President Trump has floated multiple times the idea of thwarting hurricanes headed for the US by bombing them, including by dropping nuclear bombs on hurricanes to disrupt their course, Axios reported, citing conversations with sources who heard Trump’s comments and were briefed on a National Security Council memo that recorded the comments. Ok, I get it, Jonathan Swan the Axios reporter, wants us to believe, Trump is a complete idiot – here is his report.
We won’t even attempt to give the technical idea any merit, though, for some, I guess it was important enough for NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to do a report called, “Why don’t we try to destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them?” So what is the real story here?
For the record here was Trump’s response:
The story by Axios that President Trump wanted to blow up large hurricanes with nuclear weapons prior to reaching shore is ridiculous. I never said this. Just more FAKE NEWS!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 26, 2019
There have been a few conspiracy theories running around – e.g. a planted story to a unique aid to find a Trump mole. But most likely the Occam’s razor principle applies here. The truth is probably is as stated by Jonathan Swan – the only problem is the spin. Two people can see the same information and come up with very different conclusions. Here is the proper no agenda spin:
- Trump jokes in bombastic ways all the time – most likely he said these “nuke hurricanes” comments in jest. And yes a new aid not really knowing Trump was stunned and was willing or was coerced in giving this off-hand information to the press.
- I am sure Jonathan Swan understands this, but what great clickbait material that his Trump-hating editors would love – Axios is quite left-leaning. So run with the story. If he doesn’t understand this then Jonathan Swan is the idiot.
- So the story is funny and bombastic enough to go viral.
- Now that story is viral the White House must respond. You may then think that Trump lied in his response, by saying he did not say this. Technical both true and false – again it depends on how you spin it. Saying something in jest does not mean you said something as a fact – otherwise we all go down. You might say, why did he just clarify it as a joke. Well you know the media would never give Trump that leeway, so better to say nothing on this point – so technical one can say Trump told the truth. Do I really need to explain this stuff?
Jonathan Swan Wikipedia page says it all. We post a screenshot here because Wikipedia has a habit of being edited constantly to feed agendas – a caution when using Wikipedia as a source. The editorial headline from Wikipedia says it all, “This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view.” Jonathan Swan is a product of today’s dubious Fake News journalism.
Congratulations Jonathan Swan – you and Axios got your clicks and backlinks to boost your advertising revenue and Alexa rating. Now share the wealth and please give some of that wealth to News Forecasters.