' and I said, 'Uh, yeah. YES!'" According to the aforementioned "tech," Ronnie Cremer, Swift's version of their relationship is about as sugarcoated as a Taylor Swift song. While Cremer does work as a tech guy in Reading, Pennsylvania, he was first approached by the Swift family because of his side gig as a respected local musician. Cremer claims that Taylor and her mom asked him to help her record a demo, and teach her country guitar. Ronnie worked with her for six hours a week, at $32 an hour. Still, he understands why that story never gets told: "It's just that their publicity team, that doesn't sell as good: a 36-year-old bald guy taught her. That ain't gonna work."

But while Ronnie waited years to share his side of the story, Swift's team didn't waste any time taking him to task. About a month after his testimony went public, Cremer received a letter from T(aylor) A(lison) S(wift) Rights Management, threatening to sue him for purchasing the domain name itaughttaylorswift.com. Given the proliferation of Taylor Swift fan sites, it's clear that what Swift was really protecting was her brand as a self-taught songwriting whiz kid. Shockingly, going after the man who taught her her first guitar chords isn't Swift's legal team at its most heartless. That would be the cluster of cease and desist letters that Swift unleashed on some of her biggest fans: small-time purveyors of Etsy fan art.

When Swift eventually sheds her current snake/human skin to reveal a motherboard, we won't be surprised. That's because in 2015 one of the most profitable celebrities of our generation took precious time out of her schedule to intimidate a bunch of Swifties for the crime of selling $10 1989 mugs to other fans online. In the words of one targeted Etsy seller who was forced to take her merch down, "We originally made the item for fun, we love Taylor and we had friends that love Taylor. We never intended for it to be a profit-making item. The cost of the item covered shipping costs, and production costs with very little left over... When we got the e-mail that the trademark infringement occurred, we were pretty shocked because while our item was popular we didn't feel as if it had become popular enough to cause harm to Taylor Swift's empire. We were shocked. And we were scared. We didn't even make enough money for a lawyer and this had seemed like such a harmless and fun idea." Of course, no potential trademark violation is just "harmless" to Taylor Swift, a woman so litigious that she attempted to trademark colloquial phrases like "This Sick Beat" and "Could Show You Incredible Things." To "crib" the iconic words of Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson, "this concept that [Taylor Swift] invented the English language is absurd."

The overexposure caused by these legal actions, particularly in the form of articles like this one, is hardly worth whatever soiled brand Swift believes she's protecting. If anything, suing mural artists and famous celebrity couples will only add to the image of Taylor Swift as a conniving, clandestine control-freak. In other words, see you next week!

Taylor Swift has faced her fair share of adversity: Katy Perry was mean to her, that Kennedy kid didn't propose, and it took boys in high school way too long to notice that she was adorable. But all that pales in comparison to the days that followed Swift's Sunday social media outing -Taylor Swift's worst week ever.

For months, Kim, Kanye, and Taylor had been feuding over "Famous," with the Kimye kamp claiming that Swift had approved the rapper's explicit lyrics. Swift, who low-key (but maybe high-key?) has been tapping into virginal white victim tropes her entire career, allegedly threw Kanye under the bus for favorable press. In olden times (2010), this story might have ended at "he said, she said." Luckily, Kim Kardashian eventually came to her senses and remembered that she literally films her entire life for a living (meanwhile, Kanye just endlessly records himself because he can). Once Kim sorted through her receipts, it was only a matter of time before she leaked the incriminating footage on Snapchat. With Taylor Swift's reputation permanently punctured, the internet collectively danced on the grave of America's former sweetheart to the tune of a Katy Perry Spotify playlist.

The story of Kim exposing Taylor will go down in history as a true Hanukkah in July: the tea, which only looked like enough for one or two 24-hour news cycles, miraculously kept spilling. Swift's squad, her first line of defense, got totally annihilated on Twitter-at least the ones who bothered showing up. (Et tu, Cara Delevingne?) Next, Calvin Harris finally stopped crying into his ab rivulets long enough to go to Nobu with his new gal pal, Tinashe. Then rumors began circulating that Swift was in the running to pen the Olympics theme, but lost out to her nemesis Katy Perry's "Rise"-even though stringing together inspiring pop songs through vague aphorisms and three chords is Swift's specialty! Miranda Kerr got engaged to Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel, an alleged Taylor Swift ex-even though love and marriage are totally Swift's thing! Lastly, Chloë Grace Moretz, who got tons of attention for self-righteously attacking Kim Kardashian this week, somehow managed to parlay her non-celebrity into a DNC gig -even though annoying people with her inexplicable success/cloying sincerity is the entire foundation of Taylor Swift's brand!

Thank you, Chloë, Miranda, Katy, Calvin, and miscellaneous squad members. It truly takes a village.

In all likelihood, Swift took one look at this shitshow and decided to take an extended vacation. And while we don't know the geographic coordinates of Taytay's wartime bunker, we do know that she brought her lawyers with her. Ever since Sunday's Snapchatgate, everyone's been wondering if/when Taylor will sue the Wests, in keeping with the claim that her phone call with Kanye was surreptitiously and illegally recorded. If Taylor was truly unaware of being on speakerphone-which many think is an outright lie, given Rick Rubin's presence in the room-then Kanye might be criminally liable under California's Invasion of Privacy Act. Of course, the crucial evidence was also blasted out to the entire world via Snapchat, an app that destroys content the day after it goes live. So there's not a lot of legal precedent for this one. It's a case that's left entertainment bloggers in a frenzy of confusion, with legal experts doubtlessly wondering what Snapchat law is, and what they ever did to deserve this.

Rumors of a pending lawsuit seem legit in light of Taylor Swift's history of Trump-ian litigiousness. Her various suits, trademarks, and legal grievances are as numerous and insubstantial as the members of her squad. While surface-level tabloid surfers might claim that Swift's only public reaction this week was an Instagram, that's not exactly true. According to one Australian graffiti artist, Swift was passing out cease and desists as recently as Wednesday. The story comes out of Melbourne, where street artist Lushsux installed a mock memorial to Taylor Swift, "1989-2016." The macabre portrait of the face that launched a thousand memes is technically labeled as "Taylor Smith"-fans suspect that this typo was Lushsux's attempt to dodge a defamation lawsuit. But according to an Instagram posted by the artist, "Taylor Smith's attorney has emailed me with a threat of legal action if I do not remove my wall relating to her." Luckily, Melbourne street art has a short life span, and the mural was quickly tagged over by an anonymous artist. (Tom Hiddleston, is that you?)

This is only the latest in a long line of overly vigilant image policing. Back in 2015, Swift was first outed by her own childhood guitar teacher. To hear Swift tell it, her transformation from plucky tween to pop-country sensation was a "magical twist of fate": "I was doing my homework [when the tech fixing my computer] looked over and saw the guitar in the corner. And he said, 'Do you play guitar?' I said, 'Oh. No. I tried, but...' He said 'Do you want me to teach you a few chords?' and I said, 'Uh, yeah. YES!'" According to the aforementioned "tech," Ronnie Cremer, Swift's version of their relationship is about as sugarcoated as a Taylor Swift song. While Cremer does work as a tech guy in Reading, Pennsylvania, he was first approached by the Swift family because of his side gig as a respected local musician. Cremer claims that Taylor and her mom asked him to help her record a demo, and teach her country guitar. Ronnie worked with her for six hours a week, at $32 an hour. Still, he understands why that story never gets told: "It's just that their publicity team, that doesn't sell as good: a 36-year-old bald guy taught her. That ain't gonna work."

But while Ronnie waited years to share his side of the story, Swift's team didn't waste any time taking him to task. About a month after his testimony went public, Cremer received a letter from T(aylor) A(lison) S(wift) Rights Management, threatening to sue him for purchasing the domain name itaughttaylorswift.com. Given the proliferation of Taylor Swift fan sites, it's clear that what Swift was really protecting was her brand as a self-taught songwriting whiz kid. Shockingly, going after the man who taught her her first guitar chords isn't Swift's legal team at its most heartless. That would be the cluster of cease and desist letters that Swift unleashed on some of her biggest fans: small-time purveyors of Etsy fan art.

When Swift eventually sheds her current snake/human skin to reveal a motherboard, we won't be surprised. That's because in 2015 one of the most profitable celebrities of our generation took precious time out of her schedule to intimidate a bunch of Swifties for the crime of selling $10 1989 mugs to other fans online. In the words of one targeted Etsy seller who was forced to take her merch down, "We originally made the item for fun, we love Taylor and we had friends that love Taylor. We never intended for it to be a profit-making item. The cost of the item covered shipping costs, and production costs with very little left over... When we got the e-mail that the trademark infringement occurred, we were pretty shocked because while our item was popular we didn't feel as if it had become popular enough to cause harm to Taylor Swift's empire. We were shocked. And we were scared. We didn't even make enough money for a lawyer and this had seemed like such a harmless and fun idea." Of course, no potential trademark violation is just "harmless" to Taylor Swift, a woman so litigious that she attempted to trademark colloquial phrases like "This Sick Beat" and "Could Show You Incredible Things." To "crib" the iconic words of Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson, "this concept that [Taylor Swift] invented the English language is absurd."

The overexposure caused by these legal actions, particularly in the form of articles like this one, is hardly worth whatever soiled brand Swift believes she's protecting. If anything, suing mural artists and famous celebrity couples will only add to the image of Taylor Swift as a conniving, clandestine control-freak. In other words, see you next week!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taylor Swift's History of Suing Friends, Fans, and Foes-and Now Kimye?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NIGHTMARE DRESSED LIKE A LAWSUIT Taylor Swift has faced her fair share of adversity: Katy Perry was mean to her, that Kennedy kid didn't propose, and it took boys in high school way too long to notice that she was adorable.

# data[].attributes.body
*Hotel California represents Los Angeles and the misconceptions of the music industry, where everyone thinks it is an easy way to achieve fame and success. In stark contrast to the assumptions, it is not as glamorous as thought before. It is a prison that lures its inhabitants into a world of negative influence.

**A play on words, this line describes how saturated people are with wealth, that it is twisted (bends)

***Mirrors on the ceiling and the pink champagne is considered the "cover of the book". It hides the dark secret behind the music industry and the world that fame leads to

****The man realizes that the world Hollywood and LA provide is not as desirable as seen from the outside. In fact, he is trying to escape it.
"You can check out any time you life But you can never leave" represents the hold that Hollywood life will have on you, even if you return to the world of self actualization

# data[].attributes.body
On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair
Warm smell of colitas, rising up through the air
Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light
My head grew heavy and my sight grew dim
I had to stop for the night

There she stood in the doorway
I heard the mission bell
And I was thinking to myself
'This could be heaven or this could be Hell
Then she lit up a candle and she showed me the way
There were voices down the corridor
I thought I heard them say

*Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)
Such a lovely face
Plenty of room at the Hotel California
Any time of year (any time of year) you can find it here

**Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, she got the Mercedes bends
She got a lot of pretty, pretty boys, that she calls friends
How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat
Some dance to remember, some dance to forget

So I called up the Captain
'Please bring me my wine
He said, "we haven't had that spirit here since nineteen sixty-nine
And still those voices are calling from far away
Wake you up in the middle of the night
Just to hear them say"

Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely place (such a lovely place)
Such a lovely face
They livin' it up at the Hotel California
What a nice surprise (what a nice surprise), bring your alibis

***Mirrors on the ceiling
The pink champagne on ice
And she said, 'we are all just prisoners here, of our own device
And in the master's chambers
They gathered for the feast
They stab it with their steely knives
But they just can't kill the beast

****Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door
I had to find the passage back to the place I was before
'Relax' said the night man
'We are programmed to receive
You can check out any time you like
But you can never leave!

# data[].attributes.body
Human deception can take place in the form of materialistic gains. Scams, for example, have rapidly taken over the Internet, as well as innocent lives who fall for them. Scams represent the dishonest and selfish means to obtain money and goods from vulnerable people. It also relates the need and desire of the human nature to feel satisfaction from successfully swindling someone. Similarly, Lady Macbeth found satisfaction in manipulating Macbeth into killing Duncan and fed her need for power.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Science of Why We Fall for Scams That Are So Obviously Scams

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Consumer psychologist Kit Yarrow explains why smart people fall victim to common scams involving IRS phone calls, Facebook messages, extended car warranties, and more.

# data[].attributes.body
A well known idiom among all, one cannot judge a book by its cover, because its looks may be deceptive. A character who demonstrates this is Lady Macbeth, whose beauty is a facade for what deception lies underneath.

# data[].attributes.body
From this photograph, one can immediately be intimidated by her facial expression. Similar to Macbeth, she possesses her own agenda that cannot be read from it. In stark contrast from her facial expression, Blair Waldorf (pictured below) is actually planning a charity gala, not plotting revenge on an old enemy.

# data[].attributes.headline
"There's no art to find the mind's construction in the face" 1.4.12

# data[].attributes.subject
"There's no art to find the mind's construction in the face" 1.4.12

# data[].attributes.body
Looks can be deceiving. Unfortunately, there is no method in validating one's genuine good-hearted nature. The only way humans can interpret emotion is solely through what we see on the outside. However, the face is not a true index of the mind. In other words, there is no sure way in interpreting one's character just by looking at one's face. Some people are better at hiding their intentions from their face than others, but all in all, there exists that uncertainty of one's outside appearance and inside thought process and motivation.