0
4

[–] thedarkknight2020 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I couldn’t even make it through the original Times article. What I did read was basically the Times whining that they are not able to call Trump anti-semitic because his son-in-law, daughter, and grandchildren are Jewish.

They never once considered the possibility that maybe Trump is not anti-semitic.

0
1

[–] Stonenchizel [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Right! I truly don't think he could possibly be. It was just another one of Hillary's made up Clinton Dirty Style Politics!

0
2

[–] theoldones 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

failing so badly they've gone bipolar

0
1

[–] Trueseeker_90 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

All the New York Times is good for is toilet paper.

0
1

[–] RakerKey 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

No I think that it would smear your buttcheeks too lol

Its basically only good for burning

2
1

[–] TexasConservativeFag 2 points 1 point (+3|-2) ago 

The same new York times who denied the Holocaust. Lol these people are beyond stupid

0
3

[–] Turd_Bird 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Wait the New York Slimes actually reported real news?

0
0

[–] corrbrick ago 

Skepticism about some event, or asking questions and pointing out shortcomings in a story is not the same as denial.

0
1

[–] Cleanhobo 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

This is amazing... This is implying that they are NOT 'good for the jews'. Amazing news.

0
0

[–] Stonenchizel [S] ago 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's why the title stated so.... 😕

0
1

[–] Anon1492 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Well, that is the standard by which all things are measured in this hell world.