SATURDAY: Did Ossoff float an insinuation?

SATURDAY, AUGUST 22, 2026

Citizen Heilemann, please! Should Natalie Harp be subject to ridicule?  On balance, we'd say no. 

That said, we told you the ridicule was going to come. Starting yesterday afternoon, here's a sample, from Mediaite alone:   

Natalie Harp Seen Running Behind Trump’s Golf Cart in Newly Unearthed Photo 
(For full report, click here.)

Natalie Harp Once Claimed Trump Saved Her Life in Bizarre Resurfaced Clip 
(For full report, click here.)

FLASHBACK: Natalie Harp’s Election-Denial Interview With Karoline Leavitt Resurfaces 
(For full report, click here.)

Maggie Haberman Describes Natalie Harp as Trump’s ‘Binkie’  
(For full report, click here.)

All of a sudden, a lot of material is being resurfaced (unearthed). Harp's conduct is framed as "bizarre," and she's described as a "binkie."   

In that FLASHBACK report, readers learned that Harp told Leavitt that the 2020 election was fixed. Our questions:

Is there anyone in MAGA World who hasn't advanced such unfounded claims? 

Also, when did major orgs like the New York Times ever devote appropriate focus and space to the widespread existence of crazy claims made by the president himself? 

We Blues! Our stars are afraid of the sitting president (and of the Fox News Channel). On the other hand, we do enjoy mocking "the girl," just as it ever was.

Is some such gender politics involved in the ridicule being directed at Harp? Consider what Maggie Haberman said on CNN, as reported within that "Trump's binkie" dispatch.  

Haberman has done tons of outstanding work during the endless Trump years. With respect to that "binkie" remark, this is what she said:

I described her the other day as, you know, a binkie, for lack of a better way of putting it—a comfort blanket. There are men who have played that role for him too. One of them would be Boris Epstein, about whom—you know, he is legal adviser—of whom the president describes him as his psychiatrist and says sometimes you just want somebody to tell you everything is going to be okay. That is a lot of what the president values.    

For lack of a better way of putting it? To our ear, Haberman—she's done tons of good work—was possibly trying to slide away from an earlier unfortunate comment. (Everyone makes mistakes.)   

Possibly trying to slide away from an earlier gendered remark, she offered Boris Epstein as a male example of what she was talking about. We'll assume that she has never referred to him as a binkie—and you can be sure that, if someone ever did, no one would notice or care. 

(Epstein remains almost wholly unknown. Harp is becoming quite famous.)

With respect to going after "the girl," the most remarkable statement of all came early on, from a journalist who has been widely and correctly praised for her work on the Jeffrey Epstein matter. Good grief! Senator Ossoff delivered a speech, and Julie K. Brown said this:

Award-Winning Epstein Reporter Brands Natalie Harp the ‘Side Piece’ of Trump   

Celebrated journalist Julie K. Brown joined the gang of critics bashing President Donald Trump’s aide Natalie Harp on Wednesday by branding her the president’s “side piece.”

Brown—who won a series of awards for her reporting on dead sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein in The Miami Herald—made the accusation on X.  

[...]

“None of these people defending Trump’s side piece seemed to have any issue with Trump calling female reporters ‘piggy’ and ‘hag,'” Brown posted.   

Her accusation stands out, considering Brown is one of the more acclaimed journalists in America.

And so on from there. Brown—a fully justified feminist / humanist hero—described Harp as Trump's "side piece." Dear friends, riddle us this:

His side piece of what?  

(Everyone makes mistakes.)

Yesterday morning, John Heilemann swore, on Morning Joe, that Senator Ossoff wasn't making this same insinuation when he spoke in Atlanta last Sunday.  He misquoted Ossoff's words as a way of proving his point.

Please don't make us waste our time reviewing what Heilemann unwisely said. For the record, though, Ossoff has established himself as a genuine master of stinging rhetoric. In our view, his brilliantly crafted insinuation was blindingly obvious that day.   

Based on a mountain of reported evidence, Natalie Harp seems to have extremely limited judgment. We'll admit that we sympathize with the person who lost her father the way she did, after her trial by bone cancer.

She seems to have extremely limited judgment. That's grotesquely true of the president himself, but our Blue American tribunes are unwilling to say what they surely must know about him—and we do enjoy mocking "the girl."   

European literature began with a story of subjugation. The impulse has never left, and we Blues aren't always sharp enough to understand who we sometimes are. 

Monday: The rage of Steven Cheung

What the senator said: As many people have noted, Senator Ossoff has established himself as a genuine master of stinging rhetoric. It's a remarkably powerful tool. This is what he said:  

He doesn’t want to do the job. He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the emir of Qatar.   

That's astoundingly skillful rhetoric. For the record, we aren't even saying it's morally wrong.

That said, Walt Nauta snuck away on the catering truck too. Do the lovebirds share "their palace" with him?   

Within the boundaries of that rhetoric, we think you can see that they don't!