So your first common ancestors are your great great grandparents, so that’s third cousin, and they’re a generation older than you, so once removed. Third cousin once removed.

I believe that the answer is second cousin once removed.

I believe you need to count the distance to the common ancestor from the older generation of the two people being related.

I agree that the first common ancestor is OP’s great-great-grandparent. But only OP’s relation’s great-grandparent. So OP’s parent and OP’s relation are second cousins.

Then the removed takes you down the tree from OP’s parent to OP.

I could be wrong, but my impression is that there is less politics and less bias involved in defining words and and providing pronunciations and etymologies then there is an articles about history and politics and people.

I especially like Wiktionary from the point of view of exploring cognates between languages and etymologies that cross language boundaries, in a big dictionary that covers many languages all at once.

Source article: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/10/supreme-court-analysis-john-roberts-public-confidence-crash.html

Ah. I get it now.

My work is forcing me to use Edge, and Edge is giving me news when I open up a new tab, and I’m upset to notice that the news seems to alternate between Raw Story and Daily Mail for “balance”.

The choice of the Lemmy title to match the Raw Story title is understood.

I’m giving the more general guidance to do the extra work to track down Raw Story’s source, the Guardian in this case, and to link directly to that.

Raw Story is always a repost, generally sensationalized, and not always with a link to the source.

Best to find the original reporting: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/07/trump-aide-corey-lewandowski-sidelined

This is the underlying article written by Caroline Giuliani: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/caroline-giuliani-trump-kamala-harris

Sorry, I see that basically all of this information was in the original article as well.

This article traces the source of this particular long-time delusion / fabrication:

After Trump made the claim in 2019, Trott contacted CNN to note that at a roundtable event with automotive executives in 2017, Trump had suggested he received the “Man of the Year” award at a 2013 event in Michigan where Trott had invited him to give a speech, a Lincoln Day dinner Trott had chaired in Oakland County. At that event, Trott gave Trump a framed copy of Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and other gifts. But Trott emphatically noted that he did not give Trump any “Man of the Year” award, nor did anyone else there.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/16/politics/fact-check-donald-trump-michigan-man-of-the-year/index.html

I did not understand the issue when I first wrote that comment and posted it in the wrong place on a Sync for Reddit thread.

Nor did I fully understand the issue when I copied that comment here.

But I did figure out a few moments later when I read the referenced report.

I appreciate the clarification, as I’m sure will others.

I’ve switched back to Boost in the interim.