Yeah, but it doesn't make sucking on one look any better.Freud said it best on this one.
Yeah, but it doesn't make sucking on one look any better.Freud said it best on this one.
Why would the exact location matter?Fake news. Here is the true story behind the hysterics, outrage and hyperbole of the liberal media and their audience.
"A little girl who became the public face of US migrant family separations was not taken away from her mother at the US border, says her father.
A photograph of the Honduran toddler sobbing in a pink jacket was snapped at the scene of a border detention.
Time magazine has used the image for its latest cover, depicting President Donald Trump looming over the girl with the caption: "Welcome to America"."
It's not the location. It's the fact the little girl was NOT removed from parental care.Why would the exact location matter?
And if you noticed, Trump was photoshopped in as well.It's not the location. It's the fact the little girl was NOT removed from parental care.
Many are and it was wrong. But if you are going to have a poster child I would suggest using a real one. Or it delegitimatizes the issue and provides further fodder for cries of fake news.
It's not just one magazine cover. It's the primary photo used by EVERY media outlet.And if you noticed, Trump was photoshopped in as well.
Who cares, its a magazine cover that depicts the impacts of Trump.
Deal with it and stop whining, you back that crap, own it.
Time covers are always posed, composed, retouched and chosen for the point they make. No one but total media naïfs imagines they're anything but editorial illustrations for the copy inside.And if you noticed, Trump was photoshopped in as well.
Who cares, its a magazine cover that depicts the impacts of Trump.
Deal with it and stop whining, you back that crap, own it.