Well, your source is whitehouse.gov which has taken quite a turn toward Fox News these last few months. So it's best to reach out to independent news sources. Remember one of the first admin actions was to remove all the inspectors general. Not a great look for transparency.
So your advice is that everything released on whitehouse.gov cannot be trusted? That's a rather confusing take, especially since the numbers they've provided in the linked announcement match other sources reporting the same news.
That's not what I said. But I do stand by that the admin needs to be watched. For example, what did whitehouse.gov say about the sec-defense illegally using a commercial chat app to discuss imminent attack plans? Was it the same as most media outlets?
Then great! Most things the admin reports are quickly debunked by other sources. It's nice they nailed this one!
Ordinarily I tend to rely on sources from many places including Whitehouse.gov but lately it is apparent that Whitehouse.gov has been compromised and the people who admin that website run everything by one individual for approval. At that point you may as well click on TS since it says the same things. I mean, they literally scrubbed the website and removed anything they disagreed with whether it is factual or not and they also removed/altered historical references (facts) in an attempt to either erase it or hide it....among other things. Not saying they don't get things right sometimes but how will we ever know for sure if there is no transparency and/or accountability?
A great approach is to start at the source, rather than first relying on the many so-called "fair and balanced" news outlets that interpret what they think the White House is saying (the good old telephone game). Without a baseline, I don't know how you'd ever determine if said transparency and/or accountability isn't there.
