> So not clear on your point.

I just meant that an article, claiming to go for a deep dive on how McDonald's is part of the new American zeitgeist, mentions one presidential candidate, and the CEO murderer, but doesn't mention the other presidential candidate.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/01/kamala-harris-on-working-at-... is just from a few months ago.

> “It was not a small job,” Harris told Ruhle. “There are people who work at McDonald’s in our country who are trying to...raise families and pay rent.”

Just seemed like an odd omission, that's all.

Not really. Free Press is only pretending to be journalism. In an article defending JK Rowling, they describe people who are upset with her views on transgender rights as "maniacs, who are then flattered by cowards". It's a partisan rag.

This is the context of that quote, which doesn't state what you're claiming:

In recent years, she has become a figure of some controversy. Not for any real reason, but because we live in an era where things that are self-evidently true are denied by maniacs who are then flattered by cowards.

Also, this was in a piece from one of their columnists. Opinions are to be expected.

(https://www.thefp.com/p/things-worth-remembering-jk-rowling)

The garbage-truck photo op was Trump's a followup to his campaign calling Puerto Rico "garbage", and in particular to Biden calling that behavior "garbage".

This comment illustrates pretty well how much of a game of telephone american political culture is.

The person whispering in my ear said that a roast comedian at a trump rally told a joke where Puerto Rico was called an island of garbage. I wonder how many levels it had to go to become "[trumps] campaign calling Puerto Rico "garbage"".

Your chronology does not fit.