[math-fun] recent illogical conflation

In a recent TV interview, a person said the following: M is a subset of (not I). M is a subset of (not PD). M is a subset of (not PG). GM is a subset of (not M). Many news commentators have criticized this person because the conclusion is that these statements imply that GM=I, GM=PD, and GM=PG, or at least (GM intersect I is non-empty), (GM intersect PD is non-empty) and (GM intersect PG is non-empty). Conclusion: news commentators have failed math, miserably. Even more amazingly, no one seems to have pointed out the inconsistencies in this reasoning. Whatever you may think about this person, about M, I, PD, PG, or GM, it is unreasonable to make illogical conclusions.