Staff Reports
Former President Donald Trump seized a golden opportunity to make fast food history by donning the iconic McDonald’s uniform in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. He was seen serving fries and operating the drive-thru, creating the kind of viral moment that sends leftists spiraling into a frenzy. Liberals were beside themselves, scrambling to dismiss the event as nothing more than a political stunt—a classic example of Trump being Trump, and doing it exceptionally well.
As the narrative spun out of control, the Left tried their hardest to gaslight everyone by claiming politicians don’t engage in shenanigans like this during election season. Reality check: they absolutely do. Watching the Democrats squirm as they attempt to convince people that they’re above such antics is hilarious. The glaring irony is that Trump capitalized on this moment by directly contrasting himself with Vice President Kamala Harris, who has long attempted to tout her McDonald’s past for street cred. But, as expected, when put under scrutiny, that narrative crumbled faster than a soggy fry.
The @nytimes is now saying that team Kamala can't produce proof that she worked at McDonald's because if they did it "could breathe life into" the claims.
SHE NEVER WORKED THERE.
THAT IS WHY THE CAMPAIGN IS NOT OFFERING ANYTHING OR ANYONE TO CORROBORATE HER CLAIM. #McDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/PYYfXtslGs— Tier2PowerGod (@Tier2_Power_God) October 20, 2024
The media leapt into action, fishing for dirt on Trump, but their efforts fell flat. The New York Times, ever eager to defend Kamala, published a piece that tried to validate her claim of working at McDonald’s while dismissing Trump as a liar without providing any substantial evidence themselves. The assertion that Kamala worked at the fast-food chain is based on the recollection of a childhood friend who claims to have overheard Kamala’s deceased mother mention it. Talk about thin evidence! If the New York Times was trying to play detective, they may as well have used a Magic 8-Ball for their facts.
The absurdity of the situation is hard to overlook. The Times’ logic appears to be that if a friend claims it, it must be true, which sets a dangerous precedent for journalism. If Democrats say it, the assumption is it’s gospel, and anyone questioning their claims must provide absolute proof to the contrary. But when it comes to Trump, the bar is set entirely differently, leaving the Left squawking in disbelief as they try to pin a façade of legitimacy on Kamala’s unverified experience.
In the end, what’s been revealed in the great McDonald’s debacle is an embarrassing lack of accountability on the part of those trying to protect Kamala’s narrative. Without any family members available for interviews to back her claims, they resorted to hearsay from a friend in another country. If Woodward and Bernstein had used those standards during their investigations, history books would have rewritten themselves in scorn. The way the Left is reacting is pure comedy gold, showcasing just how desperate they are to hold on to their narrative—even when it thoroughly fails to meet the smell test.
