I read the article. The Mail draws a lot of conclusions that just are not there. For example the headline reads “DeSantis says Trump should’ve given up power like George Washington after election loss and January 6.” But reading the body of the article I fail to see where DeSantis makes reference to the election loss or January 6. The article assumes that is what he is implying which is why the article puts in “drawing sharp contrast with Trump.” as if this was direct from DeSantis. It wasn’t.
In other words, he made his point through inference rather than saying it directly - like a true politician. His years as a lawyer have paid off.
I think it is lawyering 101. I am still cautious about articles aimed at stirring up division among Conservative voters.