WASHINGTON D.C. — In a groundbreaking revelation, a consortium of cable news pundits and think tank fellows announced today that the "scale" of former President Donald Trump's "political blunder" in Iran is, for the 73rd time since 2018, finally "coming into focus." The report, compiled after countless hours of re-watching the same clips and re-reading the same memos, suggests the blunder's magnitude has remained remarkably consistent despite repeated attempts to bring it into sharper relief.
"It's like trying to photograph a fuzzy Bigfoot," explained Dr. Evelyn Reed, lead analyst for the Institute for Perpetual Political Re-Evaluation. "You think you've got it, you adjust the lens, and then, darn it, it's just as fuzzy as before. But this time, we really feel it’s focusing. We’re talking 8K clarity on this blunder, maybe even 12K by next Tuesday." Reed clarified that previous "focusing" efforts, which yielded headlines like "Trump's Iran Blunder Looms Large" (2019), "The True Cost of Trump's Iran Blunder Emerges" (2020), and "Iran Blunder's Ripple Effects Now Becoming Apparent" (2021), were merely "preliminary focus-grouping."
Senior political commentator, Chad Broderick, a man whose career has been built on looking gravely concerned about things that were already obvious, added, "What we're seeing now is a comprehensive, multi-layered focusing. It's not just the blunder itself, but the *implications* of the blunder. The *aftermath* of the implications. The *existential dread* that stems from the aftermath of the implications. It’s a very complex process of stating what was already stated, but louder." Sources close to Broderick confirm he has hired a full-time assistant whose sole job is to re-organize his "Shocked and Appalled" facial expressions into a tiered system for maximum dramatic effect.
The "discovery" has sent shockwaves through the Washington D.C. pundit circuit, with many expressing relief that the "focus" has finally been achieved, at least until next quarter's earnings call. Networks are reportedly scrambling to update their graphics packages to reflect the new, clearer "scale," with some proposing a "blunder-o-meter" that fluctuates wildly based on the latest cable news segment and the perceived attentiveness of viewers. One analyst, speaking anonymously because "the truth is too dangerous in these trying times," admitted, "Honestly, we just ran out of new ways to say 'it's bad.' So, 'coming into focus' it is. It implies progress without actually needing new information."
The only remaining question is how long it will take for the "scale" of the blunder to inevitably "re-blur" itself, requiring yet another epoch-making journalistic journey into the blindingly obvious, likely just in time for an election cycle.
