Plenty of reporters — and many rightfully so — complain that people react to their articles after reading just the headline. A lot of times, though, there really isn’t much of a need to look past the headline to know what you’re in for.

Laura Ingraham, for example, took notice of CNN’s wording regarding the riot that rocked Sweden Monday night.

Bonus points for naming the logical fallacy at work.

Wow, those rioters must have been really upset over President Trump’s alleged reference to that non-existent terror attack at his rally Saturday, once the news reports made it to them. While foreign press didn’t seem to make the connection, the Washington Post highlighted Trump’s role in the violence.

Just days after his comments! Those rioters did an admirable job restraining themselves before torching those cars.

It was a while back now, but certainly someone in the media can check Google to see what Trump was up to in 2013 when “youth” in Sweden rioted for a week in an area populated largely by immigrants from Turkey, the Middle East, and Somalia.

Coincidentally, those riots followed the killing of a Muslim man who reportedly attacked police with a machete, a bit like this week’s riot followed an arrest in the area by Swedish police; best not to jump to conclusions, though.

After some investigation, news outlets like the New York Times and the Guardian reported that the 2013 riots were supposedly sparked by “long-term youth unemployment.”

It’s been years now — could someone please contact the Swedish Embassy during their non-trolling hours and tell them to just create some jobs already?