Communicating through lies

There is a, I'd say stereotypically French, method of communication through lies, call it an intellectual challenge, if you like: You put something out that contains an obvious falsehood and then let the other side find the answer to the question why you would lie about that.

So, I was in Tours for a week and because there was a problem with my accommodation I had to sleep in the local dormitory. Dormitories being what they are, I didn't want to leave anything of importance in my room, and so I went to BNP Paribas and asked them whether they could put some papers of mine and some cash in a safe deposit box. The cashier's manner made it very clear to me that he thought that was hardly necessary, but after telling me the annual fee he obliged. A week later I came back and wanted my stuff back. I hadn't told him, it was the same cashier, that I wanted the box only for a week, actually, I hadn't been sure at the time how long I would stay, and while I would have had other accommodation after a week, I simply could have left my stuff in the box, so he was visibly annoyed with me and handed the envelope back to me. I asked him, whether they had charged me anything for the week. He said: Non. I counted the money and found that 10€ had mysteriously disappeared. After a quick comparison of that figure with the annual fee I then said: Merci beaucoup.

Now, let us talk about Steve P. So, he said: Of course Trump will be president, because he has put it all together. There is an obvious lie in that statement, condensed in one word: because. If Trump had put it all together, that would be reason to get rid of him. And if he had not, someone else would have put it all together. So... which of the two did Steve P. suggest? By the way, that shirt he was wearing spelled out incongruence in colours.