"Ron DeSantis sat at her table talking in an outdoor voice indoors, failing to observe any basics of conversational ritual or propriety, reeling off an unself-conscious list of his programs and initiatives and political accomplishments."

"Impersonal, cold, uninterested in anything outside of himself. The Carlsons are dog people with four spaniels, the progeny of other spaniels they have had before, who sleep in their bed. DeSantis pushed the dog under the table. Had he kicked the dog? Susie Carlson’s judgment was clear: She did not ever want to be anywhere near anybody like that ever again. Her husband agreed. DeSantis, in Carlson’s view, was a 'fascist.'"

Wrote Michael Wolff, in "The Fall: The End of Fox News and the Murdoch Dynasty," quoted in "Tucker Carlson Refutes New Book’s Claim That Ron DeSantis Accosted His Dog" (The Jewish Voice).

Carlson's response: “This is absurd.... He never touched my dog, obviously.... It’s totally made up. Ridiculous actually."

Notice Wolff's devious writing. We're told "DeSantis pushed the dog under the table." Pushing suggests something done with the hand, not the foot. But somehow the next sentence is "Had he kicked the dog?" It's in question form, as if using a question justifies floating any accusation. We're then shuttled along to the next idea: Susie Carlson can't abide anyone "like that." Like what? A dog kicker? Is Susie's opinion based on the dog interaction, just mentioned, or some feeling about what sort of conversation is appropriate at the table — warm, modulated, attentive to others? Then we're clobbered with the word "fascist"! What supports that? Being annoyed by dogs swarming underfoot when you're at the table, talking too loud, and not doing chitchat in the manner that pleases the daughter of the headmaster at St. George's School?