I’m sure I can find you a bunch of articles where there’s no sign they’re trying to minimize what happened but they happen to use that term. I just think English is tricky. What term do you think they should be using?
That doesn’t work when the details are fuzzy, for example, this paragraph:
House Democrats Wednesday released a small batch of emails that appear to suggest President Donald Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of underage women than he has acknowledged.
You couldn’t say “Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of girls 11-14 than he has acknowledged”. That suggests that the emails that were released referenced those specific ages, which they don’t.
You couldn’t say “Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of girls 11-14 than he has acknowledged”.
You could say emails suggest Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of girls 11-14 than he has acknowledged". You sure could. You sure should! It’s the truth! It’s recorded in many places, witnessed by many people!
I’m sure I can find you a bunch of articles where there’s no sign they’re trying to minimize what happened but they happen to use that term. I just think English is tricky. What term do you think they should be using?
It depends, but “girls 11-14” might be a start.
That doesn’t work when the details are fuzzy, for example, this paragraph:
https://theweek.com/politics/house-democrats-release-epstein-emails-trump
You couldn’t say “Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of girls 11-14 than he has acknowledged”. That suggests that the emails that were released referenced those specific ages, which they don’t.
You could say emails suggest Trump knew more about Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of girls 11-14 than he has acknowledged". You sure could. You sure should! It’s the truth! It’s recorded in many places, witnessed by many people!
You clearly have no idea how fact checking works in journalism. They couldn’t make that claim.