Only Zionist Favored Ones Get on Best Selling Books Lists & Not Media Blacked Out!

New York Times: Dwindling Odds of Coincidence


Charles Blow is the “affirmative action” house-negro at Sulzberger’s ironically and noticeably non-diverse Jew York Slimes. A divorced father of three, he is also an admitted “bi-sexual” and a graduate of all-Black Grambling State University. And, of course, he hates Trumsptein — or rather, to be more precise, the many millions of White people who think Trumpstein represents their interests.

Hazmat suits and goggles on! Let’s dig into Blowhard’s bull-shine, shall we?

For his service to “Massa” Sulzberger, the pet token house-negro is given New York Slimes bestseller status and TV appearances.


Blowhard: We are still not conclusively able to connect the dots on the question of whether there was any coordination or collusion between members of Donald Trump’s campaign ….

Rebuttal: Never mind connecting these “dots” — tell us what “dots” even exist in the first place.

Blowhard: .. and the Russians who interfered in our election to benefit him, ….

Rebuttal: What evidence do you have that the Russians “interfered.” Define this “interference.”

Blowhard: … but those dots do continue to multiply at an alarming rate.

Rebuttal:  If the “dots” are indeed “multiplying,” then you should be able to point out a few of these “dots” for us. Please enlighten us, Mr. Blowjob. 

Blowhard: First, and we have to keep saying this because this fact keeps getting obscured in the subterfuge of deflection, misdirection and ideological finger-pointing about what has yet to be proven: It is absolutely clear that the Russians did interfere in our election.

Rebuttal: If Russian “interference” is as “absolutely clear” as you say it is, then show us the “dots.”

Blowhard: This is not a debatable issue.

Rebuttal: Ah yes! The good ol’ “this is not open to debate trick” — an effective rhetorical device for the manipulation of the simple-minded, but it has nothing to do with evidence. Show us the “dots,” please.

Blowhard: This is not fake news.

Rebuttal:  That’s all well and good, Mr. Blowjob. But we are still waiting for you to cite a single one of these “dots.” 

Blowhard: This is not a witch hunt.

Rebuttal: Show us the damn “dots!”

Blowhard: This happened.

Rebuttal: The “dots,” you weasel-worded son-of-a-whore! Give us the frickin’ “dots!”

Blowhard: The investigations, rightly, are seeking to figure out exactly how and to what degree, and those questions obviously depend on knowing more about campaign contacts with Russian meddlers.

Rebuttal: Don’t change the subject, sodomite! Give us the “dots,” — just one!

Blowhard: We continue to learn of new contacts between people in Trump’s orbit and Russians during the campaign.

Rebuttal: We do? We must have missed these discoveries. Exactly what have you “learned of,” Mr. Blowjob, and from where?

Blowhard: Last week we learned from The New York Times:

Rebuttal: A Slimes scribbler cites another Slimes’ scribbler as his source. Are you bloody serious, Blowhard?! Dear Lord, having to read and rebut this deceitful dung every day is going to give us a heart attack.


Magnifying Glass, Search, To Find, To Watch, Increase

Classic circular logic — After finding no “dots” to reveal a Putin-Trump conspiracy, Blowhard uses the unfounded allegations of his own newspaper to “prove” that he (a writer for the same newspaper!) is correct.


Blowhard (quoting his own newspaper): “Michael T. Flynn, the former national security adviser, has offered to be interviewed by House and Senate investigators who are examining the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia in exchange for immunity from prosecution, according to his lawyer and a congressional official.”

Rebuttal: So, General Flynn has been called to testify by the very same witch-hunters who invented the “Russian interference” scandal to begin with. This proves what, exactly, Mr. Blowjob?

Blowhard: This signals another area of possible collusion.

Rebuttal: Could you define what you mean by “collusion?” But first, and pardon the redundancy here, show us the damn “dots!”

Blowhard: There is something here, but I can’t yet put my finger on what it is.

Rebuttal: So, you “can’t yet put” your excrement-stained finger on it, eh Blowjob? In other words, you have no “dots!”  Game over, sodomite.

Blowhard: To be sure, Donald Trump is a despicable man and an awful president who deserves whatever he gets. He is crude, a liar, a bully and a cheat. He is vainglorious and vengeful.

It is not clear to me that America — and indeed the world — can survive a full-term Trump presidency.

Translation: There it is! The true purpose behind the invention of the fake Russia/Trump scandal is to cripple and impeach Trumpstein — and, in so doing, further isolating Putin, saving Obongo’s domestic “legacy,” putting the Congress and / or Senate back under Communist Demonrat control after the 2018 mid-term elections, and finally, installing a Communist female in the White House after the 2020 QFS (Quadrennial Freak Show).

Now that’s how you connect “dots,” Mr. Blowjob.


Speaking of “foreign interference” in American politics, when are we ever going to have an investigation to connect the “dots” clearly revealed in the images above? (Clinton, Bush, McCain, Obongo, Romney — Presidential candidates all.)

Boobus Americanus 1: I read in the New York Times today about how the dots linking Trump to Russia are beginning to show an incriminating pattern.

Boobus Americanus 2: No nation should influence in the internal politics of another.

Sugar: Tell that to frickin’ AIPAC — aka the Issrael Lobby — and its 100,000 check-writing memberss!

 Editor: A loony lobby that is pissed-off at Putin for saving the government of Syria!

You may also like...