WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2026
Isn't it phony to think so: They don't know how to report it, he said.
We're speaking of Lawrence O'Donnell. He said it last night at 10:05, one minute into his opening monologue on his nightly program, The Last Word.
We're willing to give him a B for effort, but what he said just isn't true.
You can see a partial tape of the monologue at the web site of The Last Word. Here's the headline at the site, along with the first thing it shows O'Donnell saying:
Lawrence: What are Trump’s deranged social media posts if not evidence of insanity?
The American news media, understandably, has no idea how to cover a possibly insane president of the United States. That's movie stuff, an insane president.
The American news media has no idea how to cover a president who could be slipping into dementia, as Donald Trump's father did. That headline basically speaks for itself. Below it, you see the way O'Donnell's monologue began.
That headline basically speaks for itself. Below it, you see the way the (partial) videotape of the monologue begins.
What O'Donnell says there is of course absurdly inaccurate. The American news media, including all the other anchors on MS NOW, do in fact know the basic way to cover any topic.
How do you cover any topic? This is what you do:
You interview carefully selected specialists in the given field. In this case, that would mean interviewing carefully selected medical specialists concerning the (fairly obvious) possibility that President Trump 1) is mentally ill in some serious way, or 2) is experiencing some serious degree of cognitive decline.
Perhaps at the direction of MS NOW executives, Lawrence wasn't being truthful as he started last night. In fact, everyone in the media knows how to cover those possibilities, but they've all agreed that they won't ever do it. That includes Wallace and Melber and Hayes and Psaki, the anchors whose programs preceded O'Donnell's on MS NOW last night.
We've shown you where the videotape at the Last Word web site starts. By clicking here, you can see the way the fuller monologue actually started.
The monologue about this topic actually started like this:
O'DONNELL (9/8/26): The corruption and lawbreaking in the Trump regime is on a scale far beyond what we have ever seen before in American history.
But 50 or 100 or two 200 years from now, the story that future historians will no doubt be fascinated by and drawn to more than any other Trump regime story...will probably be what appears to those historians to be the insanity of Donald Trump.
The American news media, understandably, has no idea how to cover a possibly insane president of the United States. That's movie stuff, an insane president.
The American news media has no idea how to cover a president who could be slipping into dementia, as Donald Trump's father did.
That's the fuller way he began. You'll note the convoluted language, in which he simply speculates about what someone else will probably say way off in the future.
You'll also note that, in Lawrence's assessment, even our historians will be taking a dive on this topic for at least the next fifty years. For the record, that's the way today's historians have behaved with respect to many basic parts of the political and journalistic history of the past forty years.
Again, you can watch the entire monologue about the possible insanity simply by clicking here, then by continuing to click. But make no mistake about the corruption:
Something resembling a type of corruption is also found all through "the American news media"—all through the orgs which won't report or discuss the astonishing possibility which is staring us all in the face.
"Understandably," their bosses don't want their news orgs to get sued. The anchors and the reporters enjoy their status and their frequently rather large salaries.
The New York Times isn't reporting the presidential meltdown O'Donnell went on to describe. Quite weirdly, no one at Mediaite has posted the remarkable but fairly obvious assessments Lawrence went on to make.
Everyone is running from this. Lawrence continues to try.
Also this: Lawrence mentioned "Natalie Harp" six times. We're sorry, but she isn't the story here.
To his credit, O'Donnell is trying harder than all the rest with respect to this fairly obvious state of affairs.
The others have agreed to take a dive. That includes the historians.
Somerby is correct.
ReplyDeleteThe media should have been calling Republicans fascists since 1983 at the latest.
O'Donnell needs to mention Jeffrey Epstein 10 times for every mention of Natalie Harp.
ReplyDeleteWhile Natalie Harp sucks up the oxygen today, this little news nugget explains why Donnie Depends is in no hurry to end the miasma he and Binnie started:
Deletehttps://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/09/trump-oil-gas-holdings-iran-war.html
"You interview carefully selected specialists in the given field. In this case, that would mean interviewing carefully selected medical specialists concerning the (fairly obvious) possibility that President Trump 1) is mentally ill in some serious way, or 2) is experiencing some serious degree of cognitive decline. "
ReplyDeleteSomerby has never explained what he means by "carefully selected" nor has he explained the need for "carefully selecting" an expert to discuss mental illness. This is very odd because ALL experts on mental illness are licensed professionals. The licensing means they have the requisite education, supervised practice, and adherence to the ethics of their field to be qualified to diagnose and treat individuals suspected of mental illness. The states license practitioners because it is difficult for an untrained person to evaluate the qualifications of a mental health specialist, and because treating someone without that expertise is dangerous to the patient and the public, given the impact of mental illness on behavior.
So, why is a carefully selected specialist needed when ALL licensed professionals are already certified to be competent in their field?
Is Somerby hinted that the carefully selected person must be selected for their political views? It sure sounds like it. But what should those views be? If Somerby is concerned about politics infecting judgment, he could specify a blind review in which the identifying info was removed from a case file and provided to an expert who doesn't know that they are evaluating the president. Chart review is frequently done in medicine and could be done to eliminate bias with regard to Trump.
So what is this odd language about? Somerby will not say. That makes me suspect that his proposal that the president's mental health be evaluated is just pro forma, intended for shock value or to provoke a negative reaction among right wingers. It seems to me that if Somerby were serious, the way he talks about evaluating Trump would be different. This "carefully selected" anything is how you introduce bias into an evaluation that should be free of political contamination.
All of the president's weird behavior is already being reported by the media -- how else would we know that it is occurring. What is missing is the medical diagnosis, which the press cannot make until and unless someone examines Trump and releases a diagnosis. This applies to Trump's physical problems too, his drooping mouth and inability to walk well for example. An examination is needed because there are multiple explanations and no one knows which applies in Trump's case. The press cannot just go around labeling the president without info, some source they can quote.
ReplyDeleteIt is bizarre that Somerby keeps calling for someone that would violate professional ethics in journalism. The press is not full of political operatives but people trying to report truth fairly and honestly. That seems to have never been on Somerby's radar. It makes him sound very foolish and biased himself.
Natalie Harp IS a story. It is now being reported that she and two other young beautiful aides on Trump's staff received $45K bonuses at Christmas time. That is inappropriate, but even more inappropriate is Trump's practice of hiring these young beautiful women for their looks. Civil service hiring is supposed to occur based on merit, not appearance. Women are not eye candy for old men. Trump has always done this in his private business life, and it was wrong then too. But this is government hiring, representing the people, and it needs to be done properly.
ReplyDeleteSexual assault is bad, but sexual harrassment, which is what happens when old men hire young women for their viewing pleasure, is also wrong. Letting Trump do wrong things because it is too tiring, frustrating, difficult, to force Trump to conform to hiring norms is wrong too. Somerby has his pet peeve about the press refusing to report things his way, well I have my pet peeve about women being used in the workplace to decorate offices and make men's fantasy lives pleasant, at the expense of the young men who were rejecting for those same positions and who have difficulty building careers in public service when the competition is about sex and not job content.
Natalie Harp is not beautiful.
DeleteTrump thinks she looks like his daughter Ivanka. So do the others he paid those big bonuses to.
DeleteHarp constantly feeds his rapacious ego with bullshit to convince him he is the greatest ever. She is a huge enabler of the bullshit gaslight mountain that is killing this country. She is a huge part of this crisis in governance.
DeleteA better use of Somerby's time, is to contact his Congressional representatives and ask them why they haven't subjected Trump to a physical and mental exam, and a release of the findings to the public.
ReplyDeleteWhich will only make it more obvious Trump's criminality and corruption isn't a Trump problem. It's a Republican Party problem.
Which is the last thing Somerby will ever admit.
That’s right - Somerby is pushing the right-wing talking point that there is an “astonishing possibility which is staring us all in the face” that Trump is both clinically insane and cognitively demented.
DeleteAnd we should pity Trump and have compassion and sympathy for him, etc, ad infinitum. Right? He blunts any criticism of Trump as a malevolent agent, ascribing all his behaviors and utterances to some nebulous “mental illness”, which we “ought” to pity, and. by focusing solely on Trump, he is giving the right wing, aka the Republican Party, cover to pretend the problem is just Trump and not the entire GOP. I can guarantee you that no Trump voter who is now disaffected from Trump is going to feel anything akin to pity for this man. They feel betrayal, anger, contempt, etc. These repeated calls for pity are foolish and insulting to all of us.
DeleteThe suggestion that we pity someone who suffers from a debilitating illness somehow constitutes an insult to you? Really?
DeleteI pity Natalie Harp.
DeleteIf Somerby wants to spend the remaining years of his existence urging us all to pity Donald fucking Trump, then that’s his choice. He could spend his remaining years on earth asking us to care about the victims of this man or the ones he’s hurting. But no, he wants to focus only on Donald snowflake Trump. Trump is 80 fucking years old, he’s had his whole life and he’s had his whole family and great wealth and so forth and so on to get him the help he supposedly needed. I don’t even know what kind of mental illness the man has. He has personality disorders. Maybe he’s demented now but that’s because he’s not taking care of himself and nobody around him gives a shit about that. And yes, it is insulting to the victims of this man who is destroying the country. Should Alex Pretti’s family have pity on Donald Trump for what his goons did? Etc. etc. I could provide you that quote once again from Mary Trump who says “no I do not pity Donald Trump knowing all of the damage he’s doing.” so there’s a mental health professional who says don’t pity this fucking loser.
DeleteWould you have pitied Adolf Hitler, DG
And I will reiterate, DG, that a sole focus on Donald Trump while ignoring the fact that the Republican Party is all in on Trump ignores the actual source of the problem. The GOP wants authoritarian/fascist government, and Trump gives it to them. Trump is a symptom and not the sole problem. And at this point, carping about the left or the liberals or the Democrats is only helping the GOP. Do you not see that?
DeleteThe mental illness cited by Somerby is not nebulous. He has hauled out the DSM several times to talk about malignant narcissism, psychopathy and similar very specific mental problems. Somerby has tended to avoid discussing Trump's dementia, which is a problem he thinks should be layed on top of whatever Mary Trump says Trump has wrong with him.
Deletelayered
DeleteI pity Hitler. The Allies drove him to suicide.
DeleteSomerby focuses on a certain subset of Trump's personalty traits (Somerby calls it a mental illness) BECAUSE it avoids talking about Trump's corruption and criminality and the culpability of the entire GOP. BECAUSE the personality traits are not actionable whereas the corruption and crimes are actionable.
DeleteIt is kind of like saying 85 years ago "You know I am starting to think Hitler is a little bit nutty, maybe we should have an expert weigh in on this, maybe form a committee" and everyone else replies "Sure, but he's killing millions of Jews, we should first focus on getting him out of power" and then responding with "Well, some of his ideas are valid, I mean he does make the trains run on time, and there are less immigrants and weirdos like gays, and maybe he really believes that Jews are evil, let's get him diagnosed and try offering him our pity, that'll straighten him out."
I'm out when Godwin's law comes into play.
DeleteBye.
DeleteI pity Godwin. He compulsively interrupts discussions, but he does it because he’s mentally ill.
DeleteO'Donnell focuses on Trump renaming New Mexico as a sign of insanity. That perhaps isn't the best example, especially if you consider his proposal as trolling instead of a sincere desire to change the name. Trolling is not a symptom of mental illness.
ReplyDeleteWhy has Somerby never proposed that Trump be removed due to incompetence? Why not due to corruption? These are both easier to prove than mental illness. It does not matter why Trump is removed as long as he is gone, no longer able to do things that hurt our nation. Why not propose that Trump be removed because he is being manipulated by billionaires and foreign interests (Netanyahu, Putin) instead of governing on behalf of voters and citizens? Why not remove Trump for violation of his oath of office, his failure to defend the Constitution and the laws of our nation?
It isn't the press at fault. It is the Congress, Trump's cabinet, and the will of those with the power to initiate and prosecute Article 25 or impeachment in Congress. When Congress is too busy tending to its own self-interests, or being blackmailed by Trump, then the culprits are not journalists and not carefully selected mental health professionals, but our elected officials. Somerby could be examining that, but he himself has never supported use of the processes inherent in our Constitution to impose a check on Trump's misbehavior. Somerby did not support the last several impeachments of Trump, and he did not support the prosecution of Trump for crimes while he was out of office, even though Trump was convicted in those trials.
Instead, Somerby urges the press to become involved in ways he knows they cannot do. That causes me to doubt Somerby's sincerity when he calls Trump insane, since Somerby is unwilling to support efforts to limit and remove Trump either. Somerby has found a catch to hide behind while he castigates everyone BUT Trump and calls for a remedy that cannot happen without destroying our free and independent press. But Somerby has also expressed a belief that democracy cannot be sustained because we humans are not up to the job, attacking the institutions that sustain democracy, including our free press which supports an educated voting populace.
I suspect Somerby is gleeful about the damage Trump is doing every day to our democracy, government, national resources and people. It furthers his desire for collapse of our democracy, so that it can be replaced by an authoritarian state, one that will punish minorities, create an underclass of women and non-citizens, and enact benefits for men like himself, along the lines of ancient Greek warrior culture (or something similar, perhaps rule by tech bros or red-pilled white men, who knows what JD Vance and Stephen Miller types are cooking up).
That leaves the main unanswered question -- how did Somerby and his bros get so bent?
Second-wave feminism bent us.
DeleteSo, Somerby desires the destruction of our “democracy, government, national resources, and people” so a replacement “authoritarian state” will institute a male-dominant culture that lords over women, minorities, and immigrants.
DeleteAnd you you’re able to infer this desire from a post moaning that the media won’t explore Trump’s mental issues?
Bob is a white male. What more need I say?
DeleteI am able to "infer" this from things Somerby has actually said over the years. And by the way, thank you for accurately summarizing what I think are Somerby's goals. On the other hand, I don't believe Somerby desires the destruction of our democracy so much as believing it is going to fall apart and make way for his preferred authoritarian state because we humans are not equipped to maintain our democracy.
DeleteMoaning about Trump's mental issues is Somerby's way of chastising the press (and blue America, whose job it is to supervise the press, according to Somerby).
Somerby actually makes a valid point. The media have clearly been engaged in “sanewashing” Trump.
ReplyDeleteTiedrich says this:
Delete"nobody saw Donny at Ground Zero, yet he’s been allowed to lie about it for literal decades. nobody questions it. the press can’t even be bothered to rouse from their slumbers. look at how the NY Times framed it. they don’t call it a disgraceful, fucked-up lie. they call it a ‘claim’ — one that’s ‘questionable and provocative.’"
Well, Somerby wouldn't call it a lie either. Perhaps Trump really believed he was there, Somerby muses.
Trump actually called into a news station during the 9/11 attack indicating he was nowhere near the WTC and then falsely boasted about how his building was now the tallest (it was not). Then he had a production crew videotape him a couple days later as he walked towards his building saying he did not know the condition of his building, solidifying his lie that he was "there" or that first responders carried him out.
DeleteTrump spits on the very patriotism that fuels his base, straining the loyalty of his true believers.
"You'll also note that, in Lawrence's assessment, even our historians will be taking a dive on this topic for at least the next fifty years."
ReplyDeleteIt didn't take 50 years for the press to report Ronald Reagan's Alzheimer's diagnosis. It was Nov 5, 1994. He left office Jan 20, 1989.
"Journalists openly questioned his fitness; a 1987 article in The New Republic bluntly asked, "Is Reagan Senile?" CBS News reporter Lesley Stahl also recalled a 1986 visit where she privately worried he seemed disengaged or "gonzo," though he later snapped out of it during the meeting. "
This idea that the press doesn't know how to report on a president's mental fitness is ridiculous in the light of how Reagan was treated by the press and Biden's treatment. If Somerby is correct that the press is sanewashing Trump, it is not because that's what they do to presidents, but because Trump is getting special treatment from at least some of the media, notably on the right.
Somerby never mentions the fact that Rachel Maddow has consistently explored Trump's mental fitness.
According to AI: "Yes, Rachel Maddow has repeatedly analyzed and openly questioned Donald Trump's mental fitness, cognitive abilities, and psychological behavior on her show. Rather than offering a formal clinical diagnosis, Maddow uses her platform to focus on what she frames as a clear trajectory of cognitive decline, erratic behavior, and intense emotional volatility."
This is Somerby straw man and it is fake.
Somerby has a right wing agenda to push, facts be damned.
DeleteOne reason why the press is not aggressive in reporting negative stories about Trump is that he sues them:
ReplyDelete"The New York Times flatly refused President Donald Trump’s demand for a retraction after he unleashed a furious attack on the newspaper and correspondent Maggie Haberman over reporting about his plans for the 25th anniversary of 9/11.
“We won’t be issuing a retraction,” the Times Communications team wrote to X. “This is another all too common example of the president lashing out at coverage he doesn’t like and belittling journalists who report the facts.”
The rebuke came after Trump used Truth Social Tuesday night to rail against New York Magazine coverage questioning his long-standing claims about visiting Ground Zero in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks and reporting on why he will commemorate Friday’s anniversary at the Pentagon rather than in New York.
“The Failing New York Magazine wrote a story that I wasn’t down at the World Trade Center after the Tragedy of September 11th, because nobody saw me there,” Trump wrote.
“Well, I don’t think I would be the first thing on anyone’s mind but, I was there, obviously not on the same day as the collapse, but shortly thereafter, with a large group of Construction Workers.”
Trump posted archival footage from Sept. 13, 2001, showing him discussing a visit to employees in lower Manhattan. He has repeatedly said he was near Ground Zero after the attacks and that his construction workers assisted recovery efforts. Responders who were at the site have said they do not remember seeing him there.
The president then turned his fire on Haberman over past reporting surrounding his decision to attend the Pentagon commemoration while Vice President JD Vance represents the administration in New York."
At some point journalists may wonder whether it is worth reporting, yet again, that the president lies, when it may attract hassles that are both expensive and upsetting to the press involved.
We the people should be holding Trump accountable for his petty attacks on the press. When we readers and voters do not react negatively toward Trump for this misbehavior, there is no cost to him for abusing his presidential power to enact revenge on those telling the truth about his ongoing misbehavior.
This imperviousness to shame is another reason why the Congress, Republicans, and Trump's cabinet must curb him, not everyday people who have no power, and the press which is harmed as a business when they tell the truth about Trump.
"The others have agreed to take a dive. That includes the historians."
ReplyDeleteThis is silly. Trump isn't history yet. We wish he were, but he isn't.
Is Somerby really saying that historians such as Heather Cox Richardson or Timothy Snyder are taking a dive? Somerby is making himself sound ridiculous today. Somerby won't read anything except The Iliad, but he is certain the historians are taking a dive on current events during Trump's term (or lifetime)? Trying to convince any of us here that Somerby has time to read anything after watching Fox 24/7 and glancing over at O'Donnell, is Somerby's own big lie and it fools no one, just as Trump fools no one.
Here is another report on Trump's neurological problems, found in the press, via Alternet:
ReplyDelete"On Wednesday, a widely cited psychologist sounded the alarm about “concerning” neurological symptoms President Donald Trump displayed during his 9/11 memorial speech a day earlier. According to Dr. John Garrison, the president’s “struggle with language production” and involuntary physical “glitches” could be signs of a serious medical condition.
Garrison notes that he’s seen ongoing evidence of Trump’s “steep neurological decline,” such as “slurring words, loss of motor control, and a possible seizure.” On Tuesday during his 9/11 speech, the president’s behavior suggested “continued problems with language production.” And as Garrison points out, the speech took place at 10:35 in the morning, when Trump “should be at his absolute freshest.”
To start off, Garrison plays a clip from Trump’s speech in which he speaks in a noticeably halting manner, as if he’s losing his breath every third word or can’t quite get out the sentence. According to Garrison, “For anybody who's seen President Trump speak before, this is highly unusual, this type of halting speech. What we are seeing is a clear struggle with language production.”
As Garrison elaborates, “He seemed to get confused, and then he really struggled to speak. There could be a wide variety of neurological reasons that someone can go through that. We've talked about the fact that he may have had a stroke at some point. We've talked about the possibility of some type of dementia. Parkinson's is also something that can cause these types of issues. But what we are clearly observing is something neurological. Changes like this are extremely significant. If this was just anybody giving a speech who was uncomfortable in front of people and wasn't used to giving speeches, of course, if they have halting speech, that can be a very normal way to give speeches. But it's not normal for President Trump. This is different.”
Garrison then moves on to Trump’s body language, saying, “I want you to look at his motor activity, specifically look at his arm and his torso.” And indeed, as the president stands listening to another speaker, his elbow makes a number of obvious twitches. “What we're noticing is a progression in his involuntary motor activity,” explains Garrison. “There are a number of possible explanations, including myoclonic activity, and there's even focal seizure activity that can cause behavior just like that.”
Over the course of Trump’s second term, there has been growing alarm at his mental and physical decline. Polls show that nearly 60 percent of Americans say he lacks the “mental sharpness” to serve as president, and doctors have regularly pointed to his behavior as evidence of some severe medical condition. These suspicions have not been alleviated by Trump’s unusually frequent hospital visits."
Don't say no one reports on this stuff.