The title of the article reveals the utter futility of the underlying presumption that a long-winded factual demonstration is necessary or sufficient. Of course Trump never uttered such a ridiculous statement and no one wants to read a tedious article explaining the factual incorrectness of the meme advanced by Trump's critics.
No one. Neither left, nor right because everyone knows that he didn't and the argument is about rhetorical effect, the brazenness of the charge, resting as it does for its effect and its force, on its Ratherian seriousness. The counter rhetoric is not a logic no one wants to wade through but ridicule of the statement and its proponents, and obvious insult and taunt against those on the other side. When the old schoolyard taunt is launched at you, the refutation that your grandmother's feet were below the minimum size required by army induction medical inspectors and therefore she could not have worn the legendary combat boots will only garner more ridicule on your head, not avert the insult that was advanced.
POTUS delivered a “long-winded factual demonstration” with reporters who were advancing the false narrative.
Was POTUS engaging the dominant media on the merits, or lack of, or was he utilizing sarcasm?
Was Mark Levin engaging in sarcasm or acknowledge the media falsehood? If he acknowledged the false narrative why did Levin spend an hour debunking it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQqdeFZt3nw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeZTZUAnveI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcx-ZCYnOoE