I like how the article writer seems to imply that it’s some sort of outrage when the “mural” (aren’t murals usually pictures? I’d call it a slogan at best) is defaced, when the movement the slogan is in support of is going around defacing anything they can get their hands on and rioting, destroying and looting. If that group can go around doing that why can’t others protest and ruin their shit? I’m sure they’d have a different point of view if they were painting MAGA outside debozo’s mansion, or anywhere else for that matter.

I like how the article writer seems to imply that it’s some sort of outrage when the “mural” (aren’t murals usually pictures? I’d call it a slogan at best) is defaced, when the movement the slogan is in support of is going around defacing anything they can get their hands on and rioting, destroying and looting. If that group can go around doing that why can’t others protest and ruin their shit?