ILLNESS: It will only get worse, observers had said!

MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2026

Stone Age, here we come: Is this what we've been worried about in months and years of reports at this site? 

We refer to one part of what the president's niece recently said. We're forced to show you again:

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

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

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

What is the phrase to which we refer? Fellow citizens, gaze on our works and despair:

...which are only going to worsen 

The current, highly unusual situation is only going to get worse!

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's true. But when Bandy X. Lee, the Yale psychiatrist, edited a best-selling book all the way back in 2017, the medical specialists whose work she presented frequently said the same thing.  

For better or worse, those medical specialists have been banned from the public discourse. They've been banned in accord with a long-standing rule of the journalistic guild, according to which issues of mental health, but especially of mental illness, must never be included in any discussion of major political figures.

That was always a very good rule, until such time as it possibly wasn't. Along the way, it was sometimes honored in the breech. 

But even now, in the case of the sitting president, our sharpest global observers fall back on language like this

From Fareed Zakaria GPS, CNN

BEDDOES (4/5/26): I mean, the first thing to say is I was shocked hearing you read that [Truth Social] post as I was reading it myself. And it isI mean, and I use this word advisedly, it sounds unhinged. That that is the President of the United States is just profoundly shocking. And I think we've all become somewhat inured to statements by the president of the United States.

But even by his standards, that was very shocking. And I wasn't surprised when I looked on my phone just a few minutes ago to find several people asking whether this was actually real.  

The speaker was Zanny Minton Beddoes, editor-in-chief of The Economist. She's one of the sharpest observers of the war in Iran available to cable news viewers. 

But even yesterday, she fell back on the established weasel word for what seems perhaps to be happening right before our eyes. We single her out because she's so well-informed and so mentally sharp. 

The weasel word is this:  

Unhinged   

Unhinged! It's a way to keep your commentary in the safe zone, even as observers ask if this latest Truth Social post could possibly be real.  

We don't say this to criticize Beddoes. This is uniform press corps practice and, for better or worse, it isn't going to stop. 

(Beddoes was engaged in a conversation about Iran with Zakaria and Richard Haass. Neither of those highly qualified observers took things beyond that one word.)

Beddoes was referring to the now-famous Truth Social post the president offered yesterday morning, as Easter Sunday dawned. It extended a worrisome series of statements over the preceding five days, starting with something he said in his televised address last Wednesday night:   

Televised address, Wednesday, April 1, 2026

Thanks to the progress we’ve made, I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly. 

We’re going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong.

In a wandering, self-contradictory speech, that reference to "bringing them back to the Stone Ages" was the start of a series of worrisome statementsstatements so strange that major observers were falling back on "unhinged." As of yesterday morning, the president's latest Truth Social post was so strange that we saw several major observers seek safety in that dodge.   

This afternoon, we'll post the text of the president's unhinged statements, from the Stone Ages comment on. We want to create an historical record, presenting the text of these statements exactly as they were made.  

Speaking with Erin Burnett, the president's niece, a clinical therapist, described her uncle as someone "who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders."   

She said those disorders are going to worsen. She was speaking of something called "mental illness," but here's a very important question:

What kind of "illness" is that?


FRIDAY: He was some mother's darling...

FRIDAY, APRIL 3, 2026

Or so Hank Williams said: Is something "wrong" with President Trump? At this site, we would assume that it seems like there is. 

Next week, we'll be examining some of the basic concepts involved in this somewhat complex conceptual arena. Early this morning, as we pondered the possible dangers involved in the current state of affairs, we also thought of Hank Williams. 

The president's niece believes that her famous uncle is seriously unwell. She regards this as a very dangerous state of affairsthough she also takes us back to what she regards as the start of the story, when her uncle was two years old.

We've suggested that (serious) "mental illness" should be regarded as a deeply unfortunate illness. This morning, we found ourselves thinking of where this sort of thing can startand of these Hank Williams lyrics:

Tramp on the Street

[...]

He was some mother's darling, he was some mother's son.
Once he was fair and once he was young.
And some mother rocked him, her darling, to sleep
But they left him to die like a tramp on the street.

Some mother rocked him, her darling, to sleep? 

Mary Trump suggests that it actually wasn't that way inside her uncle's dysfunctional childhood home. She also says, sympathetically though only up to a point, that it went downhill from there.

That said, Williams was one of the greatest of our American voices, and you can hear him sing those lyrics simply by clicking this

(As you'll see if you click that link, you'll hear him do that as part of a radio show called "The Health and Happiness Show.")

In fact, "A Tramp on the Street" was a hymn. At this particular time in the Christian calendar, it may have a specific resonance for believing Christians.

In the larger sense, the song encourages us to know how to pity those who may be deeply afflicted in various ways. We strongly recommend that performance by one of this nation's most resonant voicesby a giant star who died at an early age29!a bit like his "tramp on the street."


HEALTH: He said the press is holding back...

FRIDAY, APRIL 3, 2026

...from a real description of President Trump: Ten minutes into his opening monologue, Lawrence O'Donnell delivered the S-bomb last night.  

He was speaking about the sitting president. Suddenly, he rendered this:

O'DONNELL (4/2/26): Donald Trump achieved minor celebrity, working at the bottom of the barrel in so-called reality TV, where his catchphrase was the worst thing you could hear in the workplace:  "You're fired." 

People's live have actually been destroyed by those words in real life. But a sociopath might think that saying those words is entertaining. 

So it went as the cable news press corps continued to flirt with the highly important question at hand:

Is it possible that something is wrong with the sitting president?   

On this sprawling campus, we've admired the fact that Lawrence O'Donnell has taken the president's conduct personally. He isn't going through the motions as he reviews the president's conductbut then, on the other hand, he isn't a medical specialist. 

By way of contrast, the president's niece actually is a doctorate wielding clinical therapist. As we've noted in the past, this is the way Mary L. Trump assessed her famous uncle in her 2020 best-seller, Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man:  

Prologue

[...]

None of the Trump siblings emerged unscathed from my grandfather’s sociopathy and my grandmother’s illnesses, both physical and psychological, but my uncle Donald and my father, Freddy, suffered more than the rest. In order to get a complete picture of Donald, his psychopathologies, and the meaning of his dysfunctional behavior, we need a thorough family history.

In the last three years, I’ve watched as countless pundits, armchair psychologists, and journalists have kept missing the mark, using phrases such as “malignant narcissism” and “narcissistic personality disorder” in an attempt to make sense of Donald’s often bizarre and self-defeating behavior. 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 gets us only 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 form 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. 

For our fullest presentation of the niece's account, you can just click here.   

In her book, Mary Trump repeatedly described the president's fatherher own grandfather, who she knew as a child and as an adultas "a high-functioning sociopath." On a narrow clinical basis, she described the sitting president in the manner shown above. 

Elsewhere in her book, she also gave a fuller account of the way her uncle was raised within a family she described as highly dysfunctional, She started with a terrible medical incident afflicting the president's mother when he was only two.

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's true, but so the niece assessed. 

As we noted yesterday, Mary Trump appeared on CNN in late February. At that time, she offered a briefer assessment of the current state of affairs. 

Speaking of her famous uncle, she described an "obvious" cognitive declinea cognitive decline layered atop decades of "serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen." 

Once again, so she assessed. Her assessments might be less than perfectly accuratebut given her medical background, we can say she likely has some basic idea of what she's talking about.  

Our journalistsand even our lawyersquite frequently probably don't! Despite that fact, our cable journalists and their guests continued to offer glancing assessments in the wake of last Thursday's televised "cabinet meeting," in which the sitting president engaged in several rambling discussions which seemed perhaps a bit strange.   

Some pundits seemed to suggest the presence of a cognitive decline. Others seemed to suggest the presence of some version of "mental illness," whatever that may be 

As we noted yesterday, one of the president's former lawyers has even said that the president is "clearly insane" (whatever that means). With that, we turn to an intriguing assessment which appeared last Thursday.

 Only a few hours had passed since the cabinet meeting occurred. At Mediaite, the headline atop a (fascinating) opinion piece by Colby Hall was now saying this:

We’ve Stopped Noticing That Trump’s Cabinet Meetings Are Completely Insane 

"Completely insane," the headline said. In fairness, the headline referred to the president's cabinet meetings, not to the president himself.  

Now for the rest of the story: 

According to The Wrap, Colby Hall co-founded Mediaite (with Dan Abrams) back in 2009. 

In recent months, Hall has produced valuable work at that site, where he's now managing editor.  That includes yesterday's (researched) essay, in which he describes the way viewers of the Fox News Channel have been kept in the dark about the president's declining approval numbers.

(Headline: Fox News Viewers Have No Clue Trump’s Approval Rating Has Cratered. Can someone explain why the New York Times and The Atlantic aren't producing carefully researched work of this same type?)  

Hall has produced some excellent work. (Nobody's work is perfect.) With that, we return to last Thursday's opinion piece, the one which had the words "completely insane" sitting right there in its headline. 

Like quite a few others, Hall had been struck by that day's "cabinet meeting"but what exactly was he saying in this instant reaction?   

We'll have to admit that we don't really know! But for starters, let us say this about that:  

The word "insane" doesn't appear at any point in the text of Hall's essay. Also, his essay mainly concerns the work of the mainstream press. More specifically, it seems to concern something his colleagues in the press are refusing or failing to do.   

According to Hall, what are our journalists failing or refusing to do? Even today, we can't exactly say.  Ironically, it seems to us that Hall himself refused or failed to explain what he meant in the course of his essay.

That said, we can tell you this:

When the rubber started to meet the road, Hall offered this account of the way the mainstream press corps covered Joe Biden's decline:

OPINION
We’ve Stopped Noticing That Trump’s Cabinet Meetings Are Completely Insane 

[...]

Compare Thursday to how the press covered Joe Biden’s decline—and I mean that as an observation, not a complaint, because that coverage was legitimate. Biden’s visible deterioration became a persistent, serious, ultimately determinative story. Reporters documented it carefully. Editors treated it as a genuine question about presidential capacity. The press built a vocabulary for that kind of breakdown and applied it with consistency.

We're not sure why Hall made those statements. It seems to us that the mainstream press was much less aggressive in its description of President Biden's (unfortunate) decline.

At any rate, Hall alleges that journalists were persistent and serious in their treatment of President Biden. He says it hasn't been like that with respect to President Trump. This is the way he continues:
[Continuing directly]
That same press watched Trump move from Iranian casualty counts to Sharpie unit economics to Venezuelan oil revenue to King Charles’s cancer to Gavin Newsom’s self-reported learning disability—in a single unbroken monologue, at a wartime cabinet meeting, in front of cameras—and filed it under: here’s what the president said today.

We have a vocabulary for one kind of presidential communication failure. We have decided, apparently, not to develop one for this kind [of presidential communication failure]. And that asymmetry is a choice, even when it doesn’t feel like one.

...The question is whether we are actually describing what we’re watching, or whether we’ve quietly shifted into translation mode—taking what happens in that room and rendering it into something that fits the templates we already have, because that’s easier and faster and the templates are what the traffic wants.

I think we’re translating. I think we’ve been translating for a while now. And the thing about translation is that something always gets lost—usually the part that would require us to stop and say, out loud, in a published sentence: this is not what this has ever looked like before, and we should probably name that.
What was Hall saying there? We have no clear idea. He seems to be saying that the press corps offered clear descriptions of President Biden's "deterioration," but is failing to describe something that's right before them in the case of President Trump.

He said the press corps lacks "a vocabulary" for the kind of "presidential communication failure" taking place with President Trump. That may be, he suggests, because "this isn't what [presidential communication] has ever looked like before."

Is the press corps holding something back? It almost seems like Hall himself is doing so, even as he voices this intriguing complaint!

For the record, there's a bit more to Hall's essay. This is the way he ends:
[Continuing directly]
Read the transcript. I mean actually read it, the whole thing, not the clips. Read it the way you’d read a document from a foreign government you were trying to understand. Ask yourself what you would write if you didn’t already have a template for it.

Then ask yourself why we don’t write that. 
According to Hall, there's something the press corps is failing or refusing to writebut he never quite says what it is! In closing, we ourselves would say this:

"Cognitive decline" is a human tragedy. So can be the various forms of (significant) "mental illness." It's also true that terrible dangers can be involved.

Is that medical language the vocabulary the press is avoiding in the case of President Trump? We don't know what Hall meant in this oddly fuzzy columnbut some extremely aggressive language was sitting up there in his headline, including the word "insane."

A final point:

"Mental illness" (and "cognitive decline") should not be wielded as an insult. In our view, it should be viewed sympathetically, as an unfortunate form of "illness" (as an unfortunate form of disease). 

The danger involved can be greatbut we should remember that we're dealing with an "illness." 

We say that if we want to be good, or if we want to win.

This afternoon: The vocabulary of Hank Williams ("He was some mother's son...")

THURSDAY: The president made one of his ludicrous claims!

THURSDAY, APRIL 2, 2026

It's the absolute truth, Gutfeld said: Is something wrong with President Trump? 

Yesterday, he did a drop-in at the Supreme Court. Following that, he placed a familiar crazy claim right there on Truth Social.

Headline included, Mediaite reports:

‘STUPID’: Trump Rages Over Birthright Citizenship After Leaving Supreme Court Early

President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to rage about birthright citizenship just moments after oral arguments concluded in the highly-anticipated Supreme Court case on the issue Wednesday.

“We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow ‘Birthright’ Citizenship! President DONALD J. TRUMP,” the president wrote on Truth Social. 

It was Trump’s first public comment on the case since he attended the beginning of oral arguments on Wednesday. He’s the first sitting president to attend oral arguments in a Supreme Court case and was there for roughly 80 minutes before leaving.

We're the only country that STUPID, the sitting president said. Simply put, the president loves this groaning misstatement. It's been corrected again and again and again, but he just continues to say it.

Wisely or otherwise, do other countries have birthright citizenship, the same way we do? As the Christian Science Monitor explains, virtually every country in North and South America has unrestricted birthright citizenship, just the way we do. 

That includes our immediate neighbors to the north and to the south. Under the fancy Latin heading Jus soli, the leading authority tattles

Jus soli

[...]

Canada: Subsection 3(2) of the Citizenship Act states that Canadian citizenship by birth in Canadaincluding Canadian airspace and territorial watersis granted to a child born in Canada even if neither parent was a Canadian citizen or permanent resident except if either parent was a diplomat, in service to a diplomat, or employed by an international agency of equal status to a diplomat. However, if neither parent was a diplomat, the nationality or immigration status of the parents does not matter. 

Mexico: Article 30 of the Constitution of Mexico states that persons born in Mexican territory are natural-born citizens of Mexico regardless of their parents' nationality. The definition of "territory" includes vessels/aircraft flagged to Mexico travelling in international waters or airspace. 

The leading authority provides a similar rundown for such South American countries as Argentina, Brazil and Chile (and on and on from there). Wisely or otherwise, virtually every country in the Americas has this unrestricted citizenship policy.

Having said that, so what? The president seems to prefer the bogus claim. 

(Does he possibly believe his false claim? We have no idea.)

At any rate, the president emerged from the hearing, then banged out his bogus claim. As if that wasn't bad enough, after that, along came The Five

Amazingly, the problem started with Jessica Tarlov, the program's twice-weekly liberal punching bag. During yesterday's second segment, she quoted the president's remark: 

TARLOV (4/1/26): ...and you know that today didn't go well because Donald Trump's Truth Social post, once he left, was, “We are the only country in the world stupid enough to allow birthright citizenship."  

He didn't say, "The government kicked butt." He didn't say, "We are going to win this thing." He said, basically, "I'm going to throw a temper tantrum." And a couple of

At that point, the interruption camein this case, from Greg Gutfeld. By the time the interruption had run its course, Gutfeld had told four million viewers that the president's statement was "the absolute truth"and there was indication that Tarlov disagreed. 

Let the interruption begin! To see the exchange, click here:

[Continuing directly from above
GUTFELD: That was a fact! Is that not a fact? It doesn't matter? 

TARLOV: No, it actually doesn't matter, because you know how he behaves when he's excited about something. You know

GUTFELD: So you're focusing on emotion and not the fact that's the absolute truth. 

Tarlov blustered a bit from there. She never said that the president's familiar claim is in fact crazily false.

In all honesty, Tarlov herself seemed to believe that the president's claim was accurate.  Gutfeld proceeded to tell four million souls that the president's crazy claim is "the absolute truth."

So it goes on the most-watched "cable news" show in our un-serious nation. We've never seen a major Blue American journalist comment on the imitation of life produced by the Fox News Channel in the form of this clown-car program.  

That happened during yesterday's second segment. During the third segment, the program gave birth to the latest plea by Jesse Watters. We'll touch on that prayer tomorrow.

At any rate, the president made one of his crazy clams. It's the absolute truth, Gutfeld said.

Tarlov never disagreed, and neither did anyone else. As a nation, the Blue with the Red, this is the clown car we've chosen. 


HEALTH: "Clearly insane," the lawyer said!

THURSDAY, APRIL 2, 2026

But also, the clinical therapist's tale: "Clearly insane," the lawyer said on Tuesday night, speaking to Jim Acosta

The lawyer used some startling language. We take you to Mediaite's report about the lawyer's remarks:

Ex-Trump Lawyer Calls President ‘Clearly Insane’: ‘I Think He’s Gone’

Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb called the president “clearly insane” and argued his last night social media posts only further prove he’s mentally “gone.”

Cobb joined Acosta on his podcast The Jim Acosta Show on Tuesday evening where he blasted his former client, arguing his “screeds” on Iran and more in the dead of night on Truth Social highlight “the level of his insanity and depravity.”

“It’s not a surprise that we’re in this much trouble. It’s not a surprise given the fact that the cabinet will not invoke the 25th Amendment for a man who’s clearly insane. And this war highlights that. And these screeds that come out nightly, at 2 a.m. or 4 a.m. or whatever time Trump decides to vent without oversight, it highlights the level of his insanity and depravity,” Cobb told Acosta. 

And so on from there. Cobb had made similar comments in the recent past, as we noted in yesterday morning's report

On Tuesday night, he went there again. 

Ty Cobb is a (highly regarded) lawyerbut he's not a medical specialist. Also, "insane" is not a clinical term, eye-catching though it may be.  

Is something wrong with President Trump? In the aftermath of last Thursday's televised "cabinet meeting," many observers have seemed to suggest that the answer is yes. 

As we've noted in the past few days, some of these observers seemed to be suggesting that the sitting president has experienced some sort of cognitive decline. Other observers seemed to be suggesting that the president may be afflicted with some version of "mental illness." 

On Tuesday, speaking with Acosta, Cobb took the latter route. But here we go again in this most restricted of all possible journalistic worlds: 

Cobb, a lawyer, isn't an experienced medical specialist. Because our major news orgs have all agreed that issues of mental health must be avoided in the political context, everyone else we've quoted in the past few days shares that same shortcoming. 

None of the observers we've cited have been medical specialists! But hold on:

In training, and within a limited range of clinical experience, Mary L. Trump, the president's niece, actually is such a specialist.

As we noted back on March 4, Mary Trump shared her current view of her uncle's health on Thursday evening, February 26. She spoke that evening with CNN's Erin Burnett, on Erin Burnett OutFront. 

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's right! But Mary Trump is a doctorate-wielding clinical therapist, and these are the views she expressed:

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

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

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

Rightly or possibly wrongly, so said Mary Trump.  She seemed to say that her uncle has experienced an obvious cognitive declinebut it isn't just any such decline. In the view of Mary Trump, it's a cognitive decline which is layered atop decades worth of "serious psychiatric disorders."

Those were her assessments. We repeat them because they were offered, not because they just have to be accurate.

Her assessments may be inaccurate, but there her assessments stand. With respect to our mainstream American discoursewith respect to the modern practice of American journalisma further fact should be noted at this time: 

Of all the people offering recent thoughts about the state of the president's health, Mary Trump is the only such observer who can be assumed to have some basic idea what she's talking about. 

She isn't a lawyer, and she isn't a pundit; she's an actual medical specialist! For that reason, it's almost amazing that CNN allowed her to go on the air and, however briefly, offer those medical assessments. 

For decades, American news orgs have all agreedissues of mental health must never be discussed with respect to major political figures. In our view, that was always a very good ruleuntil the time came when it wasn't.

Now we're engaged in a great Red-Blue civil war, along with a war in Iraq. Many observers seem to be concerned about the state of the president's health. They're concerned about the state of his cognition, perhaps about the possibility of underlying "mental disorders."

Rightly or wrongly, many people hold such concerns; many others don't. In our view, such matters are always a human tragedybut we think observers are almost surely right when they give voice to such concerns.

He's the most powerful person on the planet. In fairness, you are allowed to voice your opinion about his health at this perilous time--but you're only allowed to do so if you aren't a medical specialist. You're allowed to opine if there's no particular reason to think you know what you're talking about!

"Clearly insane," the lawyer saidbut he's only a (very capable) lawyer. In her 2020 best-selling book, Too Much and Never Enough, Mary Trump gave a detailed assessment of her uncle's (many and serious) apparent "psychopathologies." 

We've quoted what she said in that book again and again and again. You've read those assessments nowhere else. For better or worse, her assessments were uniformly disappeared by the high-end political press.

Six years later, here we are. For better or worse, our journalists continue to play an understandable but debilitating game:

Lawyers can thunder as much as they like. No medical specialists need apply!  

Cognitive decline is a human tragedy. So is (serious) "mental illness."

Is the world's most powerful person possibly tangled in some such dangerous state of affairs? For better or worse, our journalists know the rules of the game:

What might medical specialists think? Our high-end journalists all know this:

Such people must never be asked!

Tomorrow: His fascinating opinion piece carried this headline:

We’ve Stopped Noticing That Trump’s Cabinet Meetings Are Completely Insane


WEDNESDAY: "Unrecognizable" lands in the Times!

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 1, 2026

Also, return of the whales: For some reason, the New York Times republished the article in yesterday's print editions, right on page A2. 

Originally, it seems to have appeared all the way back on February 5. Yesterday morning, the report by Dan Barry was back! Headline included, it started like this:

TIMES INSIDER
How Do You Write About a Slur?

In reporting on the resurgence of a word long regarded as a slur, we faced a challenge: Could we write about the inappropriate term—employed recently by, among others, the president of the United States—without using it?

Even here, in this Times Insider piece exploring that challenge, we again face a difficult question. How do we write about writing about a word that should be avoided?

The word is “retarded,” and it has been understood to be a slur against people with intellectual disabilities for nearly two generations. This is not news.

What is news is that after a steady decline in its usage, following a national campaign and federal legislation, the word has made a defiant comeback in some circles, in part because of its use by people of prominence. 

We're not sure we would have regarded the word in question as "a slur." That said, we certainly would never have used the word in question as an insultand, like almost everyone else, we knew that other formulations were now regarded as less insulting, less hurtful.  

Based on three or four years of watching the Fox News Channel, we've also learned that certain people enjoy the practice of dishing such insults and using such words. A familiar name was there in the list when Barry named some recent users: 

(continuing directly)
In recent months the word has been resurrected by Elon Musk, the musician Kid Rock and the Fox News personality Greg Gutfeld. In a post on Truth Social in November, President Trump called Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota “seriously retarded,” and last month Harmeet K. Dhillon, the official overseeing the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, used “retards” in a social media post. I found this particularly striking, since the division’s responsibilities include protecting the rights of people with disabilities.

I have occasionally written about intellectual disabilities... I remember the word being bandied about in the schoolyards of my childhood in the early 1970s, particularly by bullies. Even then, many children avoided it; too hurtful. 

Even then, children in Iowa avoided the term. Today, on Fox, not so much!

Barry continued along from therebut sure enough, Greg Gutfeld was listed among the practitioners. Incredibly, Barry even ended up writing this about an earlier report about this same topic: 

We then sat down to write, only to grapple with a few challenges: When, how and how often should we use the word in a piece exploring its power to offend?

We did not want to simply paraphrase what Mr. Trump or Ms. Dhillon had written. We also quoted the podcaster Joe Rogan and Kid Rock to demonstrate the seemingly gleeful celebration of the word’s resurgence in some quarters. Mr. Rogan declared the word’s return “one of the great culture victories.” 

Say what? Joe Rogan once declared the word's resurgence to be “one of the great culture victories?" As a courtesy, we're going to assume that whatever it is he actually said, he had somehow been misunderstood. 

Sadly, also this: 

There are few ways to give offense which aren't actively relished by Gutfeld, who we regard as one the genuine "Unrecognizables" of the modern incel-adjacent, "conservative insult" era. 

For whatever reason, his desire to insult liberal women is one of the impulses he's sent out to satisfy each night at 10 o'clock Eastern. His gruesome loathing of women seems to be obviousand sure enough:

Last Friday night, during his handful of opening jokes, there he went again

GUTFELD (3/27/26): Finally, a forty-foot whale washed up on a New York beach. 

Don't worry, though. The whale's next-of-kin have already been notified.

PHOTO: The women of The View

AUDIENCE: Laughter, hooting, applause 

In recent weeks, we've told you it seemed that he had been told to surrender this pitiful nightly pleasure. Last Friday night, the pleasure was backand then, on Monday night, he decided to do it again:

GUTFELD (3/30/26): To aid the war effort in the gulf, the U.S. is considering sending SEAL Team 6. 

And if that doesn't work, they might even send in Whale Team 4.

PHOTO: The women of The View

AUDIENCE: Applause, cheering 

Suzanne Scott sends him out to do this every night. To our ear, the cheering rings out like a fire bell in the night. 

For the record, there is no insulting premise too stupid or too tired to please this kumquat's audience. In particular, there is no way to reassert male dominance that his tortured mind won't employ.

It isn't just the nightly return to braindead comparisons of the women of The View to horses and cows, to hippos and pigs, and to whales and generic "livestock." It's also the inane jokes about that time of the month, about the way women (and Asian-Americans) don't know how to drive, about how boring women's sports are, and even to pathetic displays like this

GUTFELD (3/30/26): Bill Maher is getting the Mark Twain Award for humor. 

Big deal! I'm getting the Shania Twain Award for being most likely to bang Shania Twain.

Sad! The next joke was the joke about the 40-foot whale.

(To his credit, he has stopped asking if Hunter Biden has started "banging" or "[BLEEP]ing" his mother, first lady Jill Biden. Back in 2024, we saw him go there three separate times. Producers let the word "banging" slither through, bleeped the more challenging term.)

He still likes to say that Taylor Swift is only a 5 or a 6. (Sad!) In such ways, a 61-year-old man who could apparently use some help is determined to set an ugly, stupid, braindead example for younger men of assorted ages. In fairness, the pay is good.

Final point:

High-end Blue America has completely accepted the braindead insults this fellow directs at women. Among our various tribal shortcomings, we Blues don't have a recognizable sexual politics, and we never have.


HEALTH: Is something wrong with the president's health?

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 1, 2026

Cognition v. "mental illness:" This morning, it has come to this, in this most rapidly changing of all possible worlds.  

The person whose health has been in question has granted an interview to The Telegraph's Connor Stringer. Dual headline included, this is the way the Stringer report begins: 

Trump interview: I am strongly considering pulling out of Nato
Exclusive: US president tells The Telegraph alliance is a ‘paper tiger’ and claims UK does not even have a navy

Donald Trump has told The Telegraph he is strongly considering pulling the United States out of Nato after it failed to join his war on Iran.

The US president labelled the alliance a “paper tiger” and said removing America from the defence treaty was now “beyond reconsideration”.

It is the strongest sign yet that the White House no longer regards Europe as a reliable defence partner following the rejection of Mr Trump’s demand that allies send warships to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Mr Trump was asked if he would reconsider the US’s membership of Nato after the conflict.

He replied: “Oh yes, I would say [it’s] beyond reconsideration. I was never swayed by Nato. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way.”

He and Vlad are on the same page, as is frequently true. As an aside, we'll mention the fact that there exists in the psychological literature a variety of writings about the so-called "Samson Syndrome"alternatively, "Samson's Complex"which you can find described if you simply google around.

At any rate there the president went, threatening to walk out on NATO. Meanwhile, is there some such thing as a British Navy? The leading authority on the subject still seems to think that some entity called "The Royal Navy" continues to exist

Royal Navy

The Royal Navy (RN) is the naval warfare force of the United Kingdom, responsible for defending the UK, the Crown Dependencies, and the Overseas Territories from naval attack or invasion. It is a component of His Majesty's Naval Service, and its officers hold their commissions from the King. 

[...]

The Royal Navy maintains a fleet of technologically sophisticated ships, submarines, and aircraft, including two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, four Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines (which carry the Trident strategic nuclear weapons), six Astute-class nuclear-powered attack submarines, six Type 45 guided missile destroyers, seven Type 23 frigates, eight mine-countermeasure vessels and twenty-six patrol vessels. As of December 2025, there are 63 active and commissioned ships (including submarines as well as one historic ship, HMS Victory) in the Royal Navy, plus 9 ships of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA). There are also four Point-class sealift ships from the Merchant Navy available to the RFA under a private finance initiative, while the civilian Marine Services operate auxiliary vessels which further support the Royal Navy in various capacities. The RFA replenishes Royal Navy warships at sea and, since 2024–25, provides the lead elements of the Royal Navy's amphibious warfare capabilities through its three Bay-class landing ship vessels. It also works as a force multiplier for the Royal Navy, often doing patrols that frigates used to do. However, most of the Royal Navy ships are not actually in a condition for deployment at sea due to lack of seaworthiness. That led the navy to borrow the German frigate Sachsen for a NATO mission in spring 2026. The situation was described by the media and politicians as a national embarrassment.

Presumably, the situation was described that way by some in the media and by some politicians. Aside from that, we're going to let the experts puzzle these matters outthe question of the Samson Syndrome, along with the challenged existence, and state of repair, of the Royal Navy itself. 

For today, NATO is a paper tiger, the sitting president has saidand he has said that Vladimir Putin knows that too. For that reason, the sitting president may pull the United States out of NATOsomething he apparently isn't legally entitled to do. 

How simpler things seemed to be last Thursday when, at a televised "cabinet meeting," the president rambled on, for almost five minutes, speaking about the price of a good Sharpie pen.

"It's insane. It's insane," S. E. Cupp said that evening on CNN. Other observers have discussed that day's five-minute ramble about the Sharpies, included MS NOW's Katy Tur and that same channel's Lawrence O'Donnell. 

O'Donnell discussed the president's Sharpie monologue on last Thursday evening's edition of The Last Word. You can watch the tape of O'Donnell's analysis by clicking this link to the videotape provided by the program's web site.

What did O'Donnell say that night? As you'll see if you click that link, the web site offers this two-part thumbnail: 

Lawrence: Trump failed his own self-administered cognitive test while Iran’s regime was watching
MS NOW’s Lawrence O’Donnell describes the Donald Trump the Iranian regime saw today: a wartime president fixated on cognitive tests, presidential pens and Sharpies while nodding off during a Cabinet meeting about war.

In his monologue that evening, O'Donnell discussed the Sharpies too. But before he did, he discussed the president's latest claim about the so-called cognitive tests he has long claimed that he just keeps "acing."  

Over the past six years, the president has repeatedly said that he has aced those challenging cognitive tests in a way few others have ever done. As transcribed by Tommy Christopher at Mediaite, here's part of what he said at last Thursday's cabinet meeting:

I’m the only president that ever took a cognitive test. I took it three times. It’s actually a very hard test for a lot of people. It wasn’t hard for me. But it’s a cognitive test. It starts off with an easy question. And by the time you get to the middle, it gets tougher. By the time you get to the end, very few people can answer those questions. They get very tough mathematical equations and things.

I took it three times. I aced it all three times in front of numerous doctors that I have no idea who they are. And I was told when I went in—they said Dr. Ronnie told me this. My current doctors are fantastic doctors. They said, “Well, if you take it—you know, it’s Walter Reed. It’s essentially a public hospital. And if you do badly, he’s probably going to get out.” But I aced it. I got them all right. And one doctor said, “I’ve never seen anybody get them all right. I’ve been doing the test for twenty years.”

Plainly, nothing can make the sitting president desist from making these claims!

As many others had done before him, O'Donnell ridiculed those claims on last Thursday's evening's program. He then proceeded to mock the president's lengthy discussion of Sharpies. 

As noted above, O'Donnell said the president had "failed his own cognitive test" in his pair of rambles at that day's "cabinet meeting." (We can't really tell you that O'Donnell's suggestion is wrong.)

Last night, at 10:10 p.m., O'Donnell seemed to take a different tack, describing the president as "a madman." (O'Donnell, speaking of the president's apparent current strategy in Iran: "That is how a madman wages war in the 21st century.") 

Out of that aggressive language an important question is born, along with an observation about our American journalism as it's currently practiced:

Back in the simpler days of last week, some observers seemed to be suggesting that the president is suffering some sort of cognitive challenge. On this campus, we have no way of knowing if that's true, but that's what some discussions seemed to suggest. 

Other discussions seemed to suggest something different. Those discussions seemed to suggest the presence of what might be called "mental illness." 

In those discussions, words like "insane" and "madman" began to surface again. Not long before, on March 19, MS NOW's Chris Hayes had said this:

"Every once in a while, you just have to remind yourself the president of the United States is a sociopath." 

That would seem to be a claim about (severe) "mental illness." Around that same time, one of the president's former lawyers had described him as "a demented narcissist" in yet another MS NOW appearance.

O'Donnell has often referred to the president as "delusional." Last night, he went with "madman," then alleged that the president had engaged in "pathological lying" again.

"Madman" isn't a clinical term. At present, neither is "sociopath." Having said that, we'll add his:

Based on the language they used, some of these observers seemed to be alleging some sort of cognitive shortfall. But based on the language other observers used, those observed seemed to be suggesting that the "madman / insane / sociopath" sitting president is afflicted with some version of (significant) "mental illness."

In the Babel of our flailing discourse, various suggestions have been voiced by an array of high-profile observers. We'll leave you today with this observation:

None of those people are medical specialists! Their claims and suggestions could always be accurate, but there's no obvious reason to assume that they actually know what they're talking about.

You've heard us say this before. Our news orgs have all signed on to a sacred pacta sacred pact which goes like this: 

We will never speak to the medical specialists who, at least as a matter of theory, might have some basic idea what they're talking about!

Is the president suffering a cognitive shortfall? Might he be afflicted with some substantial "mental illness?"

Our journalists and our attorneys bring no expertise to such questions. Meanwhile, what has one trained clinical therapist recently said about all this?  As we continue to seek the president's health, we return to that question tomorrow.

The president wants to exit NATO. Is some sort of medical problem possibly lurking there?

Tomorrow: The clinical therapist's tale

Friday: Colby Hall's intriguing opinion piece