Predictably, the Trump administration propagandized new BLS data which suggested total employment across the US economy was overstated by nearly a million jobs in the year to March.

Just as predictably, The White House’s rhetoric was riddled with contradictions which Karoline Leavitt saw no point trying to reconcile, and that assumes (optimistically) she recognized them as contradictions.

“Today, the BLS released the largest downward revision on record proving that President Trump was right: Biden’s economy was a disaster and the BLS is broken,” Leavitt declared, hours after the nation’s preeminent statistical agency unveiled the figures, which were eyed closely on Wall Street. “Much like the BLS has failed the American people, so has Jerome ‘Too Late’ Powell — who has officially run out of excuses and must cut the rates now.”

As a quick aside, I’ll be the first to say the 2022-2024 “vibecession” wasn’t just a matter of psychology. And I actually agree with the Trump administration that Biden (and Kamala Harris) regularly resorted to condescension and gaslighting while explaining that in fact, the lived economic experiences of countless American families were nothing more than a perpetual case of the Mondays — a mental hangup that households should and could get over. F-ck the last administration for doing that. It was cruel and I don’t condone it.

With that out of the way, Leavitt’s bullsh-t is wholly insufferable, and Tuesday’s edition was no exception. According to the Trump White House, the BLS revisions were simultaneously “proof” that hiring was much weaker than initially reported under Biden, and also “proof” that the agency’s data isn’t reliable. Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive, but they almost are.

If the BLS really is “broken,” then these revisions should be taken with a grain of salt just like all the other data the agency produces. By contrast, Leavitt’s contention is that these revisions are reliable, but other revisions (notably the ones which prompted Trump to fire Erika McEntarfer last month) aren’t. More to the point: It appears that revisions which reflect poorly on Biden can be trusted, but those which reflect poorly on Trump can’t. Imagine that.

Do note: That’s the very same inconsistency you see time and again with Trump and the mainstream American media. Stories which reflect poorly on him (so, most stories) are “fake news.” Stories published by the very same outlets but which reflect poorly on his political rivals somehow aren’t fake. Funny how that works.

At the same time, Leavitt’s contention that Biden’s economy was a “disaster” argues against the idea that the Fed only cut rates late last year to bolster Harris’s chances of winning the election, an argument Trump makes regularly. The Fed cut rates this time last year because the labor market appeared to be teetering. Although the month-by-month breakdown isn’t available yet, Tuesday’s revisions strongly suggest the hiring numbers which prompted the Fed to start cutting late last summer were in fact worse than we know.

Leavitt accidentally admitted as much. Sort of. Just like she accidentally suggested Trump‘s labor market has in fact deteriorated over the summer consistent with the BLS’s monthly revisions which Trump claims are fake. What else, in the context of a discussion about jobs data, could she possibly mean when she says Powell is “officially out of excuses and must cut the rates now”?

This circle — the Fed-BLS-jobs-Biden-conspiracy circle — can’t be squared. Not completely. Not the way Trump wants it squared. You just can’t check every box here. For every question Leavitt can answer, she’ll raise a new one. If the Biden economy sucked, then why was the Fed wrong to cut rates ahead of the election? If Tuesday’s data is evidence that the Fed “must cut the rates now,” why? The revisions cover the year ended in March — and Trump insists the economy’s “booming” since. Why is Tuesday’s annual revision any more reliable than the “fake” monthly revisions which cost McEntarfer her job?

The irony is that the BLS could answer that latter question by explaining the methodology (the whole point of doing the annual benchmarking exercise is to get a more accurate number), but Leavitt hasn’t the faintest. That happens to people like Trump and Leavitt all the time, by the way: They don’t even realize when the facts are behind them because they can’t be bothered with any sort of strenuous mental activity. They lie and propagandize even when they don’t have to. And you know what? I don’t blame them, because the general public cares even less about the facts than they do.

The real story here’s quite simple: The Biden economy did suck (because jobs growth, whatever it actually was, can’t compensate for runaway inflation), and Trump’s economy is well on its way to sucking and will suck if he’s not careful. There’s no sort of conspiracy at the BLS (at all), and if there’s any kind of anti-Trump conspiracy at the Fed, it’s Trump’s fault for spending most of his first term and, so far, all of his second, trying to force the issue rather than finesse it.

Mr. President, here’s some free advice: When it comes to the Fed, you gotta cajole it. You can’t just “grab” it. Everything’s not a “p-ssy.” And in case it’s not clear enough after two-dozen allegations spanning five decades, you can’t just grab those either. Even if “you’re famous.”