Well well well look at this

Politics
1

FOX news has this headline out.

New York Times under fire for ‘fantasy’ about Secret Service helping Russian assassin gun down Trump

At a time when libs are demanding civility they were writing short stories about assassinating our president…and it was New York Slime no less.

The New York Times is under fire for a fictional account of President Trump being gunned down by a Russian assassin with a Glock belonging to his own Secret Service in a short story dubbed “assassination fantasy” by critics.

Funny how libs demand that we tone down our rhetoric while they retched up theirs.

Now I have to take off and won’t be back for day or so but maybe in meantime libs can chew on this for a bit…but I highly doubt that they will.

They will claim Trump has it coming or he deserves it.

Have fun now and don’t hurt yourselves while I’m away.

2 Likes
2

It looks to be a dumb story and the Times Book review section was dumb for publishing it.

You see… it isn’t hard when one has a moral center to not have to defend stupidity because they are a perceived part of a tribe.

10 Likes
3

No- it was dumb.

Will you now disavow as dumb when Trump says things like he likes politicians who can body-slam?

You have no right to a moral high ground when you have defended almost every dumb thing Trump has said.

Spare me your indignation when you are on record as saying Trump’s and the GOP’s policies should be designed to cause your political opponents pain.

This is the type of politics you yourself have embraced.

So enough now- OK Conan?

Your act is old and it’s tired.

Do you have no sense of shame for how far you have fallen as a poster?

4 Likes
4

Dumb idea by the Times to include this short story in their book review section. People make mistakes all the time. I put too many jalapenos in my fajitas last night. Most people can admit when they make a mistake and move on. Others cannot and keep doubling down on their mistakes.

1 Like
5

I don’t like that story. I denounce it.

6

Really stupid and careless on their part. Totally unecessary.

7

So stupid and they should have known better.

8

Seems dumb.

But of course, here we go again.

On the one side we have the Republican party’s standard bearer, the President of the United States, encouraging violence.

On the other we have an unknown short story author writing some tale about the President being murdered.

Both sides need to watch it! Am I doing this right?

2 Likes
9

Poorly researched as well. The current sidearm for USSS agents is the SIG Sauer P229 chambered in .357. They don’t use Flocks.

1 Like
10

So has anyone said the Times hasn’t screwed up immensely yet?

Because they screwed up immensely.

1 Like
11

:rofl:

Whatever makes you feel better for supporting this disgusting human being conan.

1 Like
12

The Times admitted this was dumb? I must have missed that.

13

Some people don’t have “defend, defend, defend” or “Whataboutism” as their immediate go-tos. Imagine that.

14

I didn’t say anything about the Times admitting anything. My words were my own, so please don’t attribute that quote to me.

15

Then what were you talking about when you said that some people can admit when they make a mistake? Certainly not the times.

16

We’ll see if they do or don’t. I stated I can admit when something was a mistake and don’t feel the need to mindlessly defend everything “my side” does or says. Can you honestly say the same thing?

1 Like
17

I don’t see anything wrong with this at all.

It’s fiction.

If one doesn’t want to read it, they don’t have to.

1 Like
18

We are heading down a very very risky path here. People need to go back to civility. We all need to address each other with great civility and realize our disagreements are not so strong as to lead to assassinations and bomb threats. I am getting really worried that something bad is going to happen.

2 Likes
19

■■■■■■■ stupid move on the part of the Times.

20

To be fair, nobody uses flocks.

…well geese and sheep do, but they don’t have the dexterity to use a glock, so there is that.

1 Like