Because what you are calling facts are just simply your interpretation of the facts, not facts. Although Intel didn't say they revived the project because of Trump, doesn't prove in any way they didn't do it because he won.
Even though the whole timing and public presentation of the announcement with Trump seems to scream otherwise, you still want to interpret it your way. Fine. But don't say it's a fact, and not just liberal scraping to pull anything remotely negative about Trump out of thin air.
As I said, what companies plan internally and what they actually do in the end are completely different things. If you don't know this, I assume you never worked at any real company in your life, on any big projects. Your investigation on the inner communications at Intel doesn't prove an ounce what they might have done or not done with or without Trump. It's simply your assumption of having all the facts when you don't, and your arrogance to still push a negative story without having those facts, which is more than just unethical. It's another journalist who thinks he's "fighting the power" by just slandering the president.
This is exactly why Trump won, by the way, because facts are 'too hard' nowadays for some journalists. Every intuition is called a fact now, no matter how delusional or how many actual facts it ignores.
I'm really taking a break from this place.
I'm a criminal !!!