You’ve gotten replies with other sources containing the same information. Do you care to edit your post, or do you want to double down on your missing-the-point attitude?
I’d rather not get my news from a tabloid that has a track record of being an awful source of, well anything, regardless of the topic. Is Trumps rhetoric horrifying, yes. That doesn’t suddenly make this a good source of information.
The dailybeast… really?
That’s your reaction to the news of a politician discussing exterminating his political opponents? Really?
The dailybeast is barely a tabloid at best.
And?
This answer has nothing to do with what you were asked. Cope harder why don’t you? 🙄
You’ve gotten replies with other sources containing the same information. Do you care to edit your post, or do you want to double down on your missing-the-point attitude?
The dailybeast is still a tabloid. That hasn’t changed.
I see you’ve chosen the latter. How disappointing, but not surprising
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-veterans-day-joe-biden-1842926
https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1723421983172710412
Is there something contained in this article, 85% of which is direct quotes from Donald Trump, you think is factually incorrect or biased?
I’d rather not get my news from a tabloid that has a track record of being an awful source of, well anything, regardless of the topic. Is Trumps rhetoric horrifying, yes. That doesn’t suddenly make this a good source of information.
It doesn’t matter whether this is generally a good source of information - it matters if this specific article is credible and accurate.
It is - almost the entire article is direct quotes - so your complaint is supremely moronic.
“Your honor I object!”
“On what basis?”
“On the basis that it’s devastating to my case!”