ILLNESS: "Who talks like this?" the gentleman said!

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 2026

We think we have his answer: Yesterday morning, President Trump offered this post on Truth Social:

Truth Social
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!

The president gave his blessing to "the great people of Iran," even as he threatened, during the day, to destroy all their bridges and all their power plants and to destroy their ancient civilization.

At the start of last evening's The Last Word, after the president had announced a fourteen day pause, Lawrence O'Donnell suggested that the president's threats had already destroyed "a whole civilization"our own. 

He said the mere fact of the past week's threats had created "a stain" on the way the United States is seen around the world. He said that stain will never be washed away. 

We don't know if that's right or that's wrong. 

Near the end of the previous hour, David Remnick had appeared on The Briefing with Jen Psaki

Remnick has been editor of The New Yorker ever since 1998.  He had a question to ask about the president's astonishing threats:  

"Who talks like this?" Remnick asked. 

He had asked a very good question. We'll guess that Remnick is aware of one (obvious) possible answer.

At this site, we feel fairly sure that we can answer his question! Because we're still weirdly under the weather, we'll offer the answer tomorrow.


ILLNESS: "He has gone insane," the lady said!

TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 2026

No one can say we weren't warned: Our most disabled president said this, early on Easter Sunday: 

Truth Details  

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
   

Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP

So he declared, on Truth Social. But then again, so what?

Yesterday afternoon, on the gong show known as The Five, Jesse Watters said this

WATTERS (4/7/26): I didn't think his [recent] tweets were any more bombastic than they usually are. And bombing power plants is not a war crime. 

How about obliterating every power plant, along with every bridge? Because that's what the sitting president has been promising.

As Fox's silliest child engaged in this messaging conduct, the chyron below him said this:   

"OPEN THE F***IN' STRAIT"  
LEFT MELTS DOWN OVER TRUMP'S TOUGH TALK ON IRAN 

Even Fox wouldn't display what the president actually said. To the producers of the nation's most-watched "cable news" program, the president's Easter Sunday message was simply the latest example of "owning the libs," in this case through a bit of "tough talk."   

Watters didn't see anything new, or anything strange, in a profane Easter Sunday rant which openly mocked the religion of Islam. Let's be sure to make this a holy, civilizational war! So the president urged. 

There's really nothing to say today. We just have to tremble and wait as the stated 8 p.m. deadline approaches.  

That said, one person had a different reaction to that "Open the Fuckin’ Strait" post.  That person was Marjorie Taylor Greene, the former Republican congresswoman.  

Last evening, on The Last Word, Lawrence O'Donnell built his opening monologue around Greene's reaction to the Easter morning post. To read the lady's lengthy post, you can just click here

As we said, Greene's post is lengthy. Headline included, this is the start of Mediaite's report:  

‘He Has Gone Insane!’ MTG Absolutely Bludgeons Trump in Fiery Reaction to President’s ‘Evil’ Threat Against Iran    

Former congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene called out President Donald Trump’s new threat against Iran in stunning fashion—claiming it shows “he has gone insane.”

Greene’s comments followed Trump’s Truth Social post in which he warned of attacks on Iran’s bridges and power plants if the Strait of Hormuz is not reopened by Tuesday.  

 [...]    

“On Easter morning, this is what President Trump posted,” Greene wrote, in a post on X. “Everyone in his administration that claims to be a Christian needs to fall on their knees and beg forgiveness from God and stop worshipping the President and intervene in Trump’s madness. I know all of you and him and he has gone insane, and all of you are complicit.”   

"He has gone insane," she said. Later, she said, "This is evil."   

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's true. Also, "insane" isn't a clinical medical term, and Greene isn't a medical specialist.  

In February, the president's niece, who does have a medical background, offered the latest warning. We're sorry to make you sit through this 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.  

This is "only going to worsen," she said. And this very day, here we are!

We'd been warned about this, again and again, dating to 2017. But over here in Blue America, the living was easy for journalistic elites. No one tried to start the discussion, and no one ever will.

Also, no one was willing to report and discuss the clowning which streams from the Fox News Channel. The silence of Blues was total. 

Meanwhile, this:

This morning, as we prepare to post, the president has posted this:

Truth Social

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!   

The pomposity is matched by the madness. It will all make sense on The Five

We must sit and wait to see what happens. No one can say we weren't warned!



MONDAY: We're breaking the promise we made this morning!

MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2026

On the bright side, we have an excuse: In this morning's report, we said we were going to post the text of the president recent unusual statements.

(This afternoon, in his press event, he added to the list.)

We're holding off for a day. Starting Saturday morning, we had an undesirable response to a prescribed pharmaceutical. As we regain full functioning, we'll wait for a brighter day.


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


TUESDAY: Is Adam Smith allowed to say that?

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026

What the congressman said: Adam Smith appeared as a guest on Fox News Sunday last weekend. 

We refer to Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), a Democrat from the state of Washington. In our view, he tends to be smart and sane. 

He serves as Ranking Member of (as top Democrat on) the House Armed Services Committee. It was in that capacity that he appeared on Fox News Sunday with its anchor, Shannon Bream, who has sometimes also been caught being both smart and sane. 

Bream isn't the standard Fox News Channel messenger person. On Sunday, she and Smith had a lengthy discussion about the current partial government shutdown.

In the main, we aren't concerned today with the shape of that longer discussion. Along the way, Smith surprised us with something he actually said. We join that discussion in progress:

BREAM (3/29/26): If you [Democrats] all want to change ICE policy, why not fund everyone as these bills were already agreed to? There was a bipartisan agreement on these bills. They hit this block in the Senate after they'd already been part of a bipartisan negotiation.

SMITH: Yes! They hit the block in the Senate after two American citizens were killed in Minneapolis, without any accountability!

BREAM: Which is a tragedy, but there are Americans tooRachel Morin, Jocelyn NungarayI mean, those are Americans who have been killed too.

SMITH: We have a legitimate debate to be had over how to do immigration enforcement. And by the way, I agree with Senator Cotton [an earlier guest]. The Biden administration did not do immigration enforcement the way it should have. We should have the border more secure than it was. But there's plenty of room between that policy, between the "radical left" policy you keep talking aboutyou know, open borders and all of thatand having masked, unidentifiable ICE agents show up, no probable cause, no due process, killing two people, warrantless searches of peoples' homes, detaining people without any due process. Can't we get somewhere in between in those two extremes? 

And so on from there. 

You're looking at part of a longer discussion. We're mainly concerned with these highlighted statements by Smith: 

The Biden administration did not do immigration enforcement the way it should have. We should have the border more secure than it was. 

We think we may have heard some major Democrat making some such statements before. But we're not totally sure that we have.

The handling of the southern border under President Biden remains the political gift which keeps on giving to purveyors of agitprop inside Silo Red. It's always there for Red American messengers to mention and fall back on. 

To the best of our knowledge, the handling of the southern border under President Biden remains unexplained to this day. Smith has at least acknowledged a fact what will seem to be obvious to tens of millions of voters: 

Absent some future explanation, the first three-plus years of border policy under President Biden are very hard to affirm. It seems to us that Smith had the right idea in admitting that this unexplained policy matter went wrong. 

A final point: 

Who were Rachel Morin and Jocelyn Nungaray?  Every Fox News Channel viewer will know. Some Blue Americans may not.

In our view, we Blues have promulgated some slippery evasions regarding the way they (and others) were sexually assaulted and murdered in recent years. Jocelyn Nungaray was only 12 years old at the time of her vicious killing by a pair of assailants. 

In our view, attention should have been paid by Blues as well as by Reds.

We Blues may be inclined to cling to our tribal dodges. It's a very human thing to do, but as we try to shape the future, we think it's a bad idea.


HEALTH: Tur was also concerned by the Sharpies!

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026

No specialists need apply: As we noted yesterday, the president held a televised "cabinet meeting" last Thursday. 

That evening, CNN's Erin Burnett was concerned. Her program, Erin Burnett OutFront, starts at 7 p.m. That evening, she started like this:  

BURNETT (3/26/26) Out front next, breaking news: 

Iran with a new threat against U.S. troops as Trump reportedly weighs new military options to seize Iranian land.

Also breaking: Are TSA lines about to finally get shorter? An announcement just in that could make a major difference at airports across the country tonight.

And why did President Trump spend five minutes talking about Sharpies today? Is this what Americans want? Let's go OUTFRONT. 

With respect to the cabinet meeting, he had her (concerned) with the Sharpies! Granted, it wasn't the first piece of breaking news that night. But the Sharpies were out front as Burnett opened her show. 

As we noted yesterday, Burnett called upon S. E. Cupp to help her discuss the five minutes the president spent on the Sharpies. Cupp was concerned about that matter too. As we noted yesterday, here's part of what she said: 

CUPP: Listen, the truth is, most voters are not watching these insane cabinet meetings. We have the pleasure of having to do that, and they are insane. 

And if you watch them, that's one, one of several moments that are just kind of nutso. If you watch them, you have to seriously question Trump's stability. 

"It's insane. It's insane," she later said. "It could get people killed." 

In fairness, it wasn't clear, at that later point, what Cupp was actually talking about. 

Was she talking about the president's conduct? Or was she talking about "the groveling, the flattery" of the cabinet members"the North Korea coded kind of attitude you have to have in this White House?" 

At that point, it wasn't clear what was insane. As we noted yesterday, the segment ended with this:

CUPP: He hasn't even told the American public why were in Iran, when we're going to get out, what to expect. He hasn't conditioned us to know what's about to happen. And he's rambling for four minutes about Sharpies. It's embarrassing. 

BURNETT: Four minutes and 56 seconds, to be exact. 

Linguistically, "embarrassing" seems less troubling than "insane." But along the way, Cupp had made this statement about the "nutso moments" from that day's televised event:

You have to seriously question Trump's stability. 

You have to (seriously) question the president's stability, Cupp had plainly said. But does anyone have a clear idea what she meant by that? 

During the program, Burnett played a brief chunk of videotape from the president's five-minute ramble. Later, People magazine presented a lengthy report about the ramble, including extensive excerpts of what the president had actually said.  

(Headline: Trump Rambles About Sharpie Pens for 5 Straight Minutes During High-Level Cabinet Meeting amid Iran War. To read that report, just click here. Lengthy quotations from Trump included!)

To appearances, Burnett was concerned about what she had seen when the president went on that extensive side trip. But please note what she and her producers did: 

They didn't book a medical specialist to discuss what the president's conduct might mean. Instead, they booked a political commentatorand when that commentator voiced concern about the president's "stability," Burnett made no attempt to ask her what she might mean. 

So it goes as our major journalists tiptoe on eggshells, pretending to discuss such points. Plainly, Burnett and Cupp thought there was something to be concerned about in the president's five-minute discussion of Sharpiesbut then again, so did MS NOW's Katy Tur.

Yesterday afternoon, Tur devoted a segment to the same topic on her two-hour afternoon program, Katy Tur Reports. In our view, Tur is thoroughly sharp. 

At Mediate, Alex Griffing published a detailed report about what Tur now said. Headline included, his report, with videotape included, started off like this

‘Is Donald Trump Well?’ MS NOW’s Katy Tur Does Deep Dive on President’s Mental Acuity 

MS NOW anchor Katy Tur asked her viewers on Monday if President Donald Trump is still mentally fit, taking a deep dive into polls showing a growing number of Americans are starting to ask the question.

“Is Donald Trump well? Is his head in the presidency? Does he have the mental acuity to lead this country?” Tur began to kick off the segment, adding:

"More people are starting to doubt that—beyond, of course, Democrats who have always doubted it. "

Soon, Tur was focusing on the Sharpies monologue. Specifically, she was asking about the president's "mental acuity," just as that headline said. 

Tur was concerned by that five-minute ramble too! In our view, that concern is perfectly reasonableis quite important, in fact.

That said, Tur didn't bring anyone on her show to evaluate what the president said. After playing extensive tape of his comments about the Sharpiesafter listing various claims by the president which had apparently turned out to be falseTur simply expressed her own concern in the manner shown: 

TUR (3/30/26): While a lot of this has always just been part of who Donald Trump is—a man who works the room, seeks attention, seeks applause—he’s now about to be 80 years old, and he’s launched a war that he does not seem to have a plan for. 

Based upon the highlighted statement, it seemed that Tur was voicing concern about a familiar type of cognitive decline. We refer to the type of decline which will often occurbut which often doesn't occurwhen people reached an advanced age.   

Might something be wrong with the sitting president? Is it possible that he is experiencing a cognitive decline of a fairly familiar type? Is there reason to question his stability, whatever that might? 

Also, is it possible that he's "insane," whatever that might mean? Was that merely colloquial speech on Cupp's part, or did Cupp mean something specific by that choice of wods? 

Quite a few journalists and news orgs have called attention to the apparent oddness of the president's ramble about Sharpies last week. As far as we know, none of them have interviewed medical specialists about their alleged points of concern. 

None have spoken to medical specialists about their concern! We'll leave you today with this question: 

How sincere a concern is that? 

On this sprawling campus, we're conducting a search for the president's health. That said, we're also conducting a maddening search for intelligent American journalism. 

Should journos be speaking to medical specialists? Or are interviews with other cable figures "close enough for journalistic work?"

Tomorrow: Cognitive decline v. "mental illness"

Still coming: The intriguing essay which carried this headline:
OPINION
We’ve Stopped Noticing That Trump’s Cabinet Meetings Are Completely Insane 

MONDAY: We didn't want to leave Friday behind!

MONDAY, MARCH 30, 2026

Truth beauty, beauty truth: "Truth is beauty, beauty truth?" Or was it the other way around? 

We couldn't quite remember! We've never ingested the poem in question, but that bromide has been banging around inside our heads over the past few days. 

Today, we finally googled it up. There Keats had gone again, at the end of a famous ode, addressing some ancient pottery:

Ode on a Grecian Urn 

[...]  

When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
 "Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all
 Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."

That's the way the poem ends. Aside from its famous bromide, we wouldn't necessarily recommend it. 

Truth is beauty, beauty truth? The misordered saying had been banging around in our heads because of what we got to write about on Friday afternoon, after spending some time down at the medical mission. 

We had taken two books along to combat the hours of sitting around. As we noted in Friday afternoon's report, the two books in our satchel were these: 

Mary L. Trump
Too Much and Never Enough 
Simon & Schuster, 2020
Francine Prose
Anne Frank: The Book, The Life, The Afterlife
HarperCollins, 2009

Until that very day, it hadn't occurred to us that there's a type of connection between those two books. The connection is lodged in the first thing Prose includes in her endlessly fascinating book. 

Prose starts with something John Berryman wrote about Anne Frank's extremely famous book way back in 1967:

I would call the subject of Anne Frank’s Diary even more mysterious and fundamental than St. Augustine’s, and describe it as the conversion of a child into a person…. 

In fact, each of the books we scanned that day involve "the conversion of a child into a person"or perhaps, the way that conversion may fail to occur in the case of the unfortunate child who is raised in a profoundly unhelpful way. 

Mary Trump's book describes the disordered upbringing of her uncle, starting at age 2 and a half. There is also a passing mention of the fact that certain kinds of (serious) "personality disorders" can be inheritedcan be passed along right there in the genes.

Mary Trump describes a tragically disordered upbringing. As Prose describes Anne Frank's upbringing, she describes something quite different. 

On Friday, we posted a pair of anecdotes from Prose's book. We didn't want to post on Saturday morningdidn't want to leave those captured moments behind.

Before the madness arrived, the one child was receiving what you'd hope every child would receive. In Mary Frank's detailed account, the other child was receiving a vastly different type of experience.

You can almost imagine that the results are there for all to see. Pity the child, we've said

We didn't want to post again on Saturday morning. We wanted to stay where we were.

We wanted to stay with that extremely famous, sacred childwith the developing, cherished young person before the madness arrived. Truth is beauty, beauty truth, Prose's book always seems to say.

HEALTH: We're launching a search for the president's health!

MONDAY, MARCH 30, 2026

And for what that familiar term means: Last Thursday afternoon, the sitting president convened one of his televised "cabinet meetings."  

We employ scare quotes there because these televised events are unlike the classic cabinet meetings of the American past. That evening, on CNN's Erin Burnett Outfront, Burnett asked S. E. Cupp to comment on this latest event.

Meanwhile, who is S. E. Supp? Burnett introduced her on this occasion as "former Republican strategist, now podcast and television host S. E. Cupp." 

The leading authority on Cupp's career as a political commentator offers this somewhat dated overview:  

S. E. Cupp 

Sarah Elizabeth Cupp (born February 23, 1979) is an American television host, political commentator, and writer. In August 2017, she began hosting S. E. Cupp: Unfiltered, a political panel show, co-hosted by Andrew Levy, on HLN and later CNN.

She is a former panelist on the CNN political debate show Crossfire, author of Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity and co-author of Why You're Wrong About the Right. She was a co-host of the MSNBC talk show The Cycle...

[...]  

Throughout her career, Cupp has described herself as a "mainstream conservative" and a supporter of "limited government, self-reliance, self-empowerment, lower taxes." ... 

Cupp was strongly critical of Donald Trump's [first term] presidency, saying "I don't know these Republicans [that support Trump]. This isn't what drew me to this party." She voted for Joe Biden in the 2020 United States presidential election. 

So it had gone with Cupp as of 2020. Now she was discussing the president's latest "cabinet meeting." In part, she offered this:

CUPP (3/26/26): Listen, the truth is, most voters are not watching these insane cabinet meetings. We have the pleasure of having to do that, and they are insane. 

And if you watch them, that's one, one of several moments that are just kind of nutso. If you watch them, you have to seriously question Trump's stability.

She described the televised events as "kind of nutso," insane. Most strikingly, she said the televised events raise serious questions about the sitting president's "stability."

That was one observer's instant assessment of the day's event. Later, Cupp added this commentary on the cabinet members, but also concerning the president himself:

CUPP: This is the cost of being in Trump's orbit. Pam Bondi unfurled a banner at DOJ with Trump's face on it to suck up to him. Rick Grenell put Trump's name on the Kennedy Center to suck up to him. He's now gone.

I mean, it's really humiliating. The groveling, the flattery, the North Korea coded kind of attitude you have to have in this White House and news breaking today, he's going to put his name on our money. I mean, this is just humiliating for a great nation like ours.

I just think we are looking increasingly like a North Korea, you know, like a hermit nation where you just have to tell the president what he wants to hear. I hear they're showing him videos of things blowing up in Iran. Like that's his security briefing. 

It's insane. It's insane. It could get people killed. But just at the basic level, this is not America as we know.

[...]

He hasn't even told the American public why were in Iran, when we're going to get out, what to expect. He hasn't conditioned us to know what's about to happen. And he's rambling for four minutes about Sharpies. It's embarrassing. 

BURNETT: Four minutes and 56 seconds, to be exact.

That was one (1) observer's assessment. For whatever it may be worth, the word "insane" kept sliding in as Cupp assessed that day's "North Korea coded" event. 

That said, also this:

That was Cupp's first mention of the Sharpies. Right at the start of the show, Burnett had beaten her to it.

Burnett had explicitly teased the president's discussion of the Sharpies in the CNN program's first minute. Later, she mentioned the Sharpies again as she teased the upcoming segment with Cupp:

("Why did President Trump spend nearly five minutes today talking about Sharpies while America is at war?")

Say what? Had the president really spent five minutes discussing Sharpies at the "cabinet meeting?" As shown above, Burnett timed the president's rambling discussion at "four minutes and 56 seconds, to be exact." 

Plainly, Burnett thought this discussion had been strange. Cupp seemed to think it was part of what made her question the president's "stability."

So it went inside much of Silo Blue in the wake of the "cabinet meeting." Cupp made liberal use od the word "insane." Earlier, a headline in Mediaite had used that same word, except a bit more so. 

The opinion piece at Mediate had been written by Colby Hall, one of the site's founding editors. The headline atop Hall's opinion piece said this:  

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

In the headline, the president's cabinet meetings were said to be completely insane. In the body of his piece, Hall quickly mentioned the Sharpies, along with a few other somewhat peculiar "subjects covered by the President of the United States at Thursday’s cabinet meeting."

The headline called the meeting insanecompletely insane at that. Somewhat oddly, the word "insane" doesn't appear in the body of Hall's essay. 

Still, an obvious question might have seemed to arise in Hall's piece. It seems like a very important question:

Was Hall suggesting that something may be wrong, in a serious, significant or dangerous way, with the president's "mental health?"

Was Hall suggesting something like that? We'll examine his essay tomorrow. For today, we'll close with this:

On a conceptual basis, physical illness is easy. On a conceptual basis, so-called "mental illness" is hard. 

Our struggling society, such as it is, operates with a very limited set of understandings about the nature of "mental illness." Also, our news orgs have long agreed that questions of mental health must never arise in discussions of major political figures.

That was always a very good ruleuntil the time came when it wasn't.

Is it possible that our sitting president is struggling with (serious) mental health issues? How well do we understand what that claim might even mean?

Today, we start down a long and winding road in pursuit of those plainly important questions. Is something wrong with the president's "stability"with the president's health? As a nation, shouldn't we possibly be trying to puzzle that out?

As a society, we're looking at this question through a glass extremely darkly. Like all people, the president deserves to be in good healthbut what is the actual situation on this very day?

Tomorrow: Hall seemed to voice a major complainta complaint about the press


SATURDAY: She had a question for President Trump!

SATURDAY, MARCH 28, 2026

We have a question for you: You'll have to forgive us for our minor activity today. 

We're looking ahead, starting Monday, to (as Lincoln had it) "a task greater than that which rested upon Washington." Also, how can a person hope to keep pace with the moral and intellectual squalor which now stirs the drink of this failing nation's imitation of a public discourse?

We speak as someone who watched the angry, fantastically bungled first segment of last night's Gutfeld! show. But also, as someone who watched the children pretend to question President Trump on Thursday's edition of The Five, in an imitation of an interview which lasted 46 minutes.

As we noted yesterday morning, the children's attention spans were notably short that day. As we noted, it fell to Jesse Watters to ask the session's fourth question. 

By now, attention spans were almost spent. This was the best he could do:

WATTERS (3/26/26): But let me ask you about Iran. You've kind of suggested that we'd knocked out Ayatollah Junior. Have we—and did the CIA tell you that Ayatollah Junior is gay? 

Is "Ayatollah Junior" gay? It seemed to be the only question the famous fellow could conjure. 

Question 6 came from Greg Gutfeld. Inevitably, it concerned himself

GUTFELD: Mr. President, let's shift onto some other topics. I'm debating whether to be serious or not serious. 

I'm gonna be not serious! 

[...] 

You know, you're doing the White House Correspondents Dinner for the first time, and you're gonna get a 10. Why wasn't I asked to do the roast? 

It was the best he could manage. (We think we've correctly transcribed the part about the president getting a 10.)

(We've edited out an interruption, in which the president asked if "Sleepy Joe" could have handled an interview session like this one. The children chuckled and agreed that he never could have done it!)

Lincoln headed off from Springfield, hoping to save the nation. As in The Sixth Sense, so too today:

Has the death of the nation already occurred, but we just don't know it yet? 

Special bonus question: Question 9 came from Dana Perino. By now, the charade was splayed out for all to see. This is what she asked

PERINO: Hi, it's Dana again, and I have a kind of pop culture question for you. 

So I'm new to New York, relatively speakingso, fifteen yearsand there's all these young people across America are watching Love Story, which is the story of JFK Jr. and Carolyn Bessette. And I'm curious: 

Did you know JFK Jr.? And do you have any nostalgia for the 90s? 

Other questions were even more pointless. Are these the death throes we've chosen?