First-hand would be reserved for the person who saw the UFO, wouldn’t it?
(Maybe that’s why they put quotes around that term, or maybe I’m wrong, I’m just not familiar with how he’s using the turn of phrase.
First-hand would be reserved for the person who saw the UFO, wouldn’t it?
(Maybe that’s why they put quotes around that term, or maybe I’m wrong, I’m just not familiar with how he’s using the turn of phrase.
The quotes are to emphasize the word as a way to distinguish his assertion from deeper hearsay; what Rubio means by first-hand is emphasized with some discussion in the originating interview [0, video].
[0] https://www.newsnationnow.com/banfield/rubio-recent-ufo-whis...
Rubio didn’t claim he saw first hand accounts himself; the ones that talked to him did.
The title says that Rubio heard [someone else's] first-hand account of the situation. That would make it a second-hand account for Rubio, yeah. But it is still correct to say that Rubio was told by someone their first-hand account.
I suspect they were trying to spin it to make him look like a fool, but they should probably stick to things he's actually being a fool about.