UNDISGUISED: "We're going to keep the oil," he says!

TUESDAY, JANUARY 6, 2026

None of this has ever been hidden: We've long complimented the role played by David Ignatius in what's left of the national discourse. But in his new column for the Washington Post, he directs a blow right at this site! 

 As always, his column offers good, sound advice. Except when he lashes out with this:

Trump is riding high on Venezuela. It might not last.

[...]

The presidency is seductive. It leads even cautious politicians to overreach, and Trump is the opposite of cautious. He is seeking to reorder the world, at home and abroad, top to bottom. It’s easy to say that this kind of thinking is delusional, or narcissistic, or dictatorial. But Trump seems convinced that he’s on a roll, and most other countries—China and Russia are the notable exceptions—haven’t figured out a strategy for containing him.

It's easy to say that Trump is "delusional" (etc.)? To the sagacious Ignatius, we'd only say this:

Go ahead! Just give it a try!

Is the sitting president's recent conduct the product of what was once described as "mental illness?" (According to the leading authority, such terminology is falling out of favor.) 

Putting it a different way, is there any chance that the president's niece was right in the assessment she delivered in her 2020 best-seller, Too Much and Never Enough?

She's a doctorate-wielding clinical therapist. This is what she said:

MARY L. TRUMP (pages 12-13): I have no problem calling Donald a narcissist—he meets all nine criteria as outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)—but the label only gets us so far.

[...]

Does Donald have other symptoms we aren't aware of? Are there other disorders that might have as much or more explanatory power? Maybe. A case could be made that he also meets the criteria for antisocial personality disorder, which in its most severe forms is generally considered sociopathy but can also refer to chronic criminality, arrogance, and disregard for the rights of others...

The fact is, Donald’s pathologies are so complex and his behaviors so often inexplicable that coming up with an accurate and comprehensive diagnosis would require a full battery of psychological and neuropsychological tests that he’ll never sit for.

As she continued, she offered other possible clinical assessments.

Was it easy for her to say such things? (She wasn't speaking colloquially.) 

We'll guess that it probably wasn't. But even after her book became a major best-seller, she couldn't get anyone else to repeat, and then to discuss, the various assessments she'd offered. The scriveners of Blue America's high journalistic caste all agreed:

Such assessments must be disappeared within the American political discourse. 

According to current rules of the culture, "mental illness" can be discussed with respect to various types of violent street crime. But (clinical) mental health issues must never, ever be discussed with respect to major political figures. 

You aren't allowed to say such things! So it goes as Ignatius bats this kind of medical assessment away once again.

Do our journalists even believe in the existence of "mental illness?" If they do, they have almost uniformly agreed to pretend that they don't.

In the case pf President Trump, the apparent manifestations of what was once known as "mental illness" have never been disguised. That explains the topic selection we made yesterday, even after the sitting president had launched his war on Venezuela.

He had won the Battle of Caracas, with subsequent threats being directed at Cuba, Colombia and Denmark. But in yesterday's report at this site, we focused, not on the assault on Caracas, but on the president's latest crazy behavior, in which he suggested that Governor Walz had somehow arranged to have Melissa Hortman killed. 

Judged by any conventional metric, that Truth Social post by President Trump seemed to be manifestly insane. For that reason, major journalists in Blue America agreed that it had to be disappeared—that the lunatic Truth Social post mustn't be reported or discussed. 

The conduct was manifestly disordered; for that reason, it had to be disappeared. From there, we come to today's Morning Joe, with Joe Scarborough reporting what the president said to him, yesterday, during a telephone call.

What did the sitting president say? At Mediaite, David Gilmour provides the videotape from Morning Joe, and he transcribes Scarborough's report about what the president said.

To read Gilmour's report, you can click here. We strongly suggest that you read his report and that you watch all the tape he provides.

For ourselves, it went like this. 

As we listened to Scarborough's account of the president's comments, visions of psychopathologies (whatever they are) instantly danced in our heads:

SCARBOROUGH (1/6/26): When I pressed comparisons with America’s failed occupation of Iraq, the president’s response was very different. I asked him, I said, "Mr. President, when you say, quote, we’re going to run everything, that obviously causes deep concerns because of the disaster in Iraq."

The president’s response? "Joe, the difference between Iraq and this is that Bush didn’t keep the oil. We’re going to keep the oil."

And to underline his point, Trump said his comments were no longer on background, and he said: 

"In 2016, I said we should have kept the oil. It caused a lot of controversy. Well, we should have kept the oil," the president said, "and we’re going to rebuild their broken-down oil facilities, and this time we’re going to keep the oil."

It sounds like we're going to keep the oil! And sure enough:

Back then, that is what Trump said Bush did wrong after he conquered Iraq. He said Bush should have kept the oil.

Yesterday, he apparently told Scarborough, again and again, that we'll be keeping the oil this time.

At this site, we've outlined various (clinical) pathologies which have come to mind, within the past year, as we've listened to the peculiar claims emerging from President Trump. We've also offered this general overview:

As a general matter, "mental illness" is conceptually complex in a way which "physical illness" isn't. Presumably, there are medical specialists who could help explain some of the points of puzzlement we've attempted to lay out.

It's also true that serious "mental illness" (like serious cognitive decline) is always a human tragedy which robs the afflicted of his or her human capability. That said, do our journalists even believe that such "mental disorders" exist?

Soon, the commander will be moving on Greenland or maybe Colombia, plus Cuba is ready to fall. He clearly plans to "keep the oil" as the spoils of last weekend's conquest.

Different people have different ideas about last weekend's action. That said, very few people will fail to see the madness of the sitting president's post about Governor Walz.

Yesterday, we focused on that Truth Social post because it rips the curtain away from the sitting president's apparent mental state. The person who posted that lunatic suggestion about Tim Walz is the same person who will guide our nation's coming adventures.

Easy to be hard, Ignatius now says. In effect, it's the latest effort to disappear the state of affairs which has been sitting right there before us over a number of years.

The Clintons killed Jefrey Epstein, this madman instantly suggester or said back in 2019. Governor Walz assassinated his ally, Hortman, this same man has now suggested or said.

The madness there is undisguised, and this is the person who will be leading us forward. Please look over here instead, the upper end "press corps" implores.

It's too late to do anything about this—about this astonishing state of affairs. In truth, it was too late all along!

Remember:

Serious (clinical) "mental disorder" is always a human tragedy. When it afflicts a sitting president, it's also a source of great danger.

Tomorrow: He went to the island 28 times, the sitting president said