polecat news and views

Thursday, July 9, 2026

As President Donald Trump arrives in Turkey for the NATO summit, he is once again pressing allies on a familiar issue: fair burden-sharing in the alliance. His call for member nations to meet higher defense spending targets is not bluster but a measured response to long-standing imbalances that have left the United States carrying a disproportionate load. At the same time, his renewed interest in U.S. control of Greenland underscores a clear-eyed view of emerging threats in the Arctic, where geography matters more than diplomatic niceties.

NATO's collective defense commitment remains vital, yet the numbers tell a story of uneven effort. For years, many European members have fallen short of agreed spending goals, relying heavily on American resources for security. Trump's insistence that allies step up to at least 5 percent of GDP in defense investment, with urgency, aligns with the reality that threats from Russia and elsewhere require more than declarations. European leaders have begun increasing outlays in recent years, but progress has been incremental.

ALSO SEE: Trump Kicks Off NATO Summit With F-35 Bombshell and a Reality Check for Europe

No More Mr. Nice Guy: US Reportedly to Sharply Slash NATO Contributions Amid Europe Tensions

Expecting partners to contribute proportionally is reasonable, not radical. It strengthens the alliance by ensuring everyone has skin in the game, reducing the risk that the U.S. alone bears the brunt of deterrence. This approach has already yielded results. Allies have boosted commitments since Trump's previous terms, and continued pressure can accelerate that trend. A stronger, more self-reliant Europe benefits transatlantic security overall.

Free-riding weakens resolve when it matters most. Trump's stance encourages practical cooperation rather than perpetual dependence. Equally grounded is the strategic logic behind pursuing greater U.S. influence over Greenland. The island sits in a region of growing competition, with Russian and Chinese activity nearby raising legitimate concerns for Arctic routes, resources, and defense positioning.

Denmark administers Greenland today, but its vast territory offers unique advantages for monitoring and projecting power in the High North. Acquiring or securing long-term control through negotiation would enhance American defensive capabilities without relying solely on distant bases.

It is a forward-looking move, not expansionism for its own sake, but a recognition that geography shapes security in an era of renewed great-power rivalry. While establishment media and left-wing critics wring their hands over "disrupted alliances," Trump is addressing core asymmetries. The U.S. has invested heavily in NATO for decades, providing the backbone of its capabilities.

JUST IN: President Trump says he probably would NOT have attended the NATO Summit if it wasn't in Turkey — and is considering pulling MORE troops out of Europe"
We've invested TRILLIONS of dollars in NATO. Why?! To protect European countries and others, Canada, etc..."
"Why are we spending hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars, and they're not there for us? We've always been there for them!"

Asking for reciprocity and securing key terrain like Greenland are prudent steps, not retreats from commitment. They reflect a view that alliances thrive on mutual effort and realistic threat assessment, not one-sided guarantees. Trump's remarks in Ankara highlight these priorities as the summit unfolds. Allies will discuss spending pledges and regional challenges, including support for Ukraine. Progress on fair contributions could ease tensions and bolster deterrence.

On Greenland, the conversation may prove thornier, but dismissing the idea outright ignores the island's role in countering potential adversaries. In the end, effective leadership in foreign policy means confronting imbalances directly. Trump's emphasis on allies paying their share and exploring strategic assets like Greenland offers a straightforward path to a more balanced and secure posture.

It prioritizes American interests within a framework of strong partnerships, grounded in the facts of spending gaps and Arctic realities. This is the kind of pragmatic focus the moment demands.

https://redstate.com/brad-essex/2026/07/08/the-essex-files-trumps-straight-talk-at-nato-allies-must-step-up-and-greenland-matters-for-real-security-n2204073?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Trump Just Bought the ICE Facilities Newsom’s California Tried to Run Out of Town

Trump Just Bought the ICE Facilities Newsom’s California Tried to Run Out of Town

By Ben Smith

California Democrats spent years trying to strangle ICE detention in their state. Trump's DHS just spent $1.5 billion to make sure that doesn't work.

President Donald Trump's Department of Homeland Security has purchased two of the largest ICE detention facilities in California, securing more than 4,500 detention beds in a state where Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has made blocking immigration enforcement a signature political cause.

CoreCivic, the nation's largest private prison and detention operator, announced Monday that DHS completed the purchase on July 2 of the 2,560-bed California City Detention Facility and the 1,994-bed Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego. The California City facility sold for $732.6 million, while Otay Mesa sold for $739.2 million.

Both facilities are expected to remain open under existing ICE management contracts with CoreCivic, though the company said those contract terms could change now that the federal government owns the buildings. The California City contract expires in August 2027. The Otay Mesa contract expires in December 2029 and includes a five-year extension option.

DHS did not just rent more space in California. It bought the buildings.

A DHS spokesperson said the purchase came through funding provided by Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which gave ICE the ability to expand detention space as the administration moves ahead with mass deportations.

The spokesperson pointed directly at California’s sanctuary-state politics:

“Unlike in states like Florida and Oklahoma, ICE can not rely on local state and county partners for detention space in California. The state’s sanctuary politicians continue to push legislation to outlaw or make private prisons financially infeasible.”

California Democrats have spent years trying to squeeze ICE detention operations through state law and local pressure. California tried to push private detention operators out of the state, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the 2020 law from being applied to federal immigration detention facilities. State leaders later turned to monitoring and investigation laws involving the California Department of Justice and local health authorities.

DHS answered with ownership.

“With federal ownership of these detention centers which are crucial to ICE’s detention network on the west coast ICE retains the detention capacity needed to arrest, detain, and remove illegal aliens,” the DHS spokesperson said.

That puts Newsom and California Democrats in a bind. Their sanctuary agenda depends on making immigration enforcement slower, harder, and more expensive. Trump’s DHS just moved two of the state’s largest detention facilities onto federal ground.

CoreCivic said the sale will bring the company about $1.1 billion in net proceeds after taxes and transaction expenses, which it plans to use largely for debt repayment.

CoreCivic President and CEO Patrick Swindle called the two facilities “mission-critical” for the company’s government partner:

“We are pleased with the sales of these two mission-critical facilities for the Company’s government partner, which demonstrates the value of the Company’s underlying real estate portfolio, while reflecting our role as a long-term, flexible solutions provider to government.”

CoreCivic also said it has been in discussions with ICE about the possible sale of additional detention facilities. The company cautioned that those talks remain in various stages and may not result in more sales.

California currently has eight ICE detention facilities with a combined capacity of nearly 9,000 people. These two are the largest.

Democrats and immigration activists are already complaining that federal ownership could limit state and local oversight. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) said his visits to CoreCivic facilities have shown immigrants held in "unacceptable conditions" and vowed to keep "demanding transparency, accountability, and humane conditions." They spent years trying to choke off ICE detention space through state politics. DHS responded by buying the capacity outright.

Drama Queen Alex Padilla Says If He Were Outside a Home Depot, ICE Would Probably Detain Him

GEO Group CEO George Zoley, whose company is in similar discussions with ICE about selling facilities, explained the logic plainly during a May earnings call: Federal ownership means "more protections from unwarranted litigation" and limits how much states can interfere. "As some blue states are considering more active involvement in oversight of facilities," Zoley said, "I think the logical solution to much of that is federal ownership of the facilities."

The hypocrisy runs deeper than Sacramento. In Fresno, assistant U.S. attorney and city council candidate Rob Fuentes spent months publicly railing against ICE while quietly defending the federal government in immigration cases, including at least 124 cases in which he argued on ICE's behalf, according to a city council opponent. When fellow Democrats confronted him about it, Fuentes resigned, then claimed Trump "pushed him out." He was placed on administrative leave one day after his public criticisms of ICE became known. "I saved them the trouble and resigned," he said. It's a fitting snapshot of California's hypocritical anti-ICE politics: loud on the outside, complicit on the inside.

Newsom wanted California to keep fighting ICE from Sacramento. Trump just took the fight to the deed office.

https://redstate.com/ben-smith/2026/07/07/trump-just-bought-the-ice-facilities-newsoms-california-tried-to-run-out-of-town-n2204095?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Wednesday, July 8, 2026

Watch Scott Jennings Nuke the Dems' Narrative on Graham Platner in Less Than Two Minutes on CNN

Watch Scott Jennings Nuke the Dems' Narrative on Graham Platner in Less Than Two Minutes on CNN

Matt Vespa

Watch Scott Jennings Nuke the Dems' Narrative on Graham Platner in Less Than Two Minutes on CNN — *AP Photo/Ron Harris*

Is that really what some Democrats are saying now that Graham Platner’s Maine Senate bid has already fallen apart? They didn’t vet him—are we hitting Hunter Biden’s crack pipe? Scott Jennings made mincemeat of that narrative in less than two minutes:

JENNINGS: “The only thing I disagree with is when she said that he hadn’t been vetted.”
“No, he had been vetted!”
“All of the things that have been stated, it was all out in the public and people like Ro Khanna, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Tim Walz, the Bulwark, Pod Save America, all these people came together to overlook it all, to explain it all, to rationalize it all.”
“He was vetted. People knew all these things and a whole bunch of Democrats in Maine showed up and voted for him anyway. And a bunch of donors from around the country sent him money anyway.”
“I agree with Alyssa’s question. What changed? Why are you bailing on Graham Platner now?!”
“You already signed off on Nazi tattoo, a self-described communist, somebody who’s had rape fantasies, somebody who has been on a social media platform known as a playground for predators.”
“And on and on and on and on and on.”
“And the difference between this accuser and the previous one is simply this, she’s a liberal. It’s okay, I guess, for Democrats that their candidate’s assault conservatives.”
“But he broke into someone’s house. And apparently, according to her, raped her. And because her politics are correct, they can now believe it.”
“All of this whole thing is disgusting. But to say that they hadn’t vetted him, or that they didn’t know about all this is totally false.”
“They knew it and they signed up for it, and I don’t know why they’re backing away from this scumbag today when they had already signed off on all that other crazy behavior.”

Well said.

Democrats have until July 13 to settle this issue in Maine and remove Platner from the ballot. The clock is ticking.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2026/07/07/watch-scott-jennings-nuke-the-dems-narrative-on-graham-platner-in-less-than-two-minutes-on-cnn-n2678945?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Movie Review: Young Washington Introduces America to a Washington Most Don't Know About

Movie Review: Young Washington Introduces America to a Washington Most Don't Know About

By streiff

If you've followed my writing, you know that I am very much a fan of George Washington and a firm believer that he was THE indispensable man of the American project. His private life was beyond reproach; he was on the cutting edge of Virginia's gentry weaning themselves from betting their existence on the price Glasgow merchants would pay for tobacco. He is clearly out of his depth tactically in the early part of the American Revolution, but he thought big; he believed in his cause, and his moral and physical example held a battered Continental Army together when, by all rights, it should have melted away. His example of forbidding a military coup during the Newburgh Conspiracy and voluntarily vacating the presidency after two terms set the tone for both our military's approach to politics and the peaceful change of governments.

January 2, 1777. The Second Battle of Trenton and George Washington at the Top of His Game – RedState

January 3, 1777. The Battle of Princeton and Washington Owns General Cornwallis for the Second Time – RedState

June 28, 1778. Battle of Monmouth – RedState

Let's get started with the basics. The film was released by Angel Studios (full disclosure, I'm a donor to that studio). Angel Studios films have been reviewed several times on RedState (see Sound of Freedom; Cabrini, The Last Rodeo), and its television series, The Chosen, has a massive following.

Young Washington begins with the death of Augustine Washington in 1743, leaving 11-year-old George and his widowed mother, Mary, in genteel poverty. George is mentored and schooled by his half-brother Lawrence, as there is no money to send young George back to England for a proper education. This introduces a theme that runs through the rest of the movie. Washington's ambitions are stymied at every turn by his lack of proper social standing, which he overcomes by perseverance and native talent. He also learns a valuable life lesson about social status when the woman who was the love of his life, Sally Cary, becomes engaged to George Fairfax because money, status, and did I mention money and status?

The movie covers Washington's mission to deliver Governor Dinwiddie's demarche to the French commander at Fort LeBoeuf, Washington and Christopher Gist's epic midwinter journey from Fort LeBoeuf to Williamsburg. The battles at Fort Necessity and Braddock's Defeat are inspiring despite some AI slop making its way into the movie as four-wheeled cannons.

The cinematography captures the size and solitude of Colonial America. The characters are skillfully written so they don't apologize for the society they live in. No one rails against slavery, or classism, or gargles on-and-on about "stolen land." Those things exist and they simply "are." The characters are in their time, and that is refreshing.

British actor William Franklyn-Miller does a job that Americans just won't do and plays the title role. I think he pulls off the Young Washington of the film very well. He's believable as a "young man in a hurry" who is beginning to trust his instincts and judgment over those of his social superiors. His height and athleticism make him a good fit for the historical character. Mary-Louise Parker does a great job in portraying the anger and frustration of a woman who sees her social standing collapse after the death of her husband. Kelsey Grammar is a natural as Lord Fairfax. Ben Kingsley portrays an irascible Virginia Governor Robert Dinwiddie who warms to Washington's perseverance.

While some reviewers have described the movie as a biopic, it most assuredly is not. It is in the tradition of Hollywood films that are billed as "based on a novel by ..." Go watch the movie for what it is, and don't use it to write your American History term paper.

The way writer-director Jon Erwin ran history through the woodchipper took me aback until I discovered the Zen of chanting "It's only a movie...It's only a movie" and focused on the art, not the history. Some of the changes were understandable dramatic license, while others make no sense. Lawrence Washington was 14 years older than his half-brother George. In the movie, you get the impression that he's a lot older. He was also dead before the main events in the film. Throughout the events of the movie, George Washington was a close friend of the Fairfax family and had led surveying expeditions in the Shenandoah Valley. He was a tough and seasoned frontiersman. I think Erwin missed a critical element when he marries off Sally Cary (Mia Rodgers) to an arrogant, overbearing George Fairfax. The two Georges were actually close friends, and Washington remained deeply in love with Sally Cary Fairfax for the rest of his life; however, his sense of honor and propriety prevented him from ever causing a whiff of scandal, though he was a frequent guest of George and Sally Fairfax. Losing the love of your life to your best friend is arguably a greater tragedy than losing her to someone you hate.

While not a member of the upper crust of Virginia aristocracy, George was within spitting distance. Lawrence's marriage into the Fairfax family created a powerful patron for him. For instance, in 1749, at age 17, he was appointed as the official surveyor for Culpeper County, Virginia. Starting in 1750, he was the official surveyor for the Fairfax family. The Fairfax land grant, called the Northern Neck, covered all land between the Rappahannock and Potomac. This meant that every plot of land laid off in that county and the Northern Neck generated income for him. In terms of annual income, he was in the top fraction of one percent of all Virginians.

Frontiersman Christopher Gist, sort of Washington's Falstaff in the movie, was quite a stud in his own right and saved Washington's life at least twice on the return from Fort LeBoeuf. The French did not kill Gist at Fort Necessity; he died of smallpox in 1759. Captain James Mackay (who correctly pronounces the name "Makaigh"), who commanded the South Carolina Independent Company of the British Army at Fort Necessity, was not the arrogant ass depicted. He did have a conflict with Washington over precedence of rank and whether a colonial major outranked a regular army captain, but they worked through it. Mackay was not killed in that battle. He and Washington became close friends, and he died in Alexandria, VA, in 1785 en route from Georgia to visit his old comrade at Mount Vernon.

Washington was bedridden with dysentery when the Battle of the Monongahela (see Braddock At The Monongahela – RedState) took place. Nevertheless, he mounted his horse and played a pivotal role in preventing Braddock's entire army from being wiped out. There is no doubting his personal bravery. He had four bullets pass through his coat, and two horses shot out from under him. General Edward Braddock is just a series of tropes that make him a one-dimensional Colonel Blimp character that doesn't credit him for marching from Alexandria, VA to Pittsburgh, PA, across the Alleghenies; see July 8, 1755. Braddock at Camp 20. A reassessment. – RedState. By killing him off at the Battle of the Monongahela instead of having him linger for four days, they missed the chance to show Washington carrying Braddock from the battlefield and Braddock giving his pistol and leopard-skin saddle pad to Washington as gifts on his deathbed.

On the other hand, Ryan Begay plays the cynical "Half King" of the Iroquois Confederacy, Tanacharison, pitch-perfect. He doesn't like the French or the English, but he can go either way depending on the best interest of his Confederacy. I was hoping they'd show him washing his hands in the brains of French Ensign Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, but the creative team took a pass and reduced that epic act to a few seconds of tomahawk chops...no word if Elizabeth Warren is offended.

In short, this is the kind of film Hollywood used to make. The history is merely the jumping-off point for a quintessentially American tale of talent and grit overcoming social strictures and lack of money. Go see it. It shows a side of our first president that is deliberately blotted out by our current society in favor of demonizing him as a genocider and slave owner. It tells the true story of American greatness that resonates today: we are a nation where you have a huge say in your own destiny.

Go see it.

https://redstate.com/streiff/2026/07/06/movie-review-young-washington-reintroduces-a-washington-most-dont-know-about-n2204035?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Luna Now Demanding Patriot Front Probe - Democrats Strangely Incurious

Luna Now Demanding Patriot Front Probe - Democrats Strangely Incurious

By Ward Clark

*CREDIT: Joe Flood via Flickr Creative Commons*

Here at RedState, we've been covering in some detail the shadowy Patriot Front movement, that monolithically young, fit, quasi-uniformed and masked dudes who show up carrying signs, American flags, Confederate battle flags, and signs promoting white supremacy.

Since this group first popped up, though, the legacy media and Democrats (but I repeat myself) have been oddly incurious about these people. Not so on the other side of the aisle; at least, not any more. Now, Republican Representative Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) is calling for House Oversight to look into the Patriot Front's organization and funding.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) on Monday called for an investigation into the Patriot Front white nationalist group after its Independence Day rally and march across Washington, D.C.
“What I find odd about Patriot Front is how under Biden they were never investigated. Well funded. Never investigated,” Luna wrote in a post on the social platform X.
“FBI under Biden looked into Catholics instead. So, looks like @GOPoversight should do some digging,” she added, referring to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

It's unclear if Rep. Luna expects the FBI to look into this group now, although the FBI falls under the executive branch; they could certainly do such an investigation, which seems far more likely under President Trump than under the administration of Joe Biden.

Rep. Luna made her call right after the Patriot Front's 400-person march; if these people are, in fact, white supremacists, then these 400 people may represent the entire population of actual no-Schiff white supremacists in the United States, despite the left's claims that one can find a white supremacist under any flat rock.

Luna’s push for a probe follows Patriot Front’s 400-person march throughout the nation’s capital on Saturday. Many of the people in the march were masked and uniformed, and some were carrying the American flag upside down.
The group is known for its “flash demonstrations,” making it one of the United States’s most visible white supremacist groups, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

We aren't aware of any connection (yet) between the Patriot Front and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which has a predilection for funding groups like this.

Hundreds of Patriot Front Demonstrators Hit DC's July 4 Celebration and Minds Are Blown

The really baffling part about all this is, really, somewhat obvious. The left is fond of shouting about all the nation's ills, including bad weather, fleas, mosquitoes, and dandruff, being caused by the nefarious machinations of white supremacists. Now, here is a group that is openly preaching, at the least, white separatism, and the left is oddly subdued. There were no calls for investigations during the Biden administration. The FBI, as Rep. Luna notes, didn't look into the group. Joe Biden, well, he was scarcely aware of where he had stuck his fingers last, much less of any supposed white supremacist groups.

No, it took a conservative Republican to call for that. Curiouser and curiouser.

Look, here's the thing: Even if these people are an honest-to-gosh, detestable group of white racists, we have to note a few things: They didn't hurt anyone. They didn't loot any stores or burn anything. They didn't even litter. And their proclaimed views may be reprehensible, even so, the 1st Amendment protects their rights to proclaim them. Although it's a safe bet that's not why the Democrats seem so strangely incurious about this group.

https://redstate.com/wardclark/2026/07/06/luna-now-demanding-patriot-front-probe-democrats-strangely-incurious-n2204053?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Tuesday, July 7, 2026

That Was Fun — We Should Throw Another Party Like It Next Year

That Was Fun — We Should Throw Another Party Like It Next Year

Stephen Kruiser

Top O' the Briefing

Happy Monday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. The Sine Qua Non Sequitur is dealing with the aftermath of an unfortunate holiday weekend rhubarb pie incident.

We will start the week off with some lighthearted fare. There is a lot of great Independence Day content in the links today, so we'll just try to keep up the good vibes a while longer.

First, I hope everyone had a grand time in celebration of this glorious country's 250th birthday. It was hot, dry, and windy here, but the fireworks didn't light any mountains on fire. As far as I know, anyway. I was binge-watching fireworks displays from all over the country online and on television while waiting for the sun to go down here.

Friends and family who I talked to were all exuberant, but I only talked to the conservatives in my circle. I knew I wouldn't be in the mood to hear any negativity or qualified nonsense. Sarah wrote about some of the lefty idiots who couldn't bring themselves to fully celebrate the anniversary of the birth of the greatest country in history. They're tedious and sad people, of course. They're also the reason I think that we should extend the party.

The intensity and immenseness of freedom in the United States of America should get a month-long celebration. I mean, we have to suffer through Pride Month every June. Calling July "American Independence Month" would be an excellent palate cleanser.

President Trump kicked everything off in grand fashion last weekend with a magnificent speech at Mount Rushmore, which Robert wrote about:

Speaking at Mount Rushmore on Friday to commemorate the 250th anniversary of our nation, President Donald Trump sounded the alarm: “As we approach this magnificent anniversary, we see our American identity under a renewed attack.” He observed that “a generation after we fought and won the Cold War against the menace of communism, there is now a resurgence of the communist menace in our land, including from newcomers to our country who embrace ideas totally opposed to our way of life and our great success.”

Robert goes on to note that the speech triggered the Dems' flying monkeys in the mainstream media. They are heavily invested in making us believe that the commie resurgence in the United States isn't real. It's a replay of the 1950s, which leftists have never admitted that they were wrong about. Joe McCarthy was right, and he's still demonized in movies and academia.

The relentless threats to our freedoms and liberties from the left are reasons to celebrate every July 4 as if it were a milestone birthday. What we have is precious, fragile, and most definitely should not be taken for granted. After the wrecking ball Biden years, it's clear that we're only one or two unfortunate elections away from this experiment in freedom coming to a crashing halt. That's even more true now that American leftists are letting their commie freak flags fly.

Let's keep the America 250 levels of excitement going for 251, 252, and however many more birthdays we are blessed with. And let's take a serious look at that "American Independence Month" idea.

https://pjmedia.com/stephen-kruiser/2026/07/06/the-morning-briefing-that-was-fun-we-should-throw-another-party-like-it-next-year-n4954708/?utm_campaign=nl_pm&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pjmediambvip

How the Media is Gaslighting You About Trump Derangement Syndrome

How the Media is Gaslighting You About Trump Derangement Syndrome

Matt Margolis

The media has a formula whenever Trump Derangement Syndrome comes up, and it never changes. We all know exactly what it is and what it means. The media clearly knows it, too, but doesn't report on it accurately. Instead, they try to take the term and reframe it as an insult to those who use it, rather than to those the term is actually about.

The latest example came this week from the Buffalo News, in a story about a police union warning its own officers ahead of Saturday's "Freedom Rally" in Niagara Square, where City Hall is. The Buffalo Police Benevolent Association sent members a text message Thursday laying out the threat in blunt terms, according to a copy that the paper obtained.

"Officers working the Trump rally be aware of people with extreme TDS as they pose a threat to people trying to peacefully assemble and voice their right to free speech," the union told members. "This current city administration values the libtard ways more the (sic) celebrating this great nations (sic) 250th birthday."

I could write a whole article about this story on its own, and I was going to, until I read the following line in the story:

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a phrase used by Trump supporters about people who criticize the president.

Excuse me? There may be competing definitions of TDS, but it is not a universal term for anyone who simply criticizes President Trump.

This week alone gave two more examples of the same trick after President Donald Trump posted an AI-generated video of himself as a doctor treating celebrities for TDS, and HuffPost described it as simply a video "depicting himself as a doctor treating celebrities who have criticized him." Forbes framed it the same way: "TDS is a reference to 'Trump Derangement Syndrome,' an insult the president regularly uses to attack his most prominent critics."

Under that definition, disliking Trump's policies makes you a TDS victim. But, I’m sorry, it’s not simple. Over and over, these outlets treat TDS as a slur Trump supporters throw at anyone who disagrees with him. Rosie O'Donnell, who left the country over Trump over absurd claims she no longer felt safe in this country, has TDS. Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), who pardoned a child rapist rather than let Trump's immigration policies allow him to be deported, has TDS.

If you can healthily disagree with Trump’s policies, then you don’t have TDS. The problem is that so many on the left don’t. And they’ve let what amounts to basic policy disagreements with a politician overwhelm their entire existence, compelling them to do things most people would consider crazy.

ICYMI: Need Another Reason to Loathe Michelle Obama?

Manhattan-based psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert says Trump Derangement Syndrome is real, and he sees it in his office constantly. Alpert recently made the case on Fox News, on Harris Faulkner’s show, that what he sees goes far beyond garden-variety political dislike.

"This is a profound pathology, and I would even go so far to call it the defining pathology of our time," Alpert said.

Patients arrive fixated on the president, and it doesn't take long for it to surface. "People are obsessed with Trump, they're fixated, they're hyper-fixated on Trump," Alpert said, adding that it takes "probably five minutes" before their feelings about him dominate the session. The symptoms mirror clinical anxiety and obsessive-compulsive patterns. "They can't sleep, they feel traumatized by Mr. Trump, they feel restless," he said. One patient couldn't even enjoy a vacation. "I had one patient who said she couldn't enjoy a vacation because anytime she saw Trump in the news or on her device, she felt triggered," Alpert said.

And this just wasn’t happening under Joe Biden with people on the right. ”I had patients who hated Joe Biden, but it never rose to the point where they wanted him dead or would stay up at night, obsessing over Joe Biden the way that they do over Trump," he told Peter Doocy on The Sunday Briefing in November. "And that's where I think the pathology comes into play, if it's affecting your life that profoundly. And I would even go so far as to call this a mental health epidemic, and in some ways the defining pathology of the past decade."

Trump "dominates probably about three-quarters of the sessions,” Alpert holds with patients, he said, and his job is helping them separate "what's fact and what isn't." That includes talking patients down from conspiracy theories. "If you think that Trump is going to round up the gays and send them off to an island, or if you think that Trump is a Nazi — look, these things are not proven, they're not fact at all," Alpert said.

The media knows exactly what Trump Derangement Syndrome is, and it's pretending it’s just a slur used against anyone who disagrees with Trump in order to protect the people who have it.

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2026/07/04/how-the-media-is-gaslighting-you-about-trump-derangement-syndrome-n4954657?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm