TUESDAY: The New York Times reports what he said!

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2025

Except they pretty much didn't: At first, we planned to give credit where due—while also praising your incomparable Daily Holer for banging out those results.

We could barely believe our eyes! In an admittedly short report, the New York Times had reported the contents of the latest strange post on the president's Truth Social site! 

There it sits, right at the top of the paper's online front page. Headline included, the report starts out like this:

Deadlock Grows Uglier as Congress Heads Toward Shutdown

The federal government barreled toward a shutdown on Tuesday ahead of a midnight deadline, as President Trump and Republicans in Congress remained deadlocked with Democrats in a spending standoff that was growing uglier by the hour.

Democratic leaders lashed out at Mr. Trump for posting a crude, A.I.-generated video insulting and mocking them on Monday night, hours after meeting with them at the White House to discuss the impasse.

The deepfake video superimposed a cartoon mustache and sombrero over Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, who was pictured standing silently while Mariachi music played and the voice of Senator Chuck Schumer was distorted to deliver expletive-laden remarks that included the line, “Nobody likes Democrats anymore.”

Mr. Jeffries responded on Monday night by posting a photograph of Mr. Trump smiling alongside Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Whew! The two parties were really swapping insults! Also, you can see to her credit, Catie Edmondson managed to say this about the A.I.-generated phony video posted on Truth Social:

"The voice of Senator Chuck Schumer was distorted to deliver expletive-laden remarks."

Given the spectacular weirdness of what the president had done, it's a bit unclear what that actually means.  It was apparently beneath the dignity of the Times to report the contents of the president's very strange post in a more explicit manner.

In this morning's report, we spared you the transcript of what the fake Senato Schumer is pictured saying in the president's fake Truth Social video. This is the way Mediaite reported the contents of this very strange post by the president:

Trump Posts Deranged AI Video of Chuck Schumer Calling Democrats ‘Just a Bunch of Woke Pieces of Sh*t’

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows on Monday after he posted a bizarre, AI-generated video of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) calling Democrats “a bunch of woke pieces of sh*t.”

In the video, Schumer could be seen standing next to a stereotypical Mexican version of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)—complete with sombrero and moustache—while saying:

"Look guys, there’s no way to sugarcoat it. Nobody likes Democrats anymore. We have no voters left because of all of our woke, trans bullsh*t. Not even Black people want to vote for us anymore. Even Latinos hate us. So we need new voters, and if we give all these illegal aliens free healthcare, we might be able to get them on our side so they can vote for us. They can’t even speak English so they won’t realize we’re just a bunch of woke pieces of sh*t, you know? At least for a while, until they learn English and they realize they hate us too."

The president posted the video on his Truth Social and X accounts.

And so on from there.

In fairness, it's hard to comprehend how bizarre this Truth Social video is without actually watching the video. That said, the Times report skips the part of the fake statement by Schumer which struck observers all over CNN and MSNBC last night as being most transgressive:

[Latinos] can’t even speak English so they won’t realize we’re just a bunch of woke pieces of sh*t.

That's cute, in several ways. On cable, the insult to Latinos was overshadowed by the image of Schumer describing himself and his Democratic colleagues as "just a bunch of woke pieces of shit." At no point did Edmondson's report capture the ugly, startling, transgressive quality of that part of the Truth Social post.

Meanwhile, sad! As presented by the Times, this bizarre incident comes very close to being transitioned into a piece of both-sides-adjacent "he said / they said" reporting. 

Briefly, let's be fair! In the end, there is never as objective way to assess how transgressive a post may be—how far, and how bizarrely far, the post in question may stray from traditional norms. 

It will always be a matter of judgment as to how transgressive—and how gratuitously insulting—a given presentation may be. It will always be a matter of judgment concerning the extent to which a presentation has entered the realm of extremely strange racial insult. 

In the end, those will always be matters of judgment. It's also true that this latest Truth Social post followed the other bizarre recent post in which the sitting president offered the crazy pledges about the magical "med beds."

As best we can tell, the New York Times has never reported that other extremely bizarre recent incident, and roughly a million more.

Is something "wrong" with President Trump? If so, that's a personal and a family tragedy, but it's also a danger for this nation. In our view, the New York Times is still doing its best to whistle along in the dark. 

In fairness, that approach has been general over Blue America and its "highly educated" journalistic and academic elites. In our view, they don't know how to talk about possible "mental illness" (or "mental disorder"), and so they don't want to try.

Borrowing from the early Dylan, the journalists "went to the finest schools." This seems to be all that's left.

WHAT IS MENTAL ILLNESS: The shooter suffered from mental health issues!

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2025

Except in the New York Times: Is cognitive impairment a type of "mental illness?"

Also, is "cognitive impairment" a technical (diagnostic) term? How about "mental illness?"

Regarding "mental illness," the term may (or perhaps may not) be slipping out of favor. As we noted several months ago, Wikipedia redirects searched on that term redirects to a lengthy post which appears beneath a different name—a post which starts like this:

Mental disorder

A mental disorder, also referred to as a mental illness, a mental health condition, or a psychiatric disability, is a behavioral or mental pattern that causes significant distress or impairment of personal functioning. A mental disorder is also characterized by a clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotional regulation, or behavior, often in a social context. Such disturbances may occur as single episodes, may be persistent, or may be relapsing–remitting. There are many different types of mental disorders, with signs and symptoms that vary widely between specific disorders. A mental disorder is one aspect of mental health.

The causes of mental disorders are often unclear. Theories incorporate findings from a range of fields. Disorders may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain...

[...]

The definition and classification of mental disorders are key issues for researchers as well as service providers and those who may be diagnosed. For a mental state to be classified as a disorder, it generally needs to cause dysfunction. Most international clinical documents use the term mental "disorder," while "illness" is also common. It has been noted that using the term "mental" (i.e., of the mind) is not necessarily meant to imply separateness from the brain or body.

And so on, at great length, from there. For the record, Wikipedia uses the term "mental illness" with substantial frequency in its lengthy discussion of "mental disorder(s)." 

That said, why might that term be losing favor on an international basis? Midway through its lengthy report, Wikipedia suggests a possible reason:

Stigma

The social stigma associated with mental disorders is a widespread problem. The US Surgeon General stated in 1999 that: "Powerful and pervasive, stigma prevents people from acknowledging their own mental health problems, much less disclosing them to others." Additionally, researcher Wulf Rössler in 2016, in his article, "The Stigma of Mental Disorders" stated:

"For millennia, society did not treat persons suffering from depression, autism, schizophrenia and other mental illnesses much better than slaves or criminals: they were imprisoned, tortured or killed."

That's the way we were back then! Later, we're told this: 

"Efforts are being undertaken worldwide to eliminate the stigma of mental illness, although the methods and outcomes used have sometimes been criticized."

A stigma may be associated with the familiar term "mental illness." Our own discussion today continues along from there.

We offer this discussion today because of ongoing behavior by the sitting president. In yesterday's report, we noted the strange Truth Social post last weekend involving so-called magic beds.

Yesterday afternoon, more strange behavior occurred. Such behavior is typically ignored by the New York Times, which seems to prefer to whistle past the graveyard while proceeding along in the dark.

By way of contrast, here's Mediaite's report:

Trump Posts Deranged AI Video of Chuck Schumer Calling Democrats ‘Just a Bunch of Woke Pieces of Sh*t’

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows on Monday after he posted a bizarre, AI-generated video of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) calling Democrats “a bunch of woke pieces of sh*t.”

In the video, Schumer could be seen standing next to a stereotypical Mexican version of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)—complete with sombrero and moustache—while saying:

We won't post what the fake version of Senator Schumer is shown to be saying. You can read the transcript—much more significantly, you can watch the actual tape—at the Mediaite report. 

In all likelihood, the New York Times won't be reporting this latest bit of bizarre behavior by the sitting president. This is one of the many ways the people we Blue Americans are taught to trust refuse to perform their basic duties within the failing American system.

Nothing to look at! Just move along! So our major Blue American stars have persistently said, on our major cable and network news shows but also within our newspapers.

Last night, though, that latest post at the Truth Social site did produce instant pushback. 

The post appeared during the 9 o'clock hour. During that hour, CNN's Kaitlan Collins asked Senator Marshall (R-KS) what he thought of the post:

Kaitlan Collins Confronts Republican Senator With Wild AI Video From Trump: ‘Is That Appropriate?’

As is his persistent wont, Senator Marshall dodged and avoided. As is her admirable wont, Collins persisted, giving the timid solon three chances to state a view. 

During the 10 o'clock hour, Lawrence O'Donnell built much of his program around the new Trust Social post, using terms like "madness' and (something in the ballpark of) "cognitive decline" as he considered what the post might indicate or suggest about the sitting president.

Is something "wrong" with President Trump? Weve persistently asked that obvious question, even as the New York Times (and other Blue American individuals and orgs) have insisted on looking away.

(Persistently, we've also done this: We'vesuggested you should "pity the child." And we've said that some such state of affairs would be a tragic loss of human potential and should be regarded that way.)

For today, we'll mention one basic point which we've mentioned before:

 The finer people in Blue America's exalted elites are comfortable with the term "mental illness"—but only when such a possibility is involved in the occurrence of certain types of "street crimes." 

When certain types of crimes occur, there is no general journalistic reluctance to consider questions of mental health, mental disorder, or even mental illness. Here for example is part of the report by NBC News about last weekend's mass shooting at that North Carolina waterfront bar. The apparent shooters was Nigel Max Edge, age 40:

'Highly premeditated' attack at North Carolina waterfront bar leaves 3 dead and 5 wounded

[...]

[Southport Police Chief Todd] Coring told reporters that Edge is a “self-described” combat veteran who was injured in the line of duty and has post-traumatic stress disorder.

Edge served in the Marines from September 2003 through June 2009, according to military records. He attained the rank of sergeant and was deployed twice as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Military records show he received numerous awards, including a Purple Heart, a Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, a Combat Action Ribbon for Iraq and an Iraq Campaign Medal with two bronze stars.

District Attorney John David said Monday that Edge is a former Marine Corps scout sniper who was injured in the line of duty and has significant mental health issues, including a possible traumatic brain injury.

There is "nothing about his criminal background which suggests he could perpetrate such horrendous crimes," David said.

Edge’s ex-wife, Rachel Crowl, told NBC News that she has not spoken to her ex-husband in about a decade. Court records show their divorce was finalized in 2009.

Crowl said he had been “crying out for help for a long time” regarding his behavior and mental health. Referring to Edge by his previous name, she added that “what Sean did was very wrong.”

“I’m sad for these families. I’m sad nobody helped him and this could have maybe been prevented,” Crowl said.

To its credit, NBC News was willing to publish the public statements about the assailant's possible "mental health" issues. As we type, the corresponding report by the New York Times does refer to PTSD, but it omits explicit statements about "mental health," even the statement which was made by the local district attorney.

Given the nature of the crime and the apparent assailant, the omission of those statements strikes us as an outlier.  We offer this fuller disclosure:

Most news orgs, including the Times, will freely discuss issues of "mental health" and "mental illness" when certain type of crimes are committed by certain types of "everyday / regular people." 

For better or worse, a different standard has long obtained with respect to behavior by major political figures.

In a spin-off from the old "Goldwater Rule," major news orgs have long avoided any such discussion with respect to political figures. As with many rules, that strikes us as an extremely good rule—until such time as it isn't.

Have we entered such a time today? As O'Donnell directly noted last night, it seems to us that the conduct of the sitting president has moved us past that point. That said, our major journalists are unlikely to have the intellectual and emotional skills which would allow them to discuss the possibility in a constructive way.

We return to the concept of stigma:

Sad! The stigma which has long accompanied the notion of "mental illness" still lurks in our world today. Even within the minds of our Blue American greats, any talk of mental illness with respect to a major pol would almost surely come in the form of an insult, rather than what it more intelligently should be seen to be:

Any report on (severe) mental illness is a report on a tragic loss of human capability—a tragic loss which may also involve a very dangerous situation in the world.

PTSD is nobody's fault. As a general matter, neither is "mental illness," including severe mental illness. 

Severe mental illness is a human tragedy, and it should be seen as such. That said, it can also become a dangerous matter—sometimes in a tragically afflicted military veteran, sometimes in a tragically affected major political figure.

Meanwhile, is "cognitive impairment" a mental illness / disorder? How about "dementia?" Is dementia a mental disorder?

The conceptual landscape is quite complex in this realm. It lies well beyond the analytical skills and range of empathy possessed by our major political journalists.

We close today with a reference to that profile in Sunday's New York Times. We refer to this profile of Kat Timpf, one of Greg Gutfeld's major enablers at the Fox News Channel.

Not unlike the sitting president, Gutfeld behaves in a highly unusual way on his nightly pair of Fox News Channel programs. It's hard to miss the possibility that a virulent form of woman hatred ("misogyny") is somehow eating the innards of this furious 61-year-old man.

Timpf is one of the players who enable this apparent "misogyny," in her case on a nightly basis. Unless you're reading the New York Times, which has now transitioned Timpf into an admirable feminist who is fighting off the various madmen within Gutfeld's right-wing audience.

That profile comes from a hall of mirrors. Of one thing we can assure you:

That cannot have been the original copy which was presented by Amanda Hess, the journalist of record. Hess has long been a writer on women's issues. There's no way that she produced the copy which appeared in Sunday's New York Times.

Plainly, some unnamed editor doctored her copy, creating the piece which appeared in the Times. In such ways, we run up against the intellectual shortcomings of our vastly imperfect species.

Before the week is done, we want to walk you through that hall of mirrors profile. Also, we want to share the unintentional humor found all through this presentation by the leading authority on our human powers of discernment:

Human

Humans, scientifically known as Homo sapiens, are primates that belong to the biological family of great apes and are characterized by hairlessness, bipedality, and high intelligence. Humans have large brains, enabling more advanced cognitive skills that facilitate successful adaptation to varied environments, development of sophisticated tools, and formation of complex social structures and civilizations.

That's the way the profile starts. The humor continues from there!

Too funny! That said, we humans have always loved to say such things about our highly intelligent selves.

"Man [sic] is the rational animal," Aristotle is said to have said. He'd never watched the Fox News Channel. We can assure you of that!

Tomorrow:  What have they done with the real Amanda Hess? Inquiring minds want to know!

MONDAY: We want to create an historical record!

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 202

The cable star smells wet garbage: With apologies, and just for the sake of history, we thought we'd establish a brief historical record concerning what happened last Thursday on the Fox News Channel—first on The Five, then on the Gutfeld! show.

The Five is the most watched show in all of American "cable news!" Also, it's a "news" show in much the same way that The Real Housewives of Catfight City belongs on a cable channel named Bravo—a cable channel which was originally designed to be about the fine arts.

As we've noted in the past, one "basic cable" channel after another dumbed its intended product way, way down once it came face to face with the preferences of the American cable news consumer. The Fox News Channel is a massively dumbed down version of whatever it was that a 24-hour "cable news" channel might originally have been intended to be.

The sheer stupidity on the channel, delivered in groups, is simply astounding. Then, along came Gutfeld, the man the channel groomed for his current role, originally starting with a show at 3 in the morning, to fold a stunningly coarse and apparently misogynistic sensibility into the stew.

That said:

Last Wednesday, Hillary Clinton appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe. Starting at 8 a.m. sharp, she did a pair of interview segments, lasting just over a total of 37 minutes. Here's one of the ways the appearance is summarized at the Morning Joe site:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joins Morning Joe to discuss President Trump saying he now thinks Ukraine can win back all territory taken by Russia, the 20th anniversary of the Clinton Global Initiative, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. and vaccine access and the current fight over free speech.

For the record, the first segment ran some 20 minutes and 41 seconds. You can watch the whole thing here. The second segment ran 16 minutes and 44 seconds. This link will take you here.

Also this: Thanks to the invaluable Internet Archive, you can watch the whole interview simply by starting here.

We're not giant fans of Hillary Clinton as a political figure. Watching each segment in full, we were struck by how healing it can be for a person like Clinton to be removed from the hurly-burly of the daily political wars.

We thought Clinton was extremely articulate and notably relaxed throughout. For the record, she started out with words of support for President Trump, affirming the way he had just adjusted his rhetoric concerning Ukraine, suggesting that Ukraine could end up driving the Russians back out of its land.

(Now she'd like to see appropriate action, she added.)

Her lengthy appearance was calm and sane—until the corporate messenger children at the Fox News Channel went to work in the standard Fox News Channel fashion. 

In short, producers found a tiny clip they could edit out of the 37 minutes. The various Stepfords on the various Fox News Channel shows then took turns explaining what the tiny bit of tape actually meant about the demonic former secretary of state.

Of one thing you can be certain—none of these flyweights had actually watched the 37 minutes. They knew what they were being paid to say, and they happily proceeded to say it.

We've already shown you Gutfeld's broken-headed assessment during the 5 o'clock hour. Here it is again, with the reliably horrible Kennedy chiming in: 

GUTFELD (9/24/25):  You know, I don't know if you know this, Kennedy. That's the first time that Hillary has been on Morning Joe since the mysterious death of that intern.

OTHER PANELISTS: [Audible chuckling]

GUTFELD: I'm not saying anything, but I have to wonder—why is this old, ugly bag still around?

KENNEDY: Don't talk about Mika that way.

GUTFELD: I mean, that is so petty. That is so petty when I call her those things. But I'm not calling her a bigot, and I'm not calling her a Nazi. I'm just saying she's old and smelly and ugly. 

Please don't ask us to explain the reference to "the mysterious death of that intern." The tragic death of the intern in question isn't mysterious in any way, and all the panelists know it. But Gutfeld never tires of keeping such ugly messaging floating around inside his viewers' heads, as Kennedy chuckles along.

For whatever reason, it's the way his head currently works. We wish corporate owners would get him some help, because we feel entirely sure that he could be doing much better.

At any rate, there you see the way the concept of "cable news" has been reinvented—has been turned into a type of "Real D-Minus Flyweight Students of the Fox News Channel."

Every afternoon and then every night, Suzanne Scott pries the lid off the garbage can and the current version of Greg Gutfeld is part of what slithers out. Last Thursday night, at 10:07 p.m., he started again on his eponymous prime time propaganda program:

GUTFELD (9/25/25): And of course, if you smell wet garbage, you know Hillary's in town.

[Tiny snippet of tape]

So it went at 10:07. Hillary Clinton, 77 years old, was no longer an ugly old bag. The former first lady was now wet garbage, as you could tell from her smell.

This is the dystopian fugue the corporate bosses have created as they've dumbed the concept of "cable news" down down down down down. The sheer stupidity never ends on these utterly dimwitted "cable news" programs—and Gutfeld, more than any other figure, had added this ugly, coarse sensibility to the soul-crushing mix.

You can watch what followed that night, if you choose, by clicking here and then clicking ahead to the 7-minute mark. We'll add this odd observation:

As of last Thursday, had someone or something gotten inside this furious person's head? On each of these shows last Thursday, he offered bizarre attempts to justify the way he name-calls and slimes those with whom he disagrees in the manner we've shown you.

In Saturday's report, we showed you part of his extremely hapless apologia from that day's The Five. By clicking the link to that evening's Gutfeld! show, you can see him offer the same self-justification, five hours later.

Had someone been getting inside his head? Is that why he was suddenly trying to explain and justify, in a ludicrous way, his amazingly peculiar conduct?

We don't know who that could have been, but we ourselves went to junior high, and then to high school, just about a mile down the Alameda de las Pulgas from Gutfeld's own Serra High. We're saddened by the thought that someone from such a sunny land could have ended up the way this guy did.

That said, there's still time to get better.

His bosses, of course, are cheering him on. A segment of the public wanted Real Housewives more than fine arts. They also wanted Ancient Aliens more than they wanted actual history on the so-called History Channel. 

And so on, down the road to perdition from there.

A certain segment of the public enjoys seeing Gutfeld call Clinton smelly and old. (Trust us—it gets more pathetic and worse.) He's been paid to so those things, and he plainly seems to enjoy the laughter and cheers which follow

Instead of that, we wish his corporate owners would get this "poor immigrant" some help.

Something is badly wrong with this man—or it is just an overwrought form of Sexual Politics Throwback Syndrome? We'll be discussing that potent cultural and political force as the week proceeds—but Clinton spoke for 37 minutes on Morning Joe, and the only thing this lost soul had to say was his claim about the smell of wet garbage.

The larger question is this:

Fox behaves this way to rake in the cash. Why do Blue American orgs agree on this key point:

What Greg Gutfeld says and does must never be reported or discussed! 

This 61-year-old California man is badly in need of help, but so is the failing American nation. Why won't the stars at the New York Times—Brooks and French and Stephens and Douthat and Bruni and Dowd and Michelle Goldberg—do their jobs as American journalists and report, for all to hear, his astonishing change in the culture of the American "news" system?

The same thing goes for Mika and Joe! Why won't these people simply report what happens on Fox? Why won't they simply say the names of the people who do this?

Why won't someone say Suzanne Scott's name? It's Suzanne Scott, an American woman from New Jersey, who puts this trash on the air.

Is it possible that Suzanne Scott is wet garbage? Have Blue America's timorous stars ever thought about that?

WHAT IS MENTAL ILLNESS: Did the president post that crazy videotape?

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2025

Is the New York Times willing to ask? "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised!"

Way back in the 1970s, it was the title of a song, then of an album, by the late Gil Scott-Heron. We'll let the leading authority on the matter offer the basic background:

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" is a satirical poem and Black Liberation song by Gil Scott-Heron. Scott-Heron first recorded it for his 1970 album Small Talk at 125th and Lenox, on which he recited the lyrics, accompanied by congas and bongo drums. A re-recorded version, with a three-piece band, was the B-side to Scott-Heron's first single, "Home Is Where the Hatred Is", from his album Pieces of a Man (1971)...

It was also included on his compilation album, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised (1974).

And so on, at length, from there. To hear the original recording, you can just click here.

That was more than fifty years ago. In the course of the deeply shocking last few days, we flashed on the Scott-Heron lyric. 

The times they have a-changed. Our contemporary adaptation of Scott-Heron's lyric would so something like this:

The truth about the demise of the American nation—imperfect though it always has been—will not be reported or discussed in the New York Times.

We single out the New York Times because of its dominant status within our own Blue America. In reality, the truth about the ongoing demise won't be reported in other key venues—on the corporate cable news channel MSNBC, to cite just one example.

Over the weekend and late last week, a great deal of shocking material clattered across our screen. Large chunks of "sane washing" occurred at the New York Times, where we've still seen no mention of the astounding event described in this report by Mediaite:

Trump Deletes Wild AI Video He Shared In Which He Promoted a Magic ‘Med Bed’ That Cures Diseases and Regrows Limbs

President Donald Trump has deleted a bizarre AI-generated video he shared in which he was seen promoting a magic bed which purportedly could cure all diseases.

The president, late Saturday night, shared the phony video on Truth Social, which shows him—on a fake Fox News broadcast of My View with Lara Trump—touting a “med bed” which has mythical healing powers.

“Every American will soon receive their own medbed card,” AI Trump said. “With it, you’ll have guaranteed access to our new hospitals led by the top doctors in the nation, equipped with the most advanced technology in the world. These facilities are safe, modern, and designed to restore every citizen to full health and strength. This is the beginning of a new era in American healthcare.”

[...]

A Fox News spokesperson quickly distanced the network from the phony video, telling Mediaite, “The video did not air on My View with Lara Trump on Fox News Channel or any other Fox News Media platforms.”

Say what? The most powerful man on the planet posted (then later deleted) "a bizarre AI-generated video in which he was seen promoting a magic bed which purportedly could cure all diseases?"

We first saw that astounding event reported at Mediaite. With apologies for the frequent childishness of that org's headlines, the original report had started like this:

Trump Posts an Absolutely Bonkers AI Video in Which He Promotes a Magic ‘Med Bed’ That Can Cure Any Disease

President Donald Trump shared a bizarre AI video to social media in which he’s seen promoting “med beds”—a far-right conspiracy involving a magical bed that can supposedly heal any sickness.

In a post to his Truth Social platform late Saturday night, Trump shared a phony, AI-generated Fox News clip—purportedly from Fox’s My View with Lara Trump—in which he’s seen rolling out this magic technology to hospitals nationwide.

“Every American will soon receive their own medbed card,” AI Trump said. “With it, you’ll have guaranteed access to our new hospitals led by the top doctors in the nation, equipped with the most advanced technology in the world.”

AI Trump went on to specifically tout the magic healing power of these fictional med beds.

We apologize for the childish headline. In our view, Mediaite would be a more credible news org if it abandoned that practice. 

At any rate, there it was—the start of the site's initial report about the bizarre Truth Social post. Videotape of the bizarre post can be seen as part of those two reports, though the bizarre post has now been deleted from the Truth Social site.

Full disclosure:

At this site, we weren't familiar with the term "med bed." We were only dimly aware of the existence of "a far-right conspiracy [theory] involving a magical bed that can supposedly heal any sickness."

Even fuller disclosure! These two reports at Mediaite seemed so bizarre that, for the first time we can recall, we wondered if we ourselves might be on the verge of reporting a major news event which would, in fact, turn out to have been based on some sort of a scam.

Had Mediaite been taken in? Plainly, the answer seems to be no! The Truth Social post has been removed, but as you can see in those reports from Mediaite, major medical specialists responded to the crazy post when it was still online. 

Also, to see CNN's report of this astounding event, you can just click here. A similar report by Forbes appears beneath this headline:

Trump Deletes Post Referencing Bizarre ‘Medbed’ Conspiracy Theory

For this morning's follow-up report by Newsweek, you can just click this. For a cogent summary by Heather Cox Richardson, you can just click here. 

And yes, it seems there was a pre-existing, lunatic clam of this type floating around within the realm of the various QAnon types. For Wikipedia's pre-existing report about this fantasy belief, we will direct you here.

In such ways, we've become convinced that this bizarre bit of videotape really did appear on the sitting president's Truth Social site. Also, though, we must tell you this:

We'll be surprised if any report of this bizarre event ever appears in the New York Times.

For whatever reason, the New York Times has exhibited a clear reluctance to come to terms with the sitting president's crazier bits of behavior. That said, what did appear in the New York Times in the past few days? 

What has appeared in the Times? Let us start to count:

This strange profile of the Fox News Channel's absurdly slippery Kat Timpf has now appeared in the Times. The profile of Timpf extends the frequent "sane washing" which major news orgs tend to provide to Greg Gutfeld, one of that channel's top ratings stars.

Also, the Times published this front-page report in Sunday's print editions about the way the Fox News Channel helps its employees sell their largely worthless books. This report may give readers the (false) impression that the Times is willing to report the most significant activities of that dominant "cable news" channel.

That impression would be false. 

In yesterday's print editions, the Times also published this report about recent conditions in Portland, Oregon—a city the president has now weirdly described as "War ravaged." 

Assuming basic accuracy, that report is quite informative. What you almost surely won't be seeing in the Times is any account of what Red America was instantly being told about this matter on Sunday morning's Fox & Friends Weekend—a scary account which flew in the face of what the Times was reporting.

Dearest darlings, use your heads! What happens on Fox stays on Fox! News orgs like the New York Times do in fact stay far away from such highly important reporting.

The revolution won't be televised? Whatever Scott-Herron meant by that iconic statement, the current demise of the American enterprise almost surely won't be reported in the New York Times. In our view, this leads to our basic question for this week:

What is mental illness?

What is mental illness? We've tried to stay away from that fraught term, in large part because of the unfortunate role the term tends to play within the American discourse. According to the leading authority, many medical specialists now prefer the less fraught term "mental disorder," perhaps for some of those very same reasons.

That said, plain speech is sometimes required. Judged by any traditional norm, the posting of that crazy Truth Social video about "med beds" would raise obvious questions about the mental health—about the fundamental "sanity"—of the person who chose to post it.

In a similar way, traditional norms would make us wonder about the mental health of the cable news star who made the remarks shown below. He made these remarks last Thursday on The Five, the American nation's most watched "cable news" show. 

As we noted on Saturday, this very strange man was speaking about Hillary Clinton:

GUTFELD (9/25/25):  You know, I don't know if you know this, Kennedy. That's the first time that Hillary has been on Morning Joe since the mysterious death of that intern.

OTHER PANELISTS: [Audible chuckling]

GUTFELD: I'm not saying anything, but I have to wonder—why is this old, ugly bag still around?

KENNEDY: Don't talk about Mika that way.

Speaking of Hillary Clinton's extremely cogent appearance on the previous day's Morning Joe, the cable star offered his latest "intern murder" jab. He then added this bit of analysis to the American discourse:

I have to wonder—why is this old, ugly bag still around?

So this person said. The reliably unfortunate Kennedy responded with an insult aimed at Mika Brzezinski. 

At that point, her 61-year-old male colleague went with this:

GUTFELD (continuing directly): I mean, that is so petty. That is so petty when I call her those things. But I'm not calling her a bigot, and I'm not calling her a Nazi. I'm just saying she's old and smelly and ugly. 

The fellow added this further bit of analysis:

I'm just saying [that Hillary Clinton] is old and smelly. 

She isn't just an ugly old bag, she's also old and smelly! At some point, it seems to us that basic questions of mental health must start to emerge about this person. But also, should questions start to emerge, at some point, about the mental functioning—not about the mental illness—of the people in Blue America who insist on pretending that this sort of thing isn't happening with this person, on a daily and nightly bass?

(Note: As we've told you again and again, you should remember to pity the child.)

We'll talk a bit more about what Gutfeld said in this afternoon's report. For today, we'll leave you with this:

We still don't know how that crazy "med bed" video found its way onto the Truth Social site. But by any normal modern standard, this obvious question arises:

Is the sitting American president in the grip of some form of mental illness? 

Blue orgs like the New York Times have agreed that such a question must never be asked. With such lunatic posts appearing on an increasingly regular basis, what can you say about the moral and intellectual functioning of the "highly educated" finer people who won't move beyond their initial stance even as they, and their failing nation, go hurtling over a cliff?

We'll talk about mental illness this week. We'll talk about what it is, and we'll talk about the unfortunate role the term and the topic often play in our unimpressive discoiurse.

For now, one additional point:

We had dreamed of writing this week under the following heading:

HUMAN

This very morning, we decided to switch to this:

WHAT IS MENTAL ILLNESS

We had dreamed of going with HUMAN because of this unintentionally humorous bit of reporting from the BBC (and from other major news orgs):

Million-year-old skull rewrites human evolution, scientists claim

A million-year-old human skull found in China suggests that our species, Homo sapiens, began to emerge at least half a million years earlier than we thought, researchers are claiming in a new study.

It also shows that we co-existed with other sister species, including Neanderthals, for much longer than we've come to believe, they say.

The scientists claim their analysis "totally changes" our understanding of human evolution and, if correct, it would certainly rewrite a key early chapter in our history.

But other experts in a field where disagreement over our emergence on the planet is rife, say that the new study's conclusions are plausible but far from certain.

We exalted members of Homo sapiens! We've had an extra half million years to attain the level of mental functioning our tribunes display, at the present time, as our nation slides down toward the sea. 

It turns out we've had a million years to get our mental functioning together! From the Fox News Channel to the New York Times, we'd call that a deeply sobering bit of anthropological news.

That Truth Social post would seem to have been flatly insane. The profile of Timpf in the New York times strikes us as the latest act of avoidance—as the latest bit of aggressive sane washing of the Fox News Channel.

Our president may be profoundly disordered. But our greatest newspaper, the New York Times, just keeps averting its gaze from him and from his most aggressive propagandists.

We've had a million years to do better! Is it what we first told you long ago? Is it too late to expect a good outcome here? Is it "all anthropology now?"

Tomorrow: In a bit of unintentional humor, the leading authority explains a key term—"Human"

This afternoon: A bit more on what Greg Gutfeld most recently said. 

We've long advised you to "pity the child." We think the time has come for his employers to get this guy some help.

SATURDAY: [NAME WITHHELD] is "a smelly old bag!"

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2025

So the Fox messenger said: It would be interesting to conduct a type of word check. The question would be this:

How often are the words "Hitler" or "Nazi" spoken in the course of a day on MSNBC or CNN? Also, how often are those words spoken in the course of a day on the Fox News Channel?

We ask for the following reason:

It seems to us that we see and hear those words much more often on Fox! We hear those words as the channel's messenger children keep spreading this message around:

Current Fox News Channel message:
"The left" has inspired at least two recent deadly shootings (Charlie Kirk; the ICE facility in Dallas) because of its use of those words.

On programs of the Fox News Channel, that corporate message is currently being promulgated on a round the clock basis. 

Thursday's edition of The Five started with a segment dedicated to that general message. It led to one of the dumbest statements we've ever seen on cable.

Dana Perino, the program's "den mother," was moderator for the segment. At 5:02, she played tape of President Trump saying that "the radical left is causing the problem." 

At that point, Perino said this:

PERINO (9/25/25): And I just want to play this montage our team put together of anti-ICE rhetoric.

So the program's resident "den mother" said—the one who's supposed to be sane. 

You can watch the montage from Perino's team simply by clicking this. Included were very short clips of longer statements by six Democratic pols.

Four of the clips took us a long way back in time. There was no way to establish a context for what was being complained about—for what was actually being said at the given point in time:

Short clips from the montage:
Gov. Tim Walz, May 17: "Donald Trump's modern-day Gestapo"
Rep. Eric Swalwell, July 16: "Running around our communities like masked bank robbers? Terrorizing women?" 
Mayor Brandon Johnson, June 11: "What terrorism looks like. This is it."
Rep. Jasmine Crockett, September 14: "When I see ICE, I see slave patrols."
Rep. Eric Larson, August 17: "This is not Germany. That's the SS and the Gestapo. This is the United States. Unmask yourselves!"
Gov. Gavin Newsom. September 23: "Masked men jumping out of unmarked cars. People disappearing. No due process."

Should Democrats be talking that way? For what it's worth, we regard Rep. Crockett as the gift that won't stop giving to MAGA's mid-term hopes. We're inclined to think that Governor Walz—he's known as "Tampon" on the Fox News Channel—isn't real far behind.

That said, we'll ask again: Should Democratic office holders be using language like that? 

There's no ultimate answer to that question. But we will say this:

We couldn't help noting that these clips went back a good long way in time. The montage included only two (2) statements which were made in the past month. 

What specific behaviors were being discussed when these statements were made? We have no idea. There is no way to tell.

That could mean that such statements are actually fairly rare. Or it could mean that Perino's team simply grabbed the first things they could find—that they don't especially care, given the way this channel's messaging actually works.

At any rate, so the clips went. We'll note this:

"Gestapo" and "the SS" are obvious references to the disaster which swept across Europe starting in the 1930s. That said, Perino's team included no Democratic pol using the words "Nazi" or "Hitler"—but the ensuing pseudo-discussion spilled with complaints about the way "the left" won't stop throwing those terms around.

In the course of the day's pseudo-discussions, the messenger children said "Hitler" at least nine times, part of their claim that "the left" calls people that all the time. They also said "Nazi" at least four times. 

In truth, you hear those words on Fox all the time. Elsewhere, perhaps not so much!

At any rate, should Democrats be more careful in the language they use? A reasonable person could say yes—but when Jessica Tarlov tried two times, within the past week, to note that President Trump speaks in similar heated ways about the Communists and fascists of the lunatic left, she was interrupted and overtalked by the corporate nitwits for whom she serves as a punching bag on these messaging panels.

Do Democrat politicians speak unwisely at times? We'd say that the answer is yes! Eventually, though, Perino's montage led to one of the dumbest things we've ever seen on cable TV, or pretty much anywhere else.

It was Perino who made the statement in question. The background goes like this:

As Gutfeld and Watters kept saying "Nazi Nazi Hitler Hitler," it fell to Tarlov to suggest that overheated rhetoric can perhaps be found in Red American locales as well. 

The day before, she had been savaged by the furious Gutfeld as she attempted make such a claim. On this day, it fell to Perino to rebut Tarlov's absurd suggestion. 

Breaking in on Tarlov's presentation, Perino threw to Jesse Watters, who brought the messaging back into line. Amazingly, Perino said this about her team's montage:

PERINO: [INDECPHERABLE DUE TO OVERTALKING] ...when we played the montage earlier, Jesse, there was not nobody, aside from Democrats, who were talking about anti-ICE rhetoric in that way.

What a shock! When Perino's team assembled a montage of people using aggressive rhetoric, the montage included no one other than Democrats! No Republicans were included in the montage, not even the sitting president!

Dana Perino is cast on The Five as the one who isn't nuts. That statement struck us as one of the dumbest things we've ever seen on TV—but during the program's second segment, Greg Gutfeld offered a statement which struck us as one of the most sadly typical. 

The segment began with a very short excerpt from a long appearance by Hillary Clinton on Wednesday's Morning Joe. Inane messaging quickly followed. 

Inevitably, Gutfeld was soon saying this:

GUTFELD:  You know, I don't know if you know this, Kennedy. That's the first time that Hillary has been on Morning Joe since the mysterious death of that intern.

OTHER PANELISTS: [Audible chuckling]

GUTFELD: I'm not saying anything, but I have to wonder—why is this old, ugly bag still around?

KENNEDY: Don't talk about Mika that way.

GUTFELD: I mean, that is so petty. That is so petty when I call her those things. But I'm not calling her a bigot, and I'm not calling her a Nazi. I'm just saying she's old and smelly and ugly. 

Hillary Clinton isn't a Nazi. She's just an ugly, smelly old bag. Why is she still around?

This was part of an absurd apologia Gutfeld launched this day—first on The Five, then on his own Gutfeld! program five hours later. He kept offering an absurd justification for his endlessly repellent behavior.  

Has someone managed to get inside this very strange person's head? 

We truly wish that his corporate owners would insist that he get some help. We feel sure that he could do better than this. 

That said, ugly messaging of this type is part of this channel's stock in trade. The most reprehensible people of all are the finer people at the major Blue orgs who refuse to report this ceaseless "night assault" on the very possibility of the American project.

Watters may have made the most striking statement of all this day. What he said was flatly false. He was falsely responding to Tarlov. His statement was clownishly false.

We'll have more on this chaos next week—but as we told you long ago, it's all anthropology now. There is no obvious way to extract ourselves from this mess.

HEALING: Some of Kelly's complaints seem crazy!

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2025

Sadly, some of them don't: It's been argued—not crazily—that James Comey got President Trump elected the first time around.

That's a reference to Comey's press events about Candidate Clinton on July 5, 2016, and then again on October 26, two weeks before that year's fateful election.

It's been argued that those controversial pressers may have tipped the narrowly decided election over to Candidate Trump. We don't know if that's a plausible claim, but the claim doesn't seem to be crazy.

James Comey, then the head of the FBI, may have delivered the White House to Trump! Despite that possibility, it had to happen:

Given the craziness of the times, "the storm" has finally come for Comey himself! It came in the form of a federal indictment written in crayon on manila paper by a brand new MAGA star.

However bogus that indictment may turn out be, the storm may spread to other such targets. That brings us back to the cri de coeur emitted last weekend by Megyn Kelly.

In yesterday's report, we showed you what Kelly said. Once again, the background is this:

It's been widely reported that Tom Homan accepted a big bag of cash last fall from undercover FBI agents. Given a chance to deny that report, Homan didn't do so.

Is it true? Did Tom Homan accept a bribe in the form of a big bag of cash? Kelly offered a somewhat surprising initial response:

"We DO NOT CARE," she posted, aligning herself with the storm.

We DO NOT CARE, she said. Then, in a lengthy post, Kelly explained that surprising stance. With apologies, it's important to look, then to look again and again, at the shape of the storm in question.

In her post, Kelly was pushing back against MSNBC's report about Homan. Below, you can once again see what she said. In our view, you can see the ultimate shape of the storm in the first and the last things she said:

KELLY (9/20/25): We don’t trust you. We don’t trust the work of your president’s DOJ. We don’t trust the work of your president’s FBI. 

You indicted our presidential candidate 4x with made-up BS charges trying to put him in jail for life. You changed laws so he could be civilly sued by a woman who didn’t even remember what year her alleged “rape” by him was. 

You let an AG who ran for office promising to “get Trump” try to bankrupt him on a claim so specious even the NY appellate court scoffed at it & had to reverse the damage award. 

One of yours killed Charlie and then you laughed at our pain, protested our vigils & said Charlie was to blame and in hell. You lied about the killer’s motives & said he was MAGA when you knew he wasn’t. You put us all in danger by not admitting the truth and then not relenting on the lies you tell about us. You cried endless tears for Jimmy Kimmel but none for Charlie.

You gleefully cancelled all of us for five+ years and danced when we suffered. You censored us & ruined careers of distinguished doctors & others who dared to say the truth during Covid and George Floyd. You cost our children years of learning during lockdowns and endangered them with deadly myocarditis by burying the risk disclosures and never apologized or owned it.

Your govt tried to strong arm Fox into firing Tucker bc of his J6 coverage and you said not a peep about the first amendment.

You changed Title IX with the stroke of a pen, without consent, and endangered and hurt our defenseless daughters. You sterilized and cut off the healthy body parts of children & want to keep doing it.

You lied about a near-vegetative president being fine with the nuclear codes. 

You (personally) had Doug Emhoff on as the scandal of his alleged woman abuse and cheating broke and you didn’t ask him ONE Q about it, then tried to tell us you care about women. 

You opened the border and let in ten+ million illegals who killed Laken Riley and 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray after they sexually assaulted her and threw her off a bridge, along with the countless other innocents they rape, murder and molest to this day.

So no, we don’t care what you say about Tom Homan. We do not trust you. We only care about defeating you.

"We only care about defeating you," Megyn Kelly said. President Biden was Blue America's president, not hers. So Kelly said in a furious post direct from the eye of the storm.

How did Kelly come to adopt this aggressively tribal view of the world—this novelized warlike picture built around "yours" and "ours?"

She listed a long list of tribal grievances, some of which struck us as stone-cold crazy nuts. Some of her grievances seemed quite odd—but in our view, some of her grievances do make obvious sense.

Crazy is as crazy does, Mother Gump always said. This angry complaint by the furious Kelly strikes us as totally nuts:

Your govt tried to strong arm Fox into firing Tucker because of his J6 coverage...

Did Blue America's government try to strongarm the Fox News Channel into firing Tucker Carlson? Did it try to do so because of what Kelly laughingly describes as "his January 6 coverage?"

We don't know if it did! That said, if Carlson's "coverage" of January 6 was sincere, it came straight out of the cuckoo nest. He should have been yanked off the air by his corporate owners the first time he went down the crazy road he took.

It seems to us that a person has to be swept away by a storm to be aggrieved by any part of the way Carlson got booted from Fox. That said, other grievances stated by Kelly are grounded in perfectly reasonable complaints. 

Sadly—self-destructively—we Blues still tend to hide from that fact.

Some of Kelly's grievances are grounded in reality—and they remain unexplained to this day. One such grievance is this:

You opened the border and let in ten+ million illegals [two or three of whom] killed Laken Riley and 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray after they sexually assaulted her and threw her off a bridge...

We've cleaned up Kelly's use of "they," a dangerous word. We've left "illegals" in. But the events she cites really did happen during the four years of the Biden administration. 

That policy at the southern border remains unexplained to this day. Over here in Blue America, our elites still ignore this potent matter—and it anchors almost everything which ever gets said on the endless propaganda programs of the Fox News Channel.

Why did the Biden administration "open the southern border?" Also, why did spokespersons for that administration—Vice President Harris included—keep saying the border was secure when it plainly wasn't?

President Trump has never stopped making crazy claims about who came across that southern border. But why did major figures in Blue America pretend the situation didn't exist? Why do we Blues continue to whistle past that political graveyard today?

For propagandists on the Fox News Channel, that unexplained border policy—and Blue America's ongoing silence—are the gifts which won't stop giving. Whatever else those messaging agents might say in the course of a "cable news" program, they tend to work their way back to what happened there—and when Vice President Harris spoke with Rachel Maddow this Monday, guess what didn't happen?

Maddow didn't ask the former vice president why the border was handled that way. She didn't ask her why she said the things she said about the border being secure.

Warning! There will be no future election in which those questions don't get asked! That said, a code of silence still obtains—but only in our own Blue America. Over there, in Red America, this unexplained matter is the gift which never stops sitting beneath that angry tribe's Christmas tree.

What explains the Biden administration's policy at the southern border? In the absence of any attempt at an explanation, we've come to make the following assumption, which could of course be wrong:

A speculation about the southern border:
President Biden entered the White House needing to avoid a recession as we emerged from the Covid shutdowns—and many of our industries run on the need for immigrant labor. 

Given the fact that our two major parties will never be able to create a workable immigration policy, the administration chose to throw the border open to allow needed labor in.

In the absence of any attempt at direct explanation, that's the speculation on which we ourselves have landed.  That speculation could be wrong. 

But the silence coming from Blue America's political / journalistic elites allows the propaganda players at Fox to talk and talk, then talk and talk, about what happened at the border during President Biden's first three-plus years.

We Blues! We have a lor of explaining to do, about that and about other topics! But we persist in the childish belief that we can simply continue along with our ongoing silence.

We Blues! Despite the claims we've made for the past sixty years, we simply aren't outrageously smart, and we aren't always obsessively honest. "And yet, this is [us]," to borrow from Ezra Pound.

We Blues! We do a wide array of other things which keep domination alive on the Fox News Channel. This past week, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez offered an explanation for her decision not to sign the House resolution concerning Charlie Kirk. 

For various reasons, we agree with that decision. But midway through her explanation, she put her foot squarely in her mouth, in a very familiar, time-honored way. For that reason, Fox has been playing the tape of that one part of her remarks ever since she made it.

We Blues! We aren't as smart as we've always said. Nor are we always the brilliant, astoundingly moral people we've long claimed to be. 

When we refuse to see ourselves as we actually are, we make it amazingly easy for the propaganda at Fox to survive—and for the storm to take shape.

Our sitting president has crazily demanded the indictment of James Comey. At Sunday's memorial service for Charlie Kirk, one of his top advisers described a lunatic storm.

We Blues! We wring our hands and curse our fate as MAGA's political power continues. As we do, overwrought multimillionaire like Megan Kelly get swept away by the storm. 

Will we Blues find our way out of this storm? We know of no reason to assume that we will. Occasionally, we do see glimmers of hope.

We close today with this:

"The sunshine of the prairie summer and fall months would come sifting down with healing and strength."

That's what Carl Sandburg said at the end of Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years. The healing barely happened back then, and now there's a second storm.

That storm will be very hard to deal with. Maybe those of us in Blue America need to learn how to heal ourselves.

Tomorrow: Has someone been criticizing Gutfeld? While wishing for that guy to improve, we'll tell you why we ask.

(Also, a look at something Rachel Campos-Duffy has said)

BREAKING: We'll be posting early this afternoon!

 FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2025

It's one of those medical Fridays: You're right! It's the third Friday in the three-week cycle again! 

We'll post about healing—and about "the storm"—early this afternoon.

THURSDAY: We saw "the storm" blow through The Five!

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2025

This is the illness we've chosen: Aside from a few basic points, we won't even try to describe what happened yesterday on The Five.

The full tape of the relevant segment is available at the program's web site.  Somewhat comically, the dual headline says this:

We're in a season of 'real leftist violence,' says Paul Mauro
'The Five' co-hosts discuss a shooting at an I.C.E. facility in Dallas and the state of political rhetoric in America

We call that comical for an obvious reason. What actually happened during that segment had nothing to do with the things Paul Mauro said.

What actually happened involved a remarkable example of "the storm"—a remarkable example of the irrational fury which increasingly seems to come from the Fox News Channel's Greg Gutfeld. As we've been noting this week, this irrational fury has also been coming from other members of Red America's elites.

The basic background to yesterday's storm is this:

In every segment of this ludicrous show, one of the five co-hosts is assigned to serve as the moderator. The other four co-hosts then take their turns discussing the topic in question.

As we've often noted, the gruesome program achieves its considerable frisson on the days when Jessica Tarlov sits in the one (1) "liberal / Democratic Party" chair. 

The four (4) pro-MAGA children all listen politely when their pro-MAGA colleagues take their turns to speak. The excitement starts when Gutfeld and Watters start interrupting and overtalking Tarlov, with the other pro-MAGA co-hosts sometimes joining in.

(That was especially likely to happen when Judge Jeanine was still a daily co-host.)

Yesterday, the first topic involved the fatal shooting at the ICE facility in Dallas. Jesse Watters, acting as moderator and seeming to be on his best behavior, threw to Tarlov in the manner shown:

WATTERS (5/24/25): Jessica, you've never called ICE agents "fascists" or "Gestapo," "Nazis." You've never done that. But there are people in your party that have done that. Do you think that's responsible?

TARLOV: Listen, I think that "fascism" and fascists" is a very special category of people, and you should use it when it's really applicable and sparingly, because then people will believe you when you say it. And it has become too common to hear words like that...

So far, so acceptable! At that point, Tarlov began recalling her recitation, on last Friday's show, of the many times when President Trump has dropped that same f-bomb on Democratic heads. 

Yesterday, she said it was a "both sides problem." That's when the roof fell in.

"That's garbage! That's absolute garbage!" the visibly furious Gutfeld now shouted, breaking in. After ordering Tarlov to "Continue," he instantly began railing at her again.

By our count, Tarlov had been permitted to speak for 37 seconds before the roof fell in.

Gutfeld's furious interruptions went on and on, then on and on some more. At one point, he seemed to have decided to stifle himself. But he soon returned to the practice of shouting at Tarlov, generally as soon as she had uttered three or four words.

It wasn't the familiar rudeness of the behavior, and it wasn't the sheer stupidity of some of the ways he tried to refute Tarlov's assertions. For us, it was the raw fury this extremely unusual person exhibited in his rant at Tarlov this day.

At Sunday's memorial service for Charlie Kirk, Stephen Miller described a growing reality. We offered a longer transcript this morning, but this was Miller's key statement:

MILLER (9/21/25) When I see Erika [Kirk] and her strength and her courage, I'm reminded of a famous expression:

The storm whispers to the warrior that you cannot withstand my strength. And the warrior whispers back, "I am the storm."

Erika is the storm. We are the storm. And our enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion. Our lineage and our legacy hails back to Athens, to Rome, to Philadelphia, to Monticello. Our ancestors built the cities. They produced the art and architecture. They built the industry.

[...]

We will prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened. 

We assume that Miller's reference to "the storm" is a nod to the QAnon crowd. But the fury to which Miller gave voice erupted yesterday, on The Five, in Gutfeld's weirdly unhinged performance.

We strongly suggest that you watch the tape; to do so, just click here. Tarlov starts attempting to speak at the seven-minute mark. Strangely, the tape of the program is missing from the Internet Archive's compilation of yesterday's Fox News Channel programs.

We strongly suggest that you watch that tape to see where the nation is going. Or you could just consider this:

In this morning's New York Times, we read this overview of President Trump's current stance on climate change:

At a Times Event, Opposing Views on Climate Change Collide

[...]

The split-screen view underscored the extent to which the United States under President Trump has become isolated from the rest of the world on climate change, perhaps more than on any other issue. Mr. Trump has said the United States will withdraw from the Paris accord, joining Iran, Libya and Yemen as the only four countries to not recognize it. In recent months, Mr. Trump has also issued numerous policies that could thwart renewable energy projects, and his administration has ordered a halt to the construction of offshore wind farms.

[...]

By contrast, Mr. Trump told the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday that climate change is the “greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world” and called renewable energy “a joke.”

On climate change, it's Iran and Libya and Yemen—and it's also us! Meanwhile, on your TV screen, you have the endless apparent misogyny of Gutfeld, tied to the remarkable, barely controllable anger he put on display yesterday.  

We're sincere in saying that the furious Gutfeld seems to need some help. We do want to comment on one of the many ridiculous things he said as he kept overtalking Tarlov:

GUTFELD: The left calls Trump a hatemonger. They've called me a hatemonger because  ridicule the left, I ridicule protesters, I ridicule academia—Hollywood, the news media. I make fun of The View every day...

Actually, no. The gentleman doesn't "make fun of" The View. Night after night, he compares the women of The View to horses, cattle, cows and pigs, to whales and also to "livestock." 

(After that, it may be time to start saying that "Tampon" is secretly gay.)

They open the garbage can every night. This is what comes slithering out. Blue America's orgs avert their gaze. To appearances, no one wants to report what happens on Fox.

In fairness, Tarlov was granted her 37 seconds. Then "the storm" began.

We'd like to see the guy get some help. But more and more, in various ways, this is the illness we've chosen.

HEALING: "One of yours killed Charlie," she said!

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2025

Megyn Kelly signs on with the storm: "I saw an interesting thing happen today."

So says Michael Corleone—the Al Pacino character—during the Cuba interlude in the 1974 feature film, The Godfather Part II. 

To watch the scene in which he says it, you can just click here.

He's referring to the determination displayed by a Cuban revolutionary as Castro is coming to power. He saw this man being shot to death by Cuban police in the final days before the fall of the Batista regime. 

Yesterday, we too "saw an interesting thing happen"—in this case, on yesterday's edition of The Five. We saw a startling display of Red American fury—what you might even call "the storm." 

That startling display is being ignored at Mediaite even as we sit here typing today.  We'll link you to yesterday's startling event in this afternoon's post. 

For now, we think it's important to spend another day contemplating recent examples of the strength of that tribal fury—in the strength of that storm.

In yesterday's report, we showed you the bulk of what Stephen Miller said at Sunday's memorial service for the late Charlie Kirk. At this point, we offer a subjective assessment:

We apologize for the length of the excerpt from Miller's speech. That said, judged by any pre-existing norm, it's shocking to think that this furious man sits at the right hand of the father:

MILLER (9/21/25): Hello, Turning Point. Hello, patriots. Hello to our fearless president, Donald J. Trump. 

And hello to millions of Americans all across this land who are gathered in sadness and sorrow to mourn Charlie Kirk, but also to dedicate ourselves to finishing his mission and achieving victory in his name.

[APPLAUSE] 

The day that Charlie died the angels wept. But those tears had been turned into fire in our hearts, and that fire burns with a righteous fury that our enemies cannot comprehend or understand. 

When I see Erika [Kirk] and her strength and her courage, I'm reminded of a famous expression:

The storm whispers to the warrior that you cannot withstand my strength. And the warrior whispers back, "I am the storm."

Erika is the storm. We are the storm. And our enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion. Our lineage and our legacy hails back to Athens, to Rome, to Philadelphia, to Monticello. Our ancestors built the cities. They produced the art and architecture. They built the industry.

[...]

We will prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened. They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen in all of us because we stand for what is good, what is virtuous, what is noble. 

And to those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us, what do you have? You have nothing. You are nothing. You are wickedness. You are jealousy. You are envy. You are hatred. You are nothing. You can build nothing. You can produce nothing. You can create nothing.

We are the ones who build. We are the ones who create. We are the ones who lift up humanity. 

You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk. You have made him immortal. You have immortalized Charlie Kirk. And now millions will carry on his legacy. And we will devote the rest of our lives to finishing the causes for which Charlie gave his last measure of devotion. You cannot defeat us. You cannot slow us. You cannot stop us. You cannot deter us.

We will carry Charlie and Erika in our heart every single day and fight that much harder because of what you did to us. You have no idea the dragon you have awakened. You have no idea how determined we will be to save the civilization, to save the West, to save this republic, because our children are strong and our grandchildren will be strong. And our children's children's children will be strong.

And what will you leave behind? Nothing. Nothing. To our enemies, you have nothing to give. You have nothing to offer. You have nothing to share but bitterness. We have beauty. We have light. We have goodness. We have determination. We have vision. We have strength. We built the world that we inhabit now, generation by generation.

[...]

We will defeat the forces of darkness and evil. And we will stand every day for what is true, what is beautiful, what is good. And we will achieve victory for our children, for our families, for our civilization, and for every patriot who stands with us. 

God bless you. God bless Turning Point. God bless Erika. God bless the Kirk family. God bless our heroes. And God bless the United States of America. Thank you.

ANNOUNCER: Please welcome to the stage, Susie Wiles.

For what it's worth, we would guess that Miller's reference to "the storm" is a shoutout to QAnon—a shoutout to the tortured souls who would shoot up pizza parlors based on crazy reports.

We apologize for the length of that excerpt. But judged by any pre-existing norm, it defies comprehension to think that the furious man who delivered that speech sits at the right hand of the father. 

So too, we would say, with respect to Megyn Kelly. As we noted yesterday, she has explained why Red American forces DO NOT CARE if Tom Homan really did accept a bribe in the form of a big bag of cash.

Judged by any traditional norm, Kelly's post took the form of a remarkable screed. It was Kelly's response to the report about Homan's possible acceptance of a large bag of cash, a matter which was first report by MSNBC.

Did Homan possibly accept a sack of cash? "We DO NOT CARE," Kelly had initially posted. 

Then, responding to MSNBC's report, she added this lengthy post:

KELLY (9/20/25): We don’t trust you. We don’t trust the work of your president’s DOJ. We don’t trust the work of your president’s FBI. 

You indicted our presidential candidate 4x with made-up BS charges trying to put him in jail for life. You changed laws so he could be civilly sued by a woman who didn’t even remember what year her alleged “rape” by him was. 

You let an AG who ran for office promising to “get Trump” try to bankrupt him on a claim so specious even the NY appellate court scoffed at it & had to reverse the damage award. 

One of yours killed Charlie and then you laughed at our pain, protested our vigils & said Charlie was to blame and in hell. You lied about the killer’s motives & said he was MAGA when you knew he wasn’t. You put us all in danger by not admitting the truth and then not relenting on the lies you tell about us. You cried endless tears for Jimmy Kimmel but none for Charlie.

You gleefully cancelled all of us for five+ years and danced when we suffered. You censored us & ruined careers of distinguished doctors & others who dared to say the truth during Covid and George Floyd. You cost our children years of learning during lockdowns and endangered them with deadly myocarditis by burying the risk disclosures and never apologized or owned it.

Your govt tried to strong arm Fox into firing Tucker bc of his J6 coverage and you said not a peep about the first amendment.

You changed Title IX with the stroke of a pen, without consent, and endangered and hurt our defenseless daughters. You sterilized and cut off the healthy body parts of children & want to keep doing it.

You lied about a near-vegetative president being fine with the nuclear codes. 

You (personally) had Doug Emhoff on as the scandal of his alleged woman abuse and cheating broke and you didn’t ask him ONE Q about it, then tried to tell us you care about women. 

You opened the border and let in ten+ million illegals who killed Laken Riley and 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray after they sexually assaulted her and threw her off a bridge, along with the countless other innocents they rape, murder and molest to this day.

So no, we don’t care what you say about Tom Homan. We do not trust you. We only care about defeating you.

"We only care about defeating you," Megyn Kelly said. 

Did Homan accept a big sack of cash? We DO NOT CARE, Kelly had already said. 

Presumably addressing Blue America (or its elites), she now referred to President Biden as "your president," not hers or that of her tribe. She said that "one of yours" killed Charlie Hurt, and that "you then laughed at our pain."

The sense of grievance was remarkably strong. "You danced when we suffered," the aggrieved multimillionaire said. 

In effect, this was a statement of tribal secession. Tied to Miller's astonishing speech, attention must be paid.

That said, attention is only tangentially being paid within the ranks of Blue America. It's astonishing to think that a person like Miller sits at the right hand of the father—but major organs in Blue America continue to avert their gaze as remarkable war cries keep emerging from within the ranks of "the storm."

Like Miller, Kelly offered a lengthy list of complaints—and her sense of grievance was strong.

In our view, quite a few of her grievances have a reasonable basis in fact. Some of her grievances strike us as remarkably silly, but others among them do not.

In the case of Miller, the problem is the undisguised madness. In Kelly's case, the problem isn't a lack of reasonable complaints. The problem is the massive mountain of self-pity, joined to the wholly unregulated whirlwind of anger within this part of the storm.

Tomorrow, we'll look at some of Kelly's grievances, some of which are unmistakably justified. As we do, we'll show you the ways our elites in Blue America keep whistling past the graveyard as they avert their gaze from the ways we Blues have worked to earn our way out.

Furious players like Miller and Kelly are part of a gathering storm. We Blues remain remarkably feckless and uncomprehending, or so it will say right here.

"I saw an interesting thing happen today." 

So Michael Corleone said—and within the context of the film, Batista was gone by that night.

"The sunshine of the prairie summer and fall months would come sifting down with healing and strength?"

That's what Sandburg said, near the end of Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years. We see few signs of healing here, given the state of our Blue cluelessness in the face of their furious storm.

This afternoon: We saw "the storm" as it blew through The Five

Tomorrow: "Ignorant / uneducated," one of our major stars said

WEDNESDAY: What did Jimmy Fallin mean?

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2025

Interpretation is hard: Did Al Gore ever say that he invented the Internet?

We'd say no, he did not.

While being interviewed by Wolf Blitzer, he made a remark which was widely paraphrased that way, though not until a few days later. He made the statement in question only once, and when people began to paraphrase it in the manner described, he instantly said that that wasn't what he had literally said, nor was it what he had meant.

Too late! At the time, he was a target of the mainstream press—the last person they could attack after their war against Bill Clinton had failed. (The impeachment of Clinton had failed only a few weeks earlier.)  

For years, Gore was assailed for having said that he "invented he Internet"—and yes, the word "invented" even slipped inside quotation marks, even though the pleasing word had never passed Gore's lips.

That's the way our mainstream press corps was functioning as of March 1999. Those of us in Blue America were so dumb that we widely let it go.

As a group, we the humans aren't enormously sharp, nor are we obsessively honest or fair. We tend to stick to reciting our tribal storylines. That leads us to an unresolved question:

What did Jimmy Fallin say last Monday night about the 22-year-old man who murdered the late Charlie Kirk?

What did Jimmy Fallin say? More to the point, what did he mean by what he said? What did he seem to mean?

It's easy to transcribe what he actually said. These are the words he said:

FALLIN (9/15/25): We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

Those are the words he actually said. It was a rather jumbled locution, which leads us to the ultimate question:

When he said those forty words, what did he seem to mean?

He plainly said that we'd "hit come new lows," but what "new lows" did he have in mind? His jumbled presentation makes his meaning a bit unclear, but let's pare his statement down to this:

"We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them..."

According to Fallin, "the MAGA gang" had been "desperately trying" to say that Tyler Robinson wasn't "one of them." To our ear, that formulation seemed to suggest that Robinson actually was "one of them"—that the new low involved the desperate attempts by the MAGA gang to pretend that he actually wasn't.

Could someone have interpreted that presentation differently? In a world where reams of major journalists insisted, for years, that Al Gore said he invented the Internet, almost any interpretation—almost any paraphrase of some remark—fits within the borders of what a tribal group can imagine.

As to what Fallin actually meant—as to what he may have thought he was saying—there's no perfect way to tell. But it's the job of a major public figure to make his meaning reasonably clear, especially about an important matter like this. 

At the very least, Fallin failed to do that last Monday night. Also, there was this:

Fallin's remark that night didn't come out of nowhere. Inevitably, an instant battleground had formed, with warring tribal groups presenting different claims about Robinson's motive and tribal membership. 

Some people on "the left" were explicitly saying or suggesting that Robinson hailed from the right of the MAGA movement. As we noted last Thursday, Professor Heather Cox Richardson had explicitly posted this on her widely read Substack over the weekend preceding Fallin's remarks:

RICHARDSON (9/13/25 or 9/14/25): [I]n fact, the alleged shooter was not someone on the left. The alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, is a young white man from a Republican, gun enthusiast family, who appears to have embraced the far right, disliking Kirk for being insufficiently radical.

Rather than grappling with reality, right-wing figures are using Kirk’s murder to prop up their fictional world. Briefly, they claimed Robinson had been “radicalized” in college. Then, when it turned out he had spent only a single semester at a liberal arts college before going to trade school, MAGA pivoted to attack those who allegedly had celebrated Kirk’s death on social media.

We have no idea why Professor Richardson would have made so explicit a claim. That said, there's little doubt about what she was asserting—and as far as we know, no particular evidence has ever emerged to show that her assessment was accurate.

The following Monday, along came Fallin! He seemed to offer a jumbled version of what the professor had said—or so it seemed to us.

Sad! Even as late as last night, America's two major tribes still couldn't agree on what Fallin had actually said—rather, on what he appeared to have meant.

We would guess that he might have thought, when he went on stage last Monday night. that Robinson actually was a figure of the right. To our ear, it sounded like that was most likely what he believed when he fashioned his statement.

Or then again, possibly not! That said, matters like these are important. Last night, in his opening monologue, Fallin apologized for a possible pair of lesser offenses. But last Monday, did he actually think, and mean to say, that Tyler Robinson was a figure of the right?

There's no perfect way to know. But it's obvious why members of the Red American tribe might think that's what he meant.

In the end, who was—who is—Tyler Robinson? What was the ideation behind the murder he committed?

At some point, the answer may become more clear. For now, we'd be inclined to assume the accuracy of something Amy Cox Barrett said, as reported by Mediaite last week:

That was horrific...I mean, for the father of two young children and a husband to be murdered in cold blood was a tragedy and certainly sobering for the nation.

And I think it is a sign of a culture that has– where political discourse has soured beyond control and something that we need to really pull back. I mean, obviously, well, I assume that the person who murdered Charlie Kirk was mentally ill. But nonetheless, you know, to create a culture in which political discourse can lead to political violence is unacceptable in the United States.

As far as we know, Robinson had never been diagnosed with a serious mental illness (with a serious "mental disorder"). But the fact that some such disorder hadn't been diagnosed doesn't mean that it didn't exist.

A tiny percentage of the two major tribes engage in murders of this type. The vast majority of the members of each tribe, Red and Blue, have never engaged in any such conduct.

Inevitably, Greg Gutfeld was playing the fool with respect to this question on the Fox News Channel last night. There's nothing that won't be said on programs like Gutfeld! and The Five—while the rest of the tribal stooges politely wait for their chance to agree.

What makes Gutfeld behave as he does? We'd call him "unrecognizable." We don't think we've ever seen a person that strange on TV.  Speaking as someone who taught fifth grade for seven years, we know he could do better.

(Also, everyone is now said to be gay on The Five and on the Gutfeld! show. They open the garbage can each night and that's what slithers out.)

That said, interpretation is hard! We humans aren't especially good at the practice, nor are we always obsessively honest. We do tend to be eager to repeat the memorized claims of our tribes.

Schorr (almost) gets it right: At Mediaite, Isaac Schorr seems to think that Fallin was faking last night. This is the headline on his opinion piece:

The Left Should Be Embarrassed by Jimmy Kimmel

In our view, Schorr is perhaps a bit too sure about what Fallin must have meant last Monday night. 

As Freud once insisted, Sometimes a jumbled presentation is just a jumbled presentation. Someone should maybe ask Fallin, at some point, what he actually believed about Tyler Robinson as of last Monday night.

Or then again, maybe not! Climate change and vaccine chaos may be more important, not to mention crazy flips concerning a former darling like Vladimir Putin, who is suddenly no longer great.

HEALING: "We are the storm," Stephen Miller declared!

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2025

Then, Megyn Kelly signed on: In fairness to Stephen Miller, he wasn't denouncing a group as amorphous—as far-ranging and hard to define—as "the left."

In the literal sense, he wasn't even talking about "the Democrat [sic] Party!" This is the start of what he said at Sunday's memorial service for the late Charlie Kirk:

MILLER (9/21/25): Hello, Turning Point. Hello, patriots. Hello to our fearless president, Donald J. Trump. 

And hello to millions of Americans all across this land who are gathered in sadness and sorrow to mourn Charlie Kirk, but also to dedicate ourselves to finishing his mission and achieving victory in his name.

[APPLAUSE] 

The day that Charlie died the angels wept. But those tears had been turned into fire in our hearts, and that fire burns with a righteous fury that our enemies cannot comprehend or understand. When I see Erika and her strength and her courage, I'm reminded of a famous expression:

The storm whispers to the warrior that you cannot withstand my strength. And the warrior whispers back, "I am the storm."

That "famous expression" seems to come from a novel, Wretched, by Jake Remington. We would assume that Miller's citation of "the storm" is a call to the forces of QAnon, though that assumption could always be wrong.

Already, Miller was assailing the people he described as "our enemies." As he continued, he offered this call to arms in the latest American war.

There was a certain sense of "us against them" as this angry man kept shouting and praising the ultimate greatness and of his great and good warrior tribe:

MILLER (continuing directly): Erika [Kirk] is the storm. We are the storm. And our enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion. Our lineage and our legacy hails back to Athens, to Rome, to Philadelphia, to Monticello. Our ancestors built the cities. They produced the art and architecture. They built the industry.

[...]

We will prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened. They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen in all of us because we stand for what is good, what is virtuous, what is noble. 

And to those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us, what do you have? You have nothing. You are nothing. You are wickedness. You are jealousy. You are envy. You are hatred. You are nothing. You can build nothing. You can produce nothing. You can create nothing.

We are the ones who build. We are the ones who create. We are the ones who lift up humanity. 

You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk. You have made him immortal. You have immortalized Charlie Kirk. And now millions will carry on his legacy. And we will devote the rest of our lives to finishing the causes for which Charlie gave his last measure of devotion. You cannot defeat us. You cannot slow us. You cannot stop us. You cannot deter us.

We will carry Charlie and Erika in our heart every single day and fight that much harder because of what you did to us. You have no idea the dragon you have awakened. You have no idea how determined we will be to save the civilization, to save the West, to save this republic, because our children are strong and our grandchildren will be strong. And our children's children's children will be strong.

And what will you leave behind? Nothing. Nothing. To our enemies, you have nothing to give. You have nothing to offer. You have nothing to share but bitterness. We have beauty. We have light. We have goodness. We have determination. We have vision. We have strength. We built the world that we inhabit now, generation by generation.

[...]

We will defeat the forces of darkness and evil. And we will stand every day for what is true, what is beautiful, what is good. And we will achieve victory for our children, for our families, for our civilization, and for every patriot who stands with us. God bless you. God bless Turning Point. God bless Erika. God bless the Kirk family. God bless our heroes. And God bless the United States of America. Thank you.

ANNOUNCER: Please welcome to the stage, Susie Wiles.

With that, the explicitly Christian memorial service moved on.

Having seemed to evoke QAnon, Miller also seemed to evoke Abraham Lincoln when he said that Charlie Kirk "gave his last measure of devotion," presumably in the fight against those who are wickedness, those who are jealousy, those who are hatred, those who are nothing. 

That said, here's what President Lincoln said this as that first civil war was about to start:

 We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.

That's what President Lincoln said. Last Sunday, a different spirit was driving a furious man as he denounced his American enemies and seemed to pray for a war.

That said, who was Miller denouncing this day? In the specific and literal sense, he was denouncing "those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us."

In the literal sense, that's who Miller was denouncing—but who gets to decide who belongs in that group? We'll guess "the storm" get to decide—the people who, or so Miller says, are the ones "who lift up humanity."

At any rate, so it went at the memorial service in which a nation was told, by other speakers, that it should align itself with Jesus Christ, a time-honored decision a person might choose to make.

(In his first book, Stride Toward Freedom, Dr. King repeatedly described his dedication to 
"the love ethic of Jesus." The book was Dr. King's account of his role in the Montgomery bus boycott.)

As the first civil war was nearing its end, the healing didn't come easy with a person like John Wilkes Booth. Last Sunday, it seemed that there might not be an impulse toward healing with people like Stephen Miller, a top adviser to President Trump.

The healing won't come easy—in fact, there may be no healing at all! A similar tone could clearly be heard when top podcaster Megyn Kelly explained why she said what she said about the fact that Tom Homan is alleged to have accepted a possible bribe in the form of a big bag of cash.

As we noted yesterday, that allegation was widely reported over the weekend. Given a chance to deny the claim that he had accepted a big bag of cash. Homan didn't deny it.

He didn't deny that he'd taken the cash! As we noted yesterday. Kelly's initial post said this:

We DO NOT CARE!

According to Kelly, she and the rest of her furious tribe don't care if Homan took the cash. Later, in a second post, Kelly explained why that is.

Her post was reported at Mediaite. Elsewhere, the biggest orgs in Blue America politely averted their gaze.

Why doesn't Megyn Kelly care? As reported by Alex Griffing, that is what Kelly said:

KELLY (9/20/25): One of yours killed Charlie and then you laughed at our pain, protested our vigils & said Charlie was to blame and in hell. You lied about the killer’s motives & said he was MAGA when you knew he wasn’t. You put us all in danger by not admitting the truth and then not relenting on the lies you tell about us. You cried endless tears for Jimmy Kimmel but none for Charlie.

You gleefully cancelled all of us for five+ years and danced when we suffered. You censored us & ruined careers of distinguished doctors & others who dared to say the truth during Covid and George Floyd. You cost our children years of learning during lockdowns and endangered them with deadly myocarditis by burying the risk disclosures and never apologized or owned it.

Your govt tried to strong arm Fox into firing Tucker bc of his J6 coverage and you said not a peep about the first amendment.

In fact, Kelly listed quite a few other grievances. You can read her X post here, but she ended by saying this:

So no, we don’t care what you say about Tom Homan. We do not trust you. We only care about defeating you.

"We only care about defeating you!" That's what Kelly now said. Indeed, even as she had raked in tens of millions of dollars, Kelly had seen rivers. There seems to be little end to her sense of grievance—or perhaps to her sense of entitlement.

Presumably, Megyn Kelly was speaking for millions of people—for millions within "the storm." She had listed some of the grievances those in that whirlwind have felt.

In our view, some of those grievances have a perfectly reasonable basis. Others quite plainly do not.

Some of those grievances have a sound basis! Over here in Blue America, we still insist on refusing to come to terms with that fairly obvious fact.

So some of those grievances have a sound basis? Tomorrow, we'll start to flesh out that assessment. But as for warfighters like Miller and Kelly, it seems to us that the real problem lies in a dangerous place:

It lies with the inability to regulate anger—with the inability to see that everyone doesn't see the world in the infallible way they do. It involves the inability to acknowledge the fact that their "enemies" may not be "evil"—that their "enemies" might not even be wrong when they state some assessment or fact.

Megyn Kelly seems to be part of the storm—and the human impulse to align with the storm is bred rather deep in the bone. Healing can be hard to achieve when the blood which flows through our veins starts blowing up a new storm.

By the way:

The New York Times is ignoring what Miller and Kelly have said. The major elites of our own Blue America don't seem to want to come to terms with this latest quite dangerous storm.

Tomorrow: Maddow interviews Harris