You've got to understand context in these questions. If you listen to the crap Trump has been spouting for months, you'd see every single question he has been asked is quite softball. There were no hit jobs. And his response is typical. Evade the question and, where appropriate, attack the reporter. If the reporter is a woman, she is "nasty." This is particularly true for a woman of color.
The context you're talking about
is the bias. Try taking the exact same dialogue in that scene and replace it with an imaginary president you know nothing about. Without any context to color your reaction, you'll see what I'm saying. Being
objective with Trump isn't easy, but I find that little trick works well for me. I'm not invested in spinning anything and everything Trump does into a slam on his personality.
There's no question that the reporter took the opportunity to attack Trump
personally rather than ask
pertinent questions about the pandemic. The fallout resulted in other news stations doing the same thing. So his comment about China, which is what people
should be paying attention to, is ignored or dismissed as a deflection of his responsibility. Or worse yet, called racist. I'm sure that puts a smile on the faces of the CCP.
The lack of objectivity that the Americans have for Trump has emotionally compromised their judgement, and therefore, regardless of any other reasons there may be, he cannot effectively lead your country. You guys need someone new, but no matter who it is, some of Trump's tar will stick to them just because they came immediately after him and have to takeover his legacy.