WEDNESDAY: Michael Waltz has to be better than this!

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 2025

A lowlife performance on Fox: Richard Haass used an interesting word on today's Morning Joe.

The word he used was "pathology." In essence, he was referring to the pathology of headlong tribal assault. 

European literature began with a portrait of that sort of pathology from the Iliad's first verses forward. Last night, a similar pathology was on display in the astonishing lowlife performance authored by national security adviser Michael Waltz on The Ingraham Angle.

 Waltz has to be better than this! His interview started at 7:03 p.m. Eastern, with a prompt from Ingraham herself.  The pathology was visible from the start. The onslaught started with this:

INGRAHAM (3/25/25):  The president expressed complete confidence in you today and his entire cabinet. But how did a Trump-hating editor of The Atlantic end up on your Signal chat?

WALTZ: I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but of all the people out there, somehow this guy. who has lied about the president, who has lied to Gold Star families, lied to their attorneys, and gone to Russia hoax, gone to just all kinds of lengths to lie and smear the president of the United States, and he’s the one that somehow gets on somebody’s contact and then get sucked into this group. So—

Ingraham interrupted at that point. That said:

Is there some reason to refer to Jeffrey Goldberg as "a Trump-hating editor?" We know of no obvious reason to describe him that way. Nor did Ingraham ever ask Waltz to justify the claim that Goldberg has lied and lied and lied and lied about the sitting president.

That said, the rule of the game has become clear—any statement which doesn't flatter the tribal potentate will be denounced as a lie. It was Waltz who screwed up the Signal chat, but by the rule of the pathological game, the pig now had to be killed.

Waltz couldn't just say that he himself had erred; he had to kill the pig. He kept it up for the next 15 minutes in a cowardly, lowlife performance.

He just kept pouring it on. By 7:06, he was now offering this:

WALTZ: We’re going to get to the bottom of it. I just talked to Elon on the way here. We’ve got the best technical minds looking at how this happened. But I can tell you, I can tell you, for 100 percent I don’t know this guy. 

I know him by his horrible reputation, and he really is the bottom scum of journalists. And I know him in the sense that he wasn't on my phone. We will figure it out.

By now, Goldberg was scum—"the bottom scum of journalists." Meanwhile, in a remarkably slimy performance, Waltz kept suggesting that Goldberg had somehow finagled his way into the Signal discussion.

Also, on what basis did Waltz say that Goldberg has a horrible reputation—is the bottom scum of journalists? In a stunning display of cowardice, he never attempted to say. One minute later, this:

INGRAHAM: But how did the number—I don't mean to be pedantic here, but how did the number get into—

WALTZ: Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name, and then you had somebody else's number there?...You've got somebody else's number on someone else's contact. So of course I didn’t see this loser in the group. It looked like someone else. 

Waltz never saw the loser! Moments later, at 7:08, there he went again:

INGRAHAM: [People at the Atlantic] are saying, "Don't blame the messenger." Any response?

WALTZ: Lied about Russia. Lied about Gold Star families. Lied about even as—last, what, year, in terms of the president paying for the family of a Gold Star family that he absolutely did. I mean, lie after lie after lie.

By now, Waltz's accusations didn't even parse—but what "lies" was he talking about? We'll offer you a link below, but Waltz never had the decency to even pretend to explain, and Ingraham never made any such request.

After spilling with Trump Administration self-praise for a while, that old clock on the wall now said 7:13. So Waltz returned to this:

INGRAHAM: [You've] never met Goldberg? He's put there saying you've met in the past. But you've never met him?

WALTZ: No idea. I wouldn't know him if I bumped into him. Wouldn't know him in a police lineup. I do now. 

I knew about his reputation for lying about the president over and over and over again. What I can tell you for certain, I certainly wasn't reaching out or talking to him at all. Why would I?

INGRAHAM: He's been one of the most vociferous, vituperative so-called journalists out there. in The Atlantic.

WALTZ: Vile. Near and dear to my heart, as a veteran, is lying about Gold Star families who love this president, veterans who love this president and are thanking God he is commander in chief once again.

He wouldn't know Goldberg in a police lineup! Also, there was the alleged "lying about Gold Star families" again. We'll offer a quick word below.

Soon, it was almost time to call it a night. Deeply sunk in a tribal pathology, the warfighter ended with this:

WALTZ: Lesson learned, number one, is you have journalists out there who have made fame and fortune trying to trash this president. So we have got to tighten up.

Waltz almost has to be better than that. It was a stunning lowlife performance from its beginning right through to its miserable end.

Pathology can be powerful, especially when prestigious jobs are at stake. Waltz never tried to explain his endless claim that the bottom scum in question has been lying about his dear leader. 

With respect to the Gold Star families, he seemed to be referring to this extremely lengthy report in The Atlantic last October. It's a deeply sourced report in which Goldberg offered endless direct quotations from major figures who had seen and heard various things Trump had done and said during his first term in the White House.

People like Waltz keep accepting denials about Trump's behavior—denials from press spokespersons who had no direct knowledge of the events under review. People like Waltz accept the statements by the spokespersons who weren't present, thereby rejecting the statements of people like Kelly, Milley and Esper—people who were actually there.

The lengthy, heavily sourced report carried this dual headline:

Trump: ‘I Need the Kind of Generals That Hitler Had’
The Republican nominee’s preoccupation with dictators, and his disdain for the American military, is deepening.

Did Trump ever make that actual statement? We can't say for sure. Goldberg did extensive reporting on many topics, and he let us the people decide.  The incident involving the (one) Gold Star family is reported in great detail.

As for Waltz, he told us about a "bottom scum." He told us about a "loser."

He said Lie lie lie lie lie lie lie. The performance was lowlife all the way down, by Waltz and Ingraham both.

In our view, the pathology of assault is all around us as these end days draw on. It was there at the dawn of the West. It was astounding and stupid last night.

At some point, Waltz was surely better than this. He probably will be again.

We wanted you to see what he said. The pathology of conquest is strong.