NY Times conceals one of Rashida Tlaib's antisemitic tirades

The Algemeiner found the awful NY Times omitting, as per their dark customs, one of the anti-Israeli Congresswoman Tlaib's anti-semitic comments on Twitter:

In a recent article about Senate legislation opposing anti-Israel BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) efforts, The New York Times covered up a tweet by Representative Rashida Tlaib that raised a firestorm earlier this month and was widely condemned as antisemitic. Tweeting about legislators who backed an anti-BDS bill, Tlaib employed the antisemitic “dual loyalty” charge on January 7:

They forgot what country they represent. This is the U.S. where boycotting is a right & part of our historical fight for freedom & equality. Maybe a refresher on our U.S. Constitution is in order, then get back to opening up our government instead of taking our rights away.

That's what Tlaib spewed out. But here's how the NYT put it:

Ms. Tlaib took a swing at anti-B.D.S. legislation this month, writing on Twitter that “this is the U.S. where boycotting is a right & part of our historical fight for freedom & equality.” Mr. [Marco] Rubio fired back, “This ‘dual loyalty’ canard is a typical anti-Semitic line.” The movement “isn’t about freedom & equality, it’s about destroying #israel.”

Without the first line, which makes no sense at all. It's nowhere to be found in their databases:

According to Lexis-Nexis searches, The New York Times’ print edition has never covered Tlaib’s “They forgot what country they represent” remark. Searches on the Times’ website also did not turn up any articles, not even a wire service story. Thus, while yesterday’s article, which cuts out Tlaib’s “dual loyalty” slur from the tweet, is particularly galling, it is a continuation of the Times’ turning a blind eye to the Congresswoman’s antisemitic remark.

The NYT's sales and stocks may be declining, as they have over the past decade, but it's not enough; this revolting paper needs to be boycotted even more due to their resolute biases in favor of Islamists and other opponents of freedom. This whole accusation of "duel loyalty" is already disgusting enough.