No. It's not mind-reading, it's basic reading comprehension. Of course that task is more challenging with a president whose regular ramblings are often indecipherable. But when journalists claim Trump is saying something he's not, news consumers lose trust. A few minutes before he mentioned LA and San Diego, Trump specifically argued that the higher oil prices were a necessary trade-off to keep the world - and the US - safe. Here's that comment: “You know, by the way, we’re kicking Iran’s ass. You do know that, right? And that’ll end soon. It’s gonna end one way or the other. It’s gonna end very soon and your prices are gonna come tumbling. All your prices have been tumbling down. In fact, oil is less than it was under Biden, just so you understand. And we are saving this country from a problem, and the Middle East and Israel and everybody. We’re saving the world from what could be one of the worst tragedies ever.” He's made this argument many times before. Here's how PBS NewsHour's Liz Landers described it in an interview she conducted with him back in March. "Americans are seeing this at the gas pump right now. So I asked the president about those oil prices rising. He said that it's a -- quote -- 'very small price to pay' for what he described as more than four decades of terror from the regime." He used that exact same language - "a very small price to pay" - in his rambling comments yesterday. Here is the verbatim excerpt, with the references to San Diego and Los Angeles, along with his comments immediately following his invocation of those cites, where Trump once again discusses oil prices dropping: “And again, remember with the war, it’s just artificial. It’s a little bit high. It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take, let it, let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That’s, this is a very small price to pay, and it’s gonna be over very soon. It’s essentially almost over with. And they might keep going a little long, you know? They always say they have a big threshold for pain. They need it, let me tell you. They need it. But it’s gonna end very soon, and it’ll end one way or the other, and your gas and your gasoline and all of the things. And don’t forget, we also took on a country known as Venezuela. They never talk about that. They never talk about Venezuela. And we’re taking in hundreds of millions of barrels of oil every week.” A minute later he revisits his argument about the war and oil prices: "But it'll end very quickly and prices are going to come down very sharply." Trump isn't suggesting he wants Iran to take out those cities -- as those headlines and the commentary from many Trump critics suggests. He said "it's a small price to pay" twice in that paragraph. The first appears to be a restatement of the argument he's been making for months: the rising cost of oil is a small price to pay for "keeping the world safe, keeping the country safe." The second is unclear, but the claim in your earlier tweet doesn't make any sense. You wrote: "I'm bummed that our president thinks that Iran taking out Los Angeles or San Diego is a small price to pay. I realize the right-wing media will do their best to spin what he said. I live in NYC. I know what a terrorist attack can do to a city. Trump is a disgrace." That second reference to a "very small price to pay" immediately follows his argument that the "small price to pay" is worth paying because it will "keep the world safe, keep our country safe." So is your claim is that Trump believes allowing Iran to "tak[e] out Los Angeles or San Diego" is what he means when he says it's a small price to pay for "keeping the world safe, keeping the country safe"? His comments were a jumbled mess, yours is logically incoherent. For months, Trump has argued that the high cost of oil is a small price to pay for the nation's security. In his remarks yesterday, before his reference LA and SD, Trump argued that the high cost of oil is a small price to pay for the nation's security. And shortly after his reference to those cities, he invokes the high cost of oil and the nation's security. And you're arguing that the "small price to pay" for keeping the country safe is...eliminating American cities? Trump often speaks in word salad. And he's said so many false, inflammatory and offensive things over the years that he long ago forfeited the benefit of the doubt. But it's not a good look, and it's not good journalism, to distort what he's said or put words in his mouth.