Version of this is happening right now with the Trump "Bloodbath" comment. He is clearly speaking in the context of automobile manufacturing but the media has spun it to insinuate he is threatening violence. Personally I very much dislike Trump but the media spin on this from supposedly neutral news companies is egregious.
“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars.”
It’s clear he introduced his bloodbath metaphor in the context of talking about the auto industry. But it seems as he was saying it he had this thought - that the bloodbath wouldn’t just be confined to the auto industry. “… it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it.” The ‘bloodbath’ he expects in the auto industry is in his mind an example of a more widespread threat. A ‘bloodbath for the country’.
Pretending his use of this language isn’t connected to a larger apocalyptic narrative he’s selling is disingenuous.
Everything he stated was in the context of the auto industry. Pulling it out of context and then applying your own interpretation is the disingenuous action. You and the media have added your own spin to a completely out of context statement. Don't get me wrong, I think Trump us dangerous but people and media doing this and misleading about what he said works to his benefit. It erodes trust in the news.
