Analysis: Here we go again! I thought that the Unselect Committee on J...

3y ago Nov 18, 2022 at 10:15 PM

Here we go again! I thought that the Unselect Committee on January 6th was a dead issue, especially with the record setting loss off Liz Chaney in the Great State of Wyoming, and likewise felt that the document hoax case, after reviewing the Clinton Socks Case & the Presidential Record Act, was dead, or at least dying fast. The Democrat Department of “Justice” had nothing, except Trump haters, so they just appointed a Special Prosecutor to go after me further. Disgraceful!

0:00 0:00

AI Analysis

Machine-generated analysis of the post above on 2026-03-20. Not written by the author of the post.

Danger Level

None

Narcissistic State

Vulnerable

Authorship

Self-Written

Intensity

65%

Trump's reaction to Jack Smith's special counsel appointment reveals a characteristic narcissistic injury response pattern. The post displays magical thinking—the belief that Liz Cheney's primary loss should have ended the J6 investigation, and that the Clinton Socks Case resolves the classified documents matter. This conflation of political outcomes with legal immunity is a recurring cognitive schema. The defensive cascade is textbook: denial (cases are "dead"), rationalization (legal precedents that don't apply), projection (motives attributed to "Trump haters"), and splitting (entire DOJ cast as partisan). The vulnerable narcissistic state is notable—rather than grandiose counter-attack, Trump sounds genuinely surprised and aggrieved that investigations continued despite what he perceived as favorable political signals. The "Here we go again!" opener frames this as persecution fatigue, a parasocial technique inviting followers to share his exhaustion with what he presents as endless, baseless attacks. The false equivalence with the Clinton Socks Case is particularly significant as a reality distortion—the cases involve fundamentally different legal questions—yet this framing became a sustained talking point. Longitudinally, this post sits within a cluster of legal-grievance posts on the same day, suggesting heightened anxiety following the special counsel announcement just days after his campaign launch.

Authorship Analysis

Self-Written

Indicators:

Misspelling 'Chaney' for Cheney
'off' for 'of' typo
Characteristic neologism 'Unselect Committee'
Stream-of-consciousness run-on sentence
Emotional reactivity with exclamation marks

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Vulnerable State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Exposure (AG Garland / Jack Smith special counsel appointment)

Rage: Intensity 60% targeting DOJ and Special Counsel

Proportionality

40%

Sentiment

-0.75

Mildly Hypomanic

Rapid posting cadence on this date across multiple legal topicsPressured quality to the run-on sentence structure

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

70%

Antisocial

30%

Paranoid

60%

Sadism

10%

Defense Mechanisms:

denialrationalizationprojectionsplitting

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

45%

Cognitive Markers:

phonemic paraphasianeologism

Parasocial Techniques:

shared grievance framinginviting audience to see persecution

Danger Assessment

None

Gaslighting Detected:

Framing active criminal investigations as 'dead' issues
Characterizing documents case as 'hoax' despite evidence
Implying DOJ staffed exclusively by 'Trump haters'

Reality Distortions:

Framing ongoing criminal investigations as 'dead' based on political outcomes
Equating classified documents case with Clinton audio recordings case
Characterizing career DOJ as exclusively partisan

Fact Checks (3)

"Record setting loss of Liz Cheney in Wyoming"

Mostly True

Cheney lost to Harriet Hageman by ~37 points in Aug 2022 primary, one of the largest margins for a sitting House member

"The document case is a hoax based on the Clinton Socks Case and Presidential Records Act"

Mostly False

The Clinton socks case (Judicial Watch v. NARA) involved audio recordings, not classified documents, and the court ruled presidential records are the president's personal property only regarding personal recordings—not classified national security documents. The PRA does not override classification law.

"Democrats appointed a Special Prosecutor"

Half True

AG Garland (appointed by Biden) named Jack Smith as Special Counsel (not Prosecutor). Smith was an independent career prosecutor, not a Democratic appointee.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Psychological Analysis: Response to Jack Smith Special Counsel Appointment

This post is Trump's direct reaction to AG Garland appointing Jack Smith as special counsel on November 18, 2022—just three days after Trump announced his 2024 candidacy. The post reveals a characteristic defensive cascade combining minimization, persecution framing, and outrage.

Authorship

Posted at 5:15 PM ET. Trump was at Mar-a-Lago (had just announced his campaign there on Nov 15). The timing is business hours, but the content is clearly emotionally reactive and personally voiced. The "Here we go again!" opener, the characteristic renaming devices ("Unselect Committee," "Democrat Department of 'Justice'"), misspelling of "Cheney" as "Chaney," and the stream-of-consciousness structure all point strongly to authentic Trump authorship despite the daytime posting.

Trigger Analysis

This is a textbook narcissistic injury response. The appointment of a special counsel represents an escalation of legal threat precisely when Trump expected these matters to die. The post reveals genuine surprise and frustration—he "thought" and "felt" these were resolved. The trigger is dual: exposure (continued investigation) and defeat (failure of his expectation that political wins would end legal jeopardy).

Defense Mechanisms

Multiple defenses deployed simultaneously:

Minimization/Denial: Characterizing J6 committee as "dead issue" and documents case as "hoax"
Rationalization: Citing Cheney's primary loss and the Clinton socks case as legal justifications
Projection: "Trump haters" as the motive rather than evidence
Splitting: Pure good (Trump) vs pure evil ("Democrat Department of Justice")

Cognitive Markers

"Chaney" for Cheney is a notable misspelling. "Unselect" is a deliberate coinage (neologism used as wordplay). "Record setting loss off Liz Chaney" uses "off" where "of" is intended—a minor error. The sentence structure is run-on but coherent, with logical flow from premise (expected resolution) to grievance (appointment) to judgment ("Disgraceful!").

Rhetorical Techniques

The Clinton Socks Case reference is a deliberate false equivalence—comparing the Judicial Watch case about Clinton's audio recordings to the classified documents matter. "Democrat Department of Justice" (using noun form rather than adjective "Democratic") is a long-standing rhetorical diminishment. The closing "Disgraceful!" is a characteristic single-word moral verdict serving as emotional punctuation.

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"Record setting loss of Liz Cheney in Wyoming"	Mostly True	Cheney lost to Harriet Hageman by ~37 points in Aug 2022 primary, one of the largest margins for a sitting House member
"The document case is a hoax based on the Clinton Socks Case and Presidential Records Act"	Mostly False	The Clinton socks case (Judicial Watch v. NARA) involved audio recordings, not classified documents, and the court ruled presidential records are the president's personal property only regarding personal recordings—not classified national security documents. The PRA does not override classification law.
"Democrats appointed a Special Prosecutor"	Half True	AG Garland (appointed by Biden) named Jack Smith as Special Counsel (not Prosecutor). Smith was an independent career prosecutor, not a Democratic appointee.

Overall Veracity: 50%