THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2025
She refuses to say who she means: Tom Nichols isn't a doctor. He isn't a medical or psychological specialist.
Neither is Lawrence O'Donnell! In our view, O'Donnell has been the go-to guy, within the past month, for reactions to the ongoing conduct of President Trump. But was he possibly over his skies in this presentation on last evening's Last Word?
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Lashes Out at ‘Insane’ Trump in Blistering Rant Calling for His Removal: ‘Trump Has Lost His Mind!’
MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell went off on “insane” President Donald Trump in a blistering rant calling for his removal from office under the 25th Amendment.
Trump followed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s address to military leaders Tuesday morning with a lengthy speech that featured several bonkers moments and characteristic deviations—as well as a lot of talk about “enemies” within the United States.
On Wednesday night’s edition of MSNBC’s The Last Word, O’Donnell declared that Trump “has lost his mind” and repeatedly invoked the removal clause while suggesting Vice President JD Vance is getting ready to step in:
O'DONNELL: It sure looked like 25th Amendment day in the White House today, where Donald Trump was not publicly visible, and the vice president of the United States took to the microphone on day one of the government shutdown to basically assure the country, I guess, that he’s in charge. And very specifically and deliberately to draw attention to Donald Trump’s public insanity by actively seeking out an opportunity to talk publicly about Donald Trump’s manifestations of outright insanity.
"Outright insanity" is a rant, not a diagnosis. It involves no actual medical terms. Nor is O'Donnell qualified, in any known way, to talk about such medical issues with any kind of expertise or specialized knowledge.
To his credit, O'Donnell actually is a high-end broadcast journalist. He's also deeply experienced. As such. he's qualified to interview specialists with a greater degree of skill than the average Joe might display.
Years back, O'Donnell did interview high-ranking medical specialists about the possibility that President Trump was experiencing serious mental health issues. O'Donnell was one of the very few mainstream figures who was willing to ignore the unspoken prohibition of such conduct within the mainstream guild.
As far as we know, he hasn't done so lately. It's always possible that such specialists will no longer speak in public, given the degree of retribution this second term White House has now put on display.
As we've noted, we think O'Donnell has let his disgust for the sitting president cloud his judgment at times. In our view, Tom Nichols was a bit too coy, in the past day or two, as to what he was actually talking about. On last night's show, it seemed to us that O'Donnell broke the other way.
In this morning's report, we spoke about the way Nichols had seemed reluctant to say what he was talking about when he said the president "didn't seem OK"—when he eventually seemed to wonder, in his column for The Atlantic, if the sitting president was "sane."
We've often told you about a second refusal to speak. We've cited the way journalists at MSNBC refuse to say who they're talking about when they criticize inexcusable, destructive behavior by people on the Fox News Channel.
How bad are things at this point on the Fox News Channel—indeed, in the MAGA world altogether as its hidden secession proceeds? In his new column for the New York Times, David French quotes Ben Shapiro saying this to Ezra Klein:
Incompetence Isn’t an Upgrade Over D.E.I.
[...]
One of the most important distinctions in politics is the difference between people who are mainly motivated to vote against their opponents rather than for their allies. Their hatred or fear of their opponents is far more important than their embrace of any particular policy or ideology.
This concept, called “negative partisanship,” is spreading like a virus across American politics, and it’s reaching its culmination in Donald Trump’s Republican Party. Ben Shapiro, one of the most popular right-wing podcasters in America, recently spoke with my colleague Ezra Klein and described the modern G.O.P. perfectly.
“I think that on the right there is such a rage that has arisen,” he said, “at least on part of the right, that the tendency is to just rip things out by their roots, rather than trying to correct or even determining whether the thing can be corrected.”
Shapiro was describing a type of blind, nihilistic rage on the part of many on the MAGA right. It's a rage which may be built on legitimate complaints, but is characterized by its unregulated fury and sense of entitlement.
We know of no one who has been displaying that rage more promiscuously of late than the Fox News Channel's Greg Gutfeld. Pitifully, his furious conduct has suddenly been swinging in the direction of race-based insult, as opposed his more typical insults based on his fairly obvious, weirdly undisguised devotion to woman hatred.
Something is tragically wrong with that furious, 61-year-old Bay Area child—but over on MSNBC, there seems to exist a policy against the naming of names and against the quoting of poisonous remarks. As reported and transcribed by Mediaite, here was Mika Brzezinski on yesterday's Morning Joe:
‘No! No!’ Joe Scarborough Yells at Wife Mika Brzezinski During MSNBC Clash About Democrats ‘Whining’
[...]
"I also just don’t understand why we’re blaming the Democrats for Republicans lying at the highest levels of office. They have the biggest megaphone. They have TV networks that repeat the lies and say things on those networks with no consequence and the things they say are violent, okay? So they’re not only repeating the lies but adding to this coarseness and there’s no consequence to it, and we’re blaming the Democrats? We’re blaming the Democrats for this. What exactly are the Democrats supposed to do?"
We apologize for subjecting you to Mediaite's silly headlines. That said:
According to Mika, unnamed people on unnamed networks are "repeating lies." Also, they're making violent statements which contribute to the coarseness of our failing discourse.
Especially in light of some recent incidents, we'll guess that she was talking about Gutfeld's slithery, towel-snapping partner, Jesse Watters, and possibly Brian Kilmeade. But she wasn't willing to name any names, not even of the network in question.
By way of contrast:
On Fox, the children trash Joe and Mika all the time. The dumbest people in the history of American broadcast "news" routinely trash the people whose daily discussions of foreign affairs are the smartest conversations found anywhere around the "cable news" dial.
The flyweights trash Joe and Mika all the time! Judging from appearances, Joe and Mika aren't allowed to even report what is said on Fox.
What was Nichols talking about? Who was Mika talking about? What sorts of coarse and violent things have been said at the Fox News Channel?
Sorry, Charlie:
All across the Blue American firmament, journalists refuse to report and discuss what the flyweights are doing at Fox. To appearances, no one wants to tussle with Fox. It simply isn't done!
If this is accurate, it shows why the National Guard is needed in Portland.
ReplyDeleteReporter reveals black eye allegedly from Portland Antifa protester hitting her with flagpole: ‘Complete lawlessness’
https://nypost.com/2025/10/02/us-news/journalists-black-eye-from-antifa-attack-in-portland/
This incident involved a reporter being hit in the eye by the end of a flagpole. It is being investigated by police. It is unclear whether it was accidental or whether it even happened as described. There is no such thing as Antifa. David doesn't say, but both the reporter and the alleged protester are female. An incident like this, whether deliberate or accidental, does not suggest "Complete lawlessness". Flags on poles can be awkward to carry but are within anyone's first ammendment right to carry in protest. Or the reporter was hit in the face by her boyfriend and doesn't want to say so. As Somerby says, Anything is Possible.
DeleteSame article:
Delete"Police said they met with the victim and that the case is being investigated by its Major Crimes Unit."
Really, David? THIS is why the NG is needed in Portland?
All Portlandians become members of Antifa at birth. That saves the govt the expense of issuing membership cards.
DeleteThe next good faith comment posted by David in Cal will his first.
DeleteLet me make sure I got it straight, David: a person allegedly getting a black eye from a hit, possibly accidental, necessitates national guard deployment?
DeleteI'll take a walk to the site of the protests this weekend and report back. Somehow, the ravages of war haven't made it to my hood, up the hill a little.
No one cares whether Mika was talking about Gutfeld or someone else. Here is important news:
ReplyDelete"A federal judge ruled that President Donald Trump's administration violated the First Amendment rights of pro-Palestinian students who are in the country on student visas by attempting to deport them. But, analysts on Wednesday were more stunned by the language the judge used in his opinion than by the crimes the administration purportedly committed.
On Tuesday, Judge William G. Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that Secretary of State Marco Rubio's efforts to deport student visa holders because of their political views violated the students' free speech rights.
"This case—perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court—squarely presents the issue whether non-citizens lawfully present here in [the] United States actually have the same free speech rights as the rest of us," Young wrote in his opinion. "The Court answers this Constitutional question unequivocally ‘yes, they do.’ ‘No law’ means ‘no law.’ The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction, and it is not to be found in our history or jurisprudence.”
The judge included in his ruling a 12-page assessment of the president himself, saying that Trump routinely ignores the Constitution, laws, regulations and customs while governing but will readily and aggressively deploy the legal system against those who stand in his way.
Delete“Now that he is our duly elected President after a full and fair election, he not only enjoys broad immunity from any personal liability, he is prepared to deploy all the resources of the nation against obstruction,” Young wrote. “Daunting prospect, isn’t it?”
IANAL but this 12 page assessment seems improper. It shows that the judge has an animus toward Trump. S/he's not unbiased.
DeleteThe animus results from Trump’s arguments and actions in the brief. The judge’s response is not reflecting bias but making a judicial decision. Trump showed no respect for the law.
DeleteSomerby's main complaint seems to be that Nichols and Mika are not naming names. But if we know the names of those they are criticizing what have we gained?
ReplyDeleteI am glad O'Donnell is talking about Trump's obvious disability. Is it fair to criticize the press for not talking about it (as Somerby claims) and then turn around and criticize O'Donnell for talking about it but not being a shrink in addition to a news commentator? Very Catch-22ish!
You don't have to be a doctor to see the bruises on Trump's hand and his attempt to hide them, the cankles of swollen flesh in his lower legs, his inability to open his eyes to the same extent or to have them track together (strabismus), his inability to stand for an hour at that podium without leaning his weight on it and grasping it with both hands, his slips and falls going up stairs, his disorientation on that escalator, his slurred speech and wandering train of thought, and the utter and complete craziness of the things he says in all contexts.
When someone declines with dementia, the wife or husbands notices first, then other family members, then friends and work associates start wondering if something is wrong, asking the family about specific behaviors they've observed. Then there is a trip to the primary care physician, then specialists who do testing and tell the family what is going on, the etiology, treatment plan and prognosis (how long and how bad things will get). We are at the stage with Trump where his problems are obvious to all who are paying attention. The doctors and family surely know. The close associates know too. There is a plan to shield Trump and keep his grift going as long as possible, but he is going down fast, too fast to last until the end of his term.
The problem is not that Trump has not been diagnosed, but that the right wants to keep pretending he is OK without involving the left or the public in the plan for the nation after his inability to function demands removal. That is unacceptable, whether you are Mika or O'Donnell or Nichols or anyone else. Gutfeld is helping the right in its cover up. So is Somerby, to the extent that he keeps ignoring the next steps that need to be taken in favor of pointing fingers and blaming various members of the press, and all of blue America.
Demand the truth about Trump's health! Demand the release of the unredacted Epstein Files!
Delete"Still coming: The New York Times pretends to profile one of Gutfeld's willing enablers"
ReplyDeleteCongrats to Somerby on his upcoming Times profile!
I am so glad the American people are getting a good look at what elderly dementia is actually like via Trump's public appearances. Otherwise they might go on thinking Biden's normal aging is the face of dementia when it is what a healty old man is like.
ReplyDeleteYep.
DeleteTrump just does the same speech over and over, without understanding either the audience or the context. He spouts the same gobbledygook with the generals and foreign leaders as he does with his cult. His cult and cult-adjacents don't care; everyone else is bewildered.
ReplyDeleteGood point, Ilya, about Trump giving the same, rambling speech regardless of audience. But, there's nothing insane about doing that, because it works.
DeleteHowever IMO opinion, the bewildered people are mostly people who didn't listen to the speech. Maybe they heard a snippet or they heard someone else's summary. People who listen to the speech know what he's saying.
What are the salient points that we missed in his ramblings to the generals? I listened to enough of it to grasp that it was a meandering bit of nonsense. It's like grampa Simpson talking.
Delete