My most important statement about Trump, aside from supporting his EO and some of the claims around it, is that anytime everyone tells me I'm supposed to hate someone, especially when there are massive identifiable issues in the reporting on why, I'm very skeptical.

Frankly, some of the most important wisdom in the world is that if you want to know who truly rules over you, look no further than whoever you can't question. This isn't merely being contrarian. That proposition isn't really allowed to be questioned in "polite society."

After this summer, I don't trust any of the major media outlets or their representatives further than I can throw them, so I have to doubt the narrative they've spun around Trump too. I'd say I want to form my own opinion, but I lack the necessary resources, it seems.

When I lack the epistemic resources necessary to form a clear opinion on my own, the only thing I can do is look to a heuristic like "what am I being told I must believe? because that's probably wrong." Trump hate and Trump worship are probably both dangerously wrong.

This is kind of my point, though, about lacking epistemic resources to know: which words and deeds? The ones that have been reported to me by sources (on both sides) that I absolutely do not and cannot trust? Nah. I don't think so. https://twitter.com/mollistan/status/1313308665462620160

I admit that it's wholly possible that Trump is nearly as loathsome as the gaslighting media makes him out to be, but they've blown their ability to communicate that with horribly unfair reporting about him and other issues with partisan valence. They should have shot straight.