New York Times under fire for publishing 'fantasy' Trump assasination.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/us/oregon-protest-riot/index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ayed-demonstrations-erupt-across-us/93633154/
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/us/trump-election-protests.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ies-across-the-nation/?utm_term=.18a3232f3105
ad nauseum

So, again:
Since you agree with what I said, what do you think about the insanity and hatred demonstrated by the left's rioting, looting, burning and shooting people at baseball practice in reaction to Trump's election?

 

Really, college campuses? Do you think that demonstrations at college campuses is anything new? College students protest and they have always protested in this way. Nothing new to see here of news from before the election.

 

I believe you avoided my question:
Since you agree with what I said, what do you think about the insanity and hatred demonstrated by the left's rioting, looting, burning and shooting people at baseball practice in reaction to Trump's election?

 

Old news and inconsequential. People rioted at college campuses because they were convinced that Trump would be a disruption and a Putin sympathizer taking his words over the words of our own intelligence agencies that warned him about Putin. Those college protestors were solidly fearful that Trump would create chaos, hatred, animus and make our country unstable and fearful of immigrants and Muslims. Welcome to the world of reality, it all happened just at they predicted and protested against.

 

I knew you'd give them a pass - liberals never hold their own accountable.

 

Actually it's not bad optics at all since the leftist allied press controls 95 percent of the media outlets and hence how stories are spun or if they are told at all. No analyzing in regards to it and no week after week of pontificating regarding leftist fantasies of presidential assassination, then effectively there is no story and hence no negative political repercussions for the Left.

Hence they can openly fantasize about murdering a White president and it is not racism and they can fantasize about murdering a GOPer president and it's NOT gutter level leftist politics and they can fantasize about murdering this president until some mentally unstable leftist tries it and it WAS NOT a leftist generated call to violence because it's never wrong when leftists do it. Sweet!

 

And when a standard template leftist ANTIFA leftist nut job decides to act on it then what will be the Left's excuse ASIDE from the now traditional one of "It's NEVER wrong when leftists do it" and in this case promote violence against the sitting president?

 

Fiction... commissioned by, approved by, and paid for by the NYT.
Why do you continue to avoid this?

 

Actually I don't think a possible motive is considered a fact. Apparently you have a rather expansive view of that word.

 

Should the NYT be endorsing an author that fantazises over the assassination of a sitting president?

 

It would be selective IF assassination fantasy stories about Obama or Clinton were being brushed aside as cavalierly as you are brushing aside this one. If you can point to some threads where right wingers poo pooed assassination porn on a Democratic President then I might concede you have a point.

 

Very revealing comment. Let me guess: You hate this racist country now and want to move to an even whiter one, like Canada.

 

I vote for New Zealand.

 

Not as must as the right enjoy sending bombs to former presidents however.

 

Actually if I moved anywhere it would be to Colombia, South America where my son moved when Trump was elected. He loves the people, they're kind and respectful and he says it's hard to meet anyone there that knows who Trump is nor do they care. That sounds good to me.

 

Read it again, they didn't 'endorse' anyone. You completely missed the entire content and meaning of the article.

 

If you can't find any content to take an opposing view with, you feel compelled to take issue with something - anything and in this instance it's the word 'possible motive'. Tell me, what's your big problem with those two words, how is there anything at all wrong. It's English, it's self-explanatory, and non-inflammatory. So please explain, what's your problem there?

 

How much do you actually READ the NYT Book Review section. Oh yeah, next to NEVER I'd bet.

 

Same as any porn

 

It wasn't paid for by the NYT, it is BOOK, what is so difficult for you people to understand what a book is or what a book review section is? Matter of fact when was the last time any of you even read a book that didn't have colored cartoons in it?

 

So you're posting porn here, I get it.

 

You did not read the article cited in the OP:

One of the short stories on the Times' online Book Review page...
A Times spokesperson told Fox News: "It's very clear what this is: a work of fiction, commissioned by editors of the Book Review

Short story, not a book...
Fiction... commissioned by, approved by, and paid for by the NYT.
Why do you continue to avoid this?

 

Why do you continue to avoid the fact this story was commissioned by, approved by, and paid for by the NYT?

 

Weakest deflection ever. The NYT paid the author to write the assasination piece and when repeatedly called out on it..your response is to question how often people read the reviews?? Millions of people read the NYT book reviews ffs. Ever here of the New York Times best seller list? Actually this isnt your weakest deflection...the argument that anyone who is justly outraged at this must be a Russian troll is the weakest. Epitomy of leftism at its best here folks.

 

You should have read the FOX article before you made a fool out of yourself.


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.

The Times Book Review section noted that it puts a spotlight on “books and stories, but also on how the books being written and read reflect the world outside of books.” Editors said that the Mueller probe and Trump’s relationship with Putin is “one of the biggest stories out there,” therefore the paper enlisted “today’s most talented spy and crime novelists” to dream up possible outcomes.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ne...rvice-helping-russian-assassin-gun-down-trump