You're just arguing that only a subset of people can correctly interpret what people truly mean. I'm not sure that is consistent or valid? Taking things at face

You're just arguing that only a subset of people can correctly interpret what people truly mean. I'm not sure that is consistent or valid? Taking things at face value is a valid interpretation because that is what is literally said. Excluding tone, but a quick search returns the literal interpretation backed by congresswoman AOC. > 'I believe the path toward justice is a long arc. Safety is not just an officer with a badge and a gun,' AOC said. 'Our [police budget] is too high,' she added, citing a $6 billion figure for New York's department. [src](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/aoc-defends-defund-the-police-in-the-face-of-democratic-criticism/ar-BB1aYDrN https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/aoc-defends-defund-t...) This is also backed by multiple cities literally cutting police funding. [LA](https://abc7.com/defund-the-police-lapd-los-angeles-mayor-eric-garcetti/6289037/ https://abc7.com/defund-the-police-lapd-los-angeles-mayor-er...) [NYC](https://www.policemag.com/562124/new-york-city-cuts-police-budget-by-1-billion https://www.policemag.com/562124/new-york-city-cuts-police-b...) Did the budget drop? Then it was defunded, which is accurate. It can be defunded and reallocated and still be accurately stated by "defund the police". You're arguing that what people say isn't what they really mean to say. Almost insinuating that it always requires an "expert" or "scholarly" opinion in order to truly interpret the true meaning of what someone says. "The sky is blue" "Well he meant to say the sky is clear, but it's the reflection of light from the water in the air that makes it appear blue, but it's not actually blue" Meanwhile if you look outside observe you notice the sky is blue, validating the original statement. There wasn't any depth to the statement other than "The sky is blue"