Not at all. I'm sure you knew the truth long before I did. When Shades objected, I realized that while he was getting obstinate and overly-technical for the sake of making a libertarian point, that he was correct, and that the news source didn't really make it clear how Trump was responsible. I didn't know the answer myself as I'm not much of a student of politics, and so I had to look up the answer. Strangely, this was a tough nut to crack, and it took me upwards of five minutes to solve. Surely, the multitude of mainstream news sources reporting the way they did weren't just making it up (even though 'killing mood' is hyperbole for effect), but I wasn't quickly rewarded with an explanation.I didn't see this, Dean. You beat me to it.
In contrast, up until a couple of days ago (I think), I didn't know anything about Hillary Clinton and the email server. Seriously. It took under three minutes to get to the bottom of that one, starting with subs favorite news source, the National Review.
I may be doing the concept of "news" an injustice by calling that a news source. I don't think I've met a right-wing "news source" yet. Rather, I've only seen news commentary, where they get information from legitimate sources and then react to it. The reactions are unhinged and the quality of analysis nearly always abysmal.