Close Menu
    Political Humor

    Oooooh, Wall Street Journal, you got some ‘splainin to do!

    Share.
    View 19 Comments

    19 Comments

    1. Metal-Dog on

      WSJ probably assumed that he was a halfway-decent artist who drew an adult woman, not a crayon-scrawler who drew a naked child. They should have known better.

    3. BeerGogglesFTW on

      It’s no surprise that the figure on the right looks like an illustration from a health class textbook that shows how the body changes when it goes through puberty.

    6. White-Rabbit_ on

      You think the take away will be that the WSJ was trying to hide the preprubescence of the real drawing? No. His supporters will point to the discrepancy as proof the whole thing is fake. Which is probably intentional on the part of the WSJ, you think Murdock suddenly grew some kind of conscience?

    10. LinearFluid on

      Wall Street journal in their July report did say that they never saw it but had confirmation it existed and their drawing was based on the description they received.

    11. doqtyr on

      First time actually seeing either, honestly would have doubted the authenticity of was drawn with any kind of care for proportions and talent

      The real one is totally a lame ass gameshow host, drawing a pic for his favorite predator

    12. roehnin on

      “Enigmas never age.”

      “That’s what I love about these high school girls, man. I get older, they stay the same age.”

    13. Caa3098 on

      That’s why Trump was able to avoid giving any of his tells that he was lying when he said “I’ve never drawn a woman.” He felt sure in his heart that he had only drawn little limbless children.

    17. substituted_pinions on

      This is the level of stupefying simplicity I expect from the leader of the free world.

    Leave A Reply