Rampell: Do you know that there actually was bipartisan legislation intended to to increase our fentanyl detection technologies at the border. And trump killed it.
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 27, 2024
Jennings: You keep fighting these old battles. Donald Trump won.. Mexico has to do something.
Rampell: They have… pic.twitter.com/szaKgKSuGI
This is why I think cable news is basically worthless: someone like Scott Jennings (it could be so many other GOP mouthpieces, though) will argue something that is either based in sheer ignorance (possible) or they HAVE TO know better than, but this is the GOP line and their "job" is to defend it. The networks can argue that they are doing this for "balance"--but that's not what it is. They are airing out a position that is basically absurd with no penalty for either lying or being as dumb as a stump.
I used to go back and forth with myself about this kind of representation, especially at the top of the Bush years. Is it ignorance, is it lying, and what's worse?
And the answer is: what does it matter? If a position is completely detached from facts, it just is bad. Donald Trump winning an election doesn't change the facts of what is happening at the at the border with Mexico any more than George W. Bush winning affected whether invading Iraq over WMD's (dumb--or lying?) was a good idea.
