Prompting this dialogue at Facebook (in which I am one of the participants):
X: Trump: bringing people together (except his daughter and her friend, who he'd rather keep apart).
Y: I wonder if I could get paid as a Trump translator. I know what he means!
X: What does it say about him if he needs a translator? It's important for the president to communicate!
Y: Seems he's done pretty well with his communicating, but people who oppose him are taking advantage of opportunities to act like they don't understand him. We'll see how these cross-purposes resolve themselves.
Z: This actually makes sense, even if on first hearing it, it doesn't sound right. A lot of what he says, though, just can't be translated into anything a decent person would ever say.
Y: You reverted to pointing at all those other things after you were prompted to observe what makes sense of this one. I challenge you to focus individually on the other things and put them, one by one, through an equivalent effort. There must be a name for the logical fallacy you are committing here. Think about it. You believe there is a pile of evidence that X is true, and when you examine one item, it doesn't show X is true, so you point to that pile. It's over there....