generally speaking, when someone says something loony tunes or obviously false or outrageous,
the story is *that* they said something loony tunes or obviously false or outrageous.
that's the headline.
"pol puts foot in mouth".
"pol lies again".
"pol faces backlash from outrageous statement".
the particulars of what was said is not the headline. the particulars are the details that support the point of the story, which is that they said something loony tunes or obviously false or outrageous.
except when it's donnie. the media usually just says whatever donnie says. maybe they go wow, maybe they report that some democrats disagree, but usually the *story* is "donnie blames democrats for x" no matter how ridiculous it is, when the story should be "donnie tries to shift blame for x".
donnie's latest effort is trying to shift blame for the recent terrible days in the stock market. again, the *story* should be how donnie is trying to shift the blame for the market losses. generally, presidents are held responsible for such things, politically speaking, even if it's not entirely deserved. donnie, in particular, has repeatedly claimed credit for the good performance that had really been merely continuing in a straight line from obama's days. so it's natural to blame him for the bad performance lately, in fact, he set himself up for that.
but the media instead takes his blaming the fed at face value and people are simply debating whether the fed is right or wrong or responsible for the drop in the market. so donnie wins by making it all about the fed, either way.
truth is, donnie's stupid tax cuts and crazy tariff crap is doing damage, the fed is very prudently raising interest rates for legitimate reasons, and donnie shouldn't be allowed to shift blame.
= new reply since forum marked as read
