How do you feel? 

This is perhaps an observation that could have been made sixty years ago, but it's one of those things that, the longer it goes on, the more stark the phenomenon. This is the practice -- amongst British journalists, including especially sports journalists -- of asking a person -- the winner of a cup, a witness of some dramatic geopolitical event, or one who has just seen their house swept away in a flood -- 'How do you feel?'  Not what do you think, what is your reaction, but how do you feel? Not quite as if one might respond with 'Oh, an odd tingling between the shoulder blades', but almost. I am quite certain that the British journalist is aware at least subliminally of the British reputation for having a stiff upper lip, of being made uncomfortable at any feelings being on display, and is anxious to show that that reputation is quite unwarranted. I think that it is the Americans as well as the British public who are chiefly in the journalist's thoughts, not the Europeans. Americans have this reputation here for being free with their feelings, of letting it all hang out (think of Little Richard, Janis Joplin, etc.), and the British, however wrongly, do feel inferior on that subject. This is connected with that peculiar way, when an interviewee begins to be overcome with emotion; the jackpot being when they actually break down in tears, and the interviewer goes silent, the camera zooms in. You know it's a case of high-fives all round amongst the production team.  

Trump 

A stratagem that our fearsome leader often employs, and is not called out as often as one would like, is for example this: 

He told reporters on Air Force One on Sunday evening, referring to the attack that killed 34 and injured at least 117 people: "I think it was terrible and I was told they made a mistake, but I think it's a horrible thing. I think the whole war is a horrible thing”. 

It was of course that latest Russian bombing of a Ukranian city, replete with obliterated children and disemboweled old ladies, which Trump avers was just a mistake, an honest mistake, could have happened to anyone. Then he adds 'I think the whole war is a horrible thing'. Not a crime, or even an injustice. Just a horrible thing, so many people died, a shame that it happened. Why? He certainly does not want to assign blame to his overlord, Vladmir Putin. Indeed he wants to see Putin successful; but he knows that this is not the view of anyone outside of Russia. Also he has designs on Ukranean minerals however flighty, as well as being loathe to cross Putin in general (perhaps for reasons connected with Golden Showers). So he feints: He stresses how 'horrible' the bombing was (his voice rising) gambling that that momentary show of feeling with the mainstream will be enough, that the conversation will move on to other topics.