SORROW? PITY? FEAR?: There's no way to know how this will end!

FRIDAY, APRIL 24, 2026

This seems to be where it started: "Conduct disorder?"

Believe it or not, that innocuous sounding designation is an actual clinical term. Behind that innocuous formulation lies a vast amount of human tragedy and personal hurt. 

We've discussed this topic in the past, but for today, let's go there again. The leading authority speaks:

Conduct disorder

Conduct disorder (CD) is a mental disorder diagnosed in childhood or adolescence that presents itself through a repetitive and persistent pattern of behavior that includes theft, lies, physical violence that may lead to destruction, and reckless breaking of rules, in which the basic rights of others or major age-appropriate norms are violated. These behaviors are often referred to as "antisocial behaviors," and is often seen as the precursor to antisocial personality disorder; however, the latter, by definition, cannot be diagnosed until the individual is 18 years old. Conduct disorder may result from parental rejection and neglect and in such cases can be treated with family therapy, as well as behavioral modifications and pharmacotherapy. It may also be caused by environmental lead exposure. Conduct disorder is estimated to affect 51.1 million people globally as of 2013.

So says the leading authority, at the start of a lengthy discussion. That said, can there really be some such "mental disorder"—some such clinical diagnosis?

The innocuous name of this disorder may trigger a skeptic's instinctive denial. That said, for the Cleveland Clinic's thumbnail on "Conduct Disorder," you can just click here.  For the overview by Johns Hopkins Medicine, you can just click this.

We're telling you these things, as best we can, because our major news orgs and journalists won't. In truth, the American discourse barely comprehends the basic fact that "mental illness" exists. Our society's understanding of "mental illness" is extremely limited. 

Within this branch of medical science, "Conduct Disorder" is an actual thing! And then the story leads on from there. The leading authority on Antisocial Personality Disorder (colloquially, "sociopathy") says this about the connection between these two disorders:

Antisocial personality disorder

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is a personality disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behavior that disregards the rights and well-being of others. People with ASPD often exhibit behavior that conflicts with social norms, leading to issues with interpersonal relationships, employment, and legal matters. The condition generally manifests in childhood or early adolescence, with a high rate of associated conduct problems and a tendency for symptoms to peak in late adolescence and early adulthood.

 [...]

In the main section (section II) of the DSM-5...antisocial personality disorder is defined as being characterized by at least three of seven traits. In order to be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder under the DSM-5, one must be at least 18 years old, show evidence of onset of conduct disorder before age 15, and antisocial behavior cannot be explained by schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. 

We're telling you this, as best we can, because our high-end journalists won't. But yes—it seems that a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder requires evidence of "conduct disorder" before the age of 15.

We pity the child who's so disordered—the child who badly needs some help. For the child who doesn't get that help, a troubled future may well beckon. That brings us back to the (widely reported story of the sitting president's early life.

For ourselves, we pity the (disordered) child who doesn't get the help he needs, though it isn't clear that every such child actually can be helped.  We think of one profoundly troubled child who was once in our fifth grade class—a plainly troubled child who was later murdered in the street when he was still quite young.

(He plainly seemed to be deeply troubled during the short time he was in our class. Did he ever get the help he seemed to need? We don't know that part of the story, but we mourn the loss of that child.)

With that, we return to the sitting president—to the troubling behavior he evidenced when he was still a child. He grew up as part of a wealthy family—and ss we mentioned the other day, both his brothers prepped at the tony St. Paul's.

Among the trio of brothers, he alone didn't prep at St. Paul's. 

The basic facts are not in doubt. That said, this is the way his niece, a doctorate-holding clinical therapist, told this part of her family history in her best-selling book, Too Much and Never Enough:

CHAPTER THREE: The Great I-Am

[...]

Encouraged by his father, Donald eventually started to believe his own hype. By the time he was twelve, the right side of his mouth was curled up in an almost perpetual sneer of self-conscious superiority, and [his older brother] Freddy had dubbed him “the Great I-Am,” echoing a passage from Exodus he’d learned in Sunday school in which God first reveals himself to Moses.

[...]

Though Donald’s behavior didn’t bother [his father]—given his long hours at the office, he wasn’t often around to witness much of what happened at home—it drove his mother to distraction. Mary couldn’t control him at all, and Donald disobeyed her at every turn. Any attempt at discipline by her was rebuffed. He talked back. He couldn’t ever admit he was wrong; he contradicted her even when she was right; and he refused to back down. He tormented his little brother and stole his toys. He refused to do his chores or anything else he was told to do. Perhaps worst of all to a fastidious woman like her, he was a slob who refused to pick up after himself no matter how much she threatened him. “Wait until your father comes home” had been an effective threat with Freddy, but to Donald it was a joke that his father seemed to be in on.

Finally, by 1959, Donald’s misbehavior—fighting, bullying, arguing with teachers—had gone too far. [The private] Kew-Forest [School] had reached its limits. Fred’s being on the school’s board of trustees cut two ways: on the one hand, Donald’s behavior had been overlooked longer than it otherwise might have; on the other, it caused Fred some inconvenience. Name-calling and teasing kids too young to fight back had escalated into physical altercations. Fred didn’t mind Donald’s acting out, but it had become intrusive and time consuming for him. When one of his fellow board members at Kew-Forest recommended sending Donald to New York Military Academy as a way to rein him in, Fred went along with it. Throwing him in with military instructors and upperclassmen who wouldn’t put up with his shit might toughen up Fred’s burgeoning protégé even more. Fred had more important things to do than deal with Donald.

I don’t know if Mary had any say in the final decision, but she didn’t fight for her son to stay home, either, a failure Donald couldn’t help but notice. It must have felt like a replay of all the times she’d abandoned him in the past.

Over Donald’s objections, he was enrolled at NYMA, a private boys’ boarding school sixty miles north of New York City. The other kids in the family referred to NYMA as a “reform school”—it wasn’t prestigious like St. Paul’s, which Freddy had attended. Nobody sent their sons to NYMA for a better education, and Donald understood it rightly as a punishment.

(For much fuller background from that part of Mary Trump's text, see THE DAILY HOWLER, 4/24/25.)

That's the way Mary Trump told the story in her best-selling book. Based on her acknowledgments, she was likely relying on Marianne Trump, the sitting president's older sister, as a primary source concerning these childhood years.

His two brothers prepped at St. Paul's! He himself was shipped off to "reform school," the result of his misbehavior—including the bullying of younger children—at the local private school where his father sat on the board. 

His early conduct had become so bad he couldn't even stay there!

By the end of seventh grade, his misbehavior at the local private school was no longer tolerable. Was this an example of "Conduct Disorder?" In his years at NYMA, did he get the help he needed?

We feel sorry for the horrible kid who had to shipped off that way. However horrible their anger and their conduct may be, we don't blame 11- or 12-year-old children who are badly in need of help.

When children don't get the help they need, the consequences may be profound. One child was later murdered in the street. Yesterday, the absurd behavior of the other child continued in a string of gonzo statements as he insulted the press and lauded himself in new yet familiar ways.

He'll be in office for almost three more years. We can always hope for the best, but we regard that as a dangerous state of affairs.

We pity the child who didn't get helped. Right to this day, our vaunted press corps refuses to discuss the apparent medical dimensions of this dangerous state of affairs.

For better or worse, they're following a long-standing rule of the guild. In our view, that was always a very good rule—until the time came when it wasn't.

THURSDAY: Tormented Tarlov pushes back!

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2026

"Cable news" bullroar mocked: We transported you to the set of The Five in Tuesday afternoon's post. Today, we take you to that gong-show program again, in part for some comic relief.  

We take you to yesterday's second segment, in which the gang pretended to discuss the state of Virginia's redistricting vote. In theory, ten congressional districts in the state will favor Democrats if the new House map survives court review. Only one district will favor Republicans under the new (and temporary) configuration. 

Needless to say, The Gang of Four wanted to savage the Dems for engaging in such a practice—but how well were Red American viewers informed about the convoluted chronology of this year's highly unusual mid-census redistricting process? 

Were such viewers suitably informed about the long and winding road which started in Texas, then moved on to California and to other states? As he threw to liberal co-host Jessica Tarlov, this is the way resident "silly boy" Jesse Watters filled in the background history:  

WATTERS (4/22/26): All right, so Jessica, you guys have been gerrymandering for quite some time. You're very good at it. Trump tried his hand at it, did it in Texas, got some good results. [Chuckling] And then you guys have just been running the table. Can you stop! Can you slow down?  

The silly fellow made it sound like a tsunami of gerrymandering had been underway "for quite some time," and that President Trump then decided to give it a try in the Lone Star State.

Redistricting efforts this year in other Republican states went unmentioned by Watters. To our ear, this was a rather modest attempt to present the background to Virginia's aggressive effort.   

At this point, a question comes to mind. We wonder if viewers of programs like The Five have ever heard a reasonably full-blooded account of this year's highly unusual mid-census redistricting efforts.  

As someone who suffers through The Five on a regular basis, we'll guess that the answer could possibly be no. Agitprop rules the day on The Five, information much less so.

At any rate, that's where the comic relief entered the scene! Tarlov responded with this:   

TARLOV (continuing directly): No! All gas, no brakes!

So the top ten gerrymandered states in the country, only two of them are Democratically controlled, by the way. So this isn’t really all about how we’re the evil gerrymandering force. 

But you are correct in your setup, which I think has never happened in recorded history, at least of me being on The Five, that you guys were the ones who started it. 

The lady continued from there. But she had mocked Watters' fleeting reference to President Trump's demand that Texas reconfigure its House districts, saying it was the only time in her long history on The Five in which Watters presented a setup which was at least partially accurate. 

Tarlov continued from there. You can see the videotape of her fuller statement by clicking to this report by Mediaite.    

Tarlov appears in the liberal chair on this imitation of a news show roughly two days per week. Within the past month or so, we've gotten the impression that producers may have coached her to fight back a bit more, though that may not be the case.   

Yesterday, Tarlov openly mocked the ridiculous way this ridiculous "cable news" program is run. She said Watters' overview was an historical first, in that it was at least partially accurate!

For the record, The Five is our nation's most watched "cable news" program. No large modern nation can expect to prosper by proceeding in the clownish, tribalized way performed each day on The Five.

OUTRIGHT FEAR: How did it [ever] get this far?

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2026

In search of the way it started: "How did it [ever] get this far?"  

Within the context of modern American history, that's a well-known question. The question was asked by Don Corleone in an Oscar-winning film which appeared in 1972.  

Corleone was talking about a war which had broken out among the so-called "five families." Today, it's a question which might be asked about the chaotic state we Americans find ourselves in during this, the second term of the sitting president.  

It's still amazingly early in that second term. Indeed, the sitting president still has almost three years to go. 

That said, his erratic behavior and his endless bizarre pronouncements are, at least in our own view, reasonable cause for great concern—yes, for outright fear. 

Setting his behaviors aside, how strange have his pronouncements become? Headline included, HuffPost reports his latest bizarre Truth Social post:

Trump Drops Stunning New 2-Word Description Of Himself, And Critics Can’t Believe It

President Donald Trump on Wednesday fired off a lengthy rant attacking the Virginia redistricting referendum that’s expected to send up to 10 Democrats to Congress.

But two words in particular stood out, which came as he described himself: “extraordinarily brilliant.”

Trump, as he often does in votes that don’t go his way, complained without evidence that the referendum was “rigged.” He railed against mail-in votes. And he griped that the language on the ballot was “purposefully unintelligible and deceptive.”

“I am an extraordinarily brilliant person,” he declared on Truth Social. “And even I had no idea what the hell they were talking about in the Referendum, and neither do they!”  

In fact, the actual Truth Social post was even more delusional than you'd know from that overview. Sadly, here's the president's fuller claim about his astonishing brilliance:

Truth Details

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

A RIGGED ELECTION TOOK PLACE LAST NIGHT IN THE GREAT COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA! All day long Republicans were winning, the Spirit was unbelievable, until the very end when, of course, there was a massive “Mail In Ballot Drop!” Where have I heard that before—And the Democrats eked out another Crooked Victory! Six to five goes to ten to one, and yet the Presidential Election in November was very close to a 50-50 split. In addition to everything else, the language on the Referendum was purposefully unintelligible and deceptive. As everyone knows, I am an extraordinarily brilliant person, and even I had no idea what the hell they were talking about in the Referendum, and neither do they! Let’s see if the Courts will fix this travesty of “Justice.” President DONALD J. TRUMP 

Good God! "As everyone knows, I am an extraordinarily brilliant person?" 

Delusionally, that's what the sitting president has now openly said. 

For the record, "delusional disorder" is a clinical term found in the DSM-5. As the leading authority on the subject explains, it names a particular type of "mental disorder" ("mental illness"). 

We aren't medical specialists here, but we make this further point: 

As you can see at that link, the DSM "defines six subtypes of the disorder," including "grandiose (belief that one is the greatest, strongest, fastest, richest, or most intelligent person ever)." 

We don't mean it as an insult when we wonder if the sitting president is lost in this (clinically) delusional world, or when we suggest that some such (undiscussed) state of affairs might be, under the circumstances, a genuine cause of substantial fear with respect to the coming three years.

For the leading authority's report on "grandiose delusions," you can just click here. As we've often noted, we ourselves aren't medical specialists. You're reading this here because our nation's major journalists refuse to interview the people who actually are.

Is something wrong with the sitting president? If so, should that be an occasion for substantial fear?

We don't mean it as an insult when we say the answer to each question seems to be yes. 

As we've frequently suggested, people gripped by "mental illness" don't choose to be gripped by "mental illness." In some instances, the uninvited mental illness has possibly been in place for a very long time.

So it may be, tragically, with the sitting president, or so his niece has recently (once again) said. With apologies for the repetition, this is what she said on CNN:

BURNETT (2/26/26): You've known him your whole life. Do you actually see a [cognitive] decline?

MARY L. TRUMP: I do, but I think it's important to remember that Donald has never been fit in any capacity. Obviously, what we're dealing with now are age-related cognitive declines. We're dealing with physical issues that the White House tries to cover over.

But this is somebody who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen, especially given the pressure he's under and given the cognitive and physical declines.  

Again, that doesn't sound good. In line with established press corps behavior, that recent assessment came and went without a word of comment and without any wider discussion.

How did it ever get this far? How did it ever reach the point where the sitting president has created a situation in the Strait of Hormuz which seems to present no obvious means of resolution, even as he offers his latest delusional claim about his plainly non-existent astounding intellectual brilliance?

(Washington Post: "Clearing Strait of Hormuz of mines could take 6 months, Pentagon tells Congress")

How did it ever get this far? There's no easy answer to that question. A long and winding cultural road have led us to this astonishing point.

But have we reached a dangerous point? Is there cause for outright fear about the next three years? Here's the fuller statement by Dr. Lance Dodes, speaking to Lawrence O'Donnell on The Last Word three days after the riots of January 6:

DR. DODES (1/9/21): This is a deeply disturbed man, a delusional psychopath who has been the same his whole adult life, and who we knew would get worse the more stress he was under, because that's what happens with people with this kind of severe disorder. 

So when Nancy Pelosi said that she was making sure that the nuclear button couldn't be pushed, that was very wise and made a lot of sense. It was not an over-reaction in the slightest. 

And when she said he's unstable, absolutely! That's exactly the situation we're in and why he needs to be removed [from office] immediately—yesterday, really, because he is going to continue to get worse, and after he leaves office, he will continue to get worse.

You can watch the tape of the full exchange simply by clicking here. For ourselves, we would have liked it better if Dr. Dodes had stressed the fact that he was offering his best professional assessment, not a recitation of established medical fact.

That said:

Back in 2021, Dr. Dodes was deeply concerned about what President Trump might do in the eleven remaining days of his term. Skeptics might say that Dodes was over-reacting. We would say that assessments like those, mixed with the sitting president's ongoing conduct, still provide cause for enormous concern.

How did it ever get this far? With respect to our crumbling political and journalistic cultures, the answer is varied, complex. 

Red America has been at fault. Blue America has been at fault too.  Our journalism has increasingly been a meas. This is the chaos we have chosen—or perhaps which has chosen us.

With respect to the sitting president, how did it ever reach the point where he is picturing himself as Jesus Christ, and is boasting about his (non-existent) astonishing brilliance?

That too is a long and winding road. Tomorrow, as we pity the child, we'll recall where it seems to have started.

Tomorrow: As we've noted before:

"Conduct disorder." It's an actual clinical term!

WEDNESDAY: Virginia's redistricting by the numbers!

 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2026

Virginia is for questions: These were the vote totals on Virginia's (temporary) redistricting:

In favor of (temporary) redistricting: 51.5%
Opposed to (temporary) redistricting: 48.5%

The (temporary) measure squeaked through by a fairly narrow three points.

Virginia's current House delegation looks like this:

Democrats: 6
Republicans: 5

In theory, the new districts trend like this:

Democrats: 10
Republicans: 1

Plainly, that looks like a major (temporary) change. Now, for a pair of questions:

Will Democrats really win ten seats in Virginia this fall? Also, was so severe a (temporary) gerrymander really a good idea?

Virginia Democrats went for broke, though only on a temporary basis. In the long run, was this a good idea? For example, would 8-3 have been enough of a temporary redistricting?

In the long run, was this a good idea? That may be a later discussion as our nation (hopefully) tries to recover from the partisan body blows of the past too many years.

Also, our apologies: Distracted by a bureaucratic matter, we accidentally forgot to post this morning's main report!

SORROW, PITY, OUTRIGHT FEAR: In search of the actual President Trump!

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2026

Sources of pity—and fear: Who is the actual President Trump? This very day, on Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough called attention to a new column in the (conservative) Washington Examiner. 

The column was written by Dan Hannan. He's described by the Examiner as "a member of the [British] House of Lords and a former Conservative MEP [Member of the European Parliament]." 

Hannan isn't a "lefty lunatic." He also isn't a medical specialist, but his Examiner column—provocative headline included—starts off like this  

Donald Trump is losing his mind  

Imagine it was someone other than President Donald Trump. Suppose a different leader were posting deranged rants in the small hours, insulting the spiritual leader of 1.3 billion Catholics, threatening entire civilizations with annihilation, and comparing himself to God. What would be the reaction?

We all know the answer. Both parties would be rushing to bundle him out of office before he did irreversible harm to the republic. Yet, as we all also know, different rules apply to Trump. Democrats, having had their fingers burned by two failed impeachment attempts, are reluctant to try again, for they know that there is no surer way to boost his support. Republicans, who privately despair at the electoral damage he is doing, let alone the constitutional damage, are paralyzed by fear of upsetting their primary voters. 

You can read the entire column here. Presumably, Hannan didn't write the headline on his piece, but along the way, he makes such statements as these: 

[Continuing directly] 
Harold Macmillan, the suave British postwar leader, liked to quip that there were three institutions that no sensible man challenged: the Brigade of Guards, the National Union of Mineworkers, and the Roman Catholic Church. Yet Trump, in one of his nocturnal forays, decided to conjure a fight with the Bishop of Rome out of thin air...

The president, whom critics accuse of having a God-complex, then followed up with an image of himself as Jesus healing the sick. This image was offensive, not only to Catholics, but to almost every practicing Christian and, come to that, to almost every Muslim. 

[...]

[Various] things are possible, I suppose. The likelier explanation, though, is that this is exactly what it looks like. A 79-year-old man who has long dealt in chaos is now being consumed by that chaos. His episodes are becoming more frequent, his good days further apart. What he has lost is not a sense of decency or decorum—he never had those—but any remaining sense of self-control.

Everyone around him can see it. Yet, whether from ambition, cowardice, or weary acceptance, they keep looking for ways to rationalize his behavior. The tragedy is no longer Trump’s. It is now America’s. 

That's the way the column ends. Hannan doesn't quite say that the president "is losing his mind," but some might say he comes close.   

Hannan does say that the president's critics "accuse [him] of having a God-complex." It isn't entirely clear what that "accusation" might mean, but if critics have been making that accusation, they've done so very rarely and only among themselves.  

Is the sitting president "losing his mind," perhaps as once happened with Lear—perhaps as may have happened with former President Biden? The claim is fuzzy, but given the president's enormous power, the claim is cause for enormous fear—and that fear is not just "America's."  

Some such fear would belong to the world.

Hannan's column returns us to a familiar journalistic play, in which people who aren't medical specialists seem to be expressing views about the president's (mental) health.  So too with MS NOW's Alex Wagner, who offered a sidelong assessment of President Trump as she discussed Tucker Carlson's recent disavowal of the president.

Along the way, Wagner assesses President Trump. Headline included, Mediaite offers this report:  

...MS NOW’s Alex Wagner Says Tucker Carlson’s Trump Apology ‘Feels’ Genuine

MS NOW’s Alex Wagner admitted Tucker Carlson’s apology for helping to elect President Donald Trump “feels” genuine, though she remains skeptical of how much help he could actually be to Democrats.   

Wagner joined Ari Melber on MS NOW’s The Beat on Tuesday evening, where she reacted to Carlson offering an apology on his show this week for ever supporting and campaigning for Trump. Though he threw an endorsement Trump’s way, Carlson has become increasingly critical of him over issues like the Iran war.  

[...]

"I guess it’s welcome if overdue. Pardon me for being a little cynical about [Carlson's] mea culpa. Ari, this is someone who witnessed Trump stage and foment an insurrection at the Capitol and still went and campaigned for the man. Like, did you not think his narcissism was malignant in early January of 2021? Because I sure did. Like, here was a man that clearly was going to stop at nothing, including tearing down our own democracy, to regain power. So the idea that it’s just dawned on [Carlson] that this man’s moral compass may not be pointing in the right direction, and he may not be operating with the most strategic manual is like maybe a little bit late and maybe a little bit not as genuine as I wish it was."  

For ourselves, we'd be reluctant to assess the sincerity of anything Carlson says. But along the way, Wagner seemed to say that she has believed, ever since January 2021, that the sitting president can be characterized as a "malignant narcissist."   

Malignant narcissism! That's an actual medical / clinical term, though only, it appears, of a sort. (The leading authority discusses "malignant narcissism" here.) 

Should the sitting president be viewed as a "malignant narcissist?" If so, it seems to us—we aren't medical specialists either—that that would be cause for a great deal of fear.   

That said, Wagner isn't a medical specialist—and, as far as we know, she has never gone on the air and directly stated this major cause for concern. This has been the game our Blue American journalists have played down through these (apparently) dangerous years.  

Wagner apparently thought the sitting president was a "malignant narcissist!" As far as we know, she never challenged her news org to bring (carefully selected) medical specialists on the air to discuss this possibility—this obvious source of concern and fear.  

In such ways, our Blue American thought leaders have, for better or worse, played a type of double game. For ourselves, we want to express a different reaction to the president's most recent behavior. 

We're very sorry, but yes! Given his enormous power, we do regard the president's erratic conduct—his endlessly bizarre behaviors—as an obvious source of concern and outright fear. 

We'll also admit that, even in the face of that fear, we feel pity for a 79-year-old man who has been reduced to the pitiful state in which he offers messages to the world as pitiful as this:

Truth Details

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Iran doesn’t want the Strait of Hormuz closed, they want it open so they can make $500 Million Dollars a day (which is, therefore, what they are losing if it is closed!). They only say they want it closed because I have it totally BLOCKADED (CLOSED!), so they merely want to “save face.” People approached me four days ago, saying, “Sir, Iran wants to open up the Strait, immediately.” But if we do that, there can never be a Deal with Iran, unless we blow up the rest of their Country, their leaders included! President DONALD J. TRUMP

So reads his latest Truth Social post. For a report from Mediaite, you can just click here.

That's the president's explanation for his latest change of course. As with Lear, so too here: 

We feel sorry for any person who's been reduced to such desperate twaddle as that.

"How did it get this far?" Don Corleone once asked. Tomorrow, we'll ask The Ghost of Childhood Past to refresh you as to how this deeply dangerous situation seems to have started to surface, way back in the distant past.

Tomorrow: First inklings?