Analysis: Is Mark Pomerantz and his law firm, Paul Weiss, going to be ...

2y ago Sep 12, 2023 at 2:36 AM

Is Mark Pomerantz and his law firm, Paul Weiss, going to be prosecuted by the Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, for his, and their, horrible and outrageous acts against justice and a free and fair trial? Remember, he was the Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer, who left his law firm to go to the D.A., without fee, to prosecute President Donald J. Trump. He was so outrageous and obnoxious that he was FIRED, left, and WROTE A BOOK during the Grand Jury process. He was admonished by all. BAD!

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

Elevated

Narcissistic State

Mixed

Authorship

Self-Written

Intensity

68%

This post exemplifies a sustained DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) response to ongoing criminal proceedings, with Pomerantz — a relatively peripheral figure — serving as a focal point for displacement of narcissistic injury generated by the cumulative legal threat cluster of mid-2023. The rhetorical demand that the prosecutor be prosecuted is a high-confidence marker of narcissistic injury processing: accountability is intolerable, so the act of prosecution becomes itself the crime. Multiple factual distortions are present, most notably the false claim that Pomerantz was "FIRED" — a fabrication that rewrites a voluntary resignation as termination, delegitimizing his standing as a critic. The post arrives at 10:36 PM local time, within the authenticated late-evening window, with strong stylometric markers of authentic authorship including the signature single-word closer ("BAD!"), third-person self-reference with formal title, and spontaneous redundant verb clustering. Danger is assessed at elevated: while no direct physical threat is present, the named call for prosecution of a specific legal actor represents implicit intimidation consistent with a pattern of using audience reach to pressure individuals in the legal system. Cognitive complexity is within recent-period baseline; the primary deviation is affective rather than cognitive, reflecting the mixed grandiose-vulnerable narcissistic state characteristic of the post-indictment period.

Authorship Analysis

Self-Written

Indicators:

10:36 PM local time (EDT), within authentic late-night window
Third-person self-reference with full formal title 'President Donald J. Trump'
Redundant verb cluster: 'was FIRED, left' (spontaneous self-correction pattern)
Signature single-word terminal sentence: 'BAD!'
ALL CAPS emphasis on emotionally salient phrases: FIRED, WROTE A BOOK

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Mixed State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Exposure (Mark Pomerantz / ongoing Manhattan/Georgia criminal proceedings)

Rage: Intensity 65% targeting Mark Pomerantz / Paul Weiss law firm

Proportionality

20%

Sentiment

-0.72

Baseline Deviation: slight

Mildly Hypomanic

Late-night posting (10:36 PM) consistent with reduced sleep/elevated activationHigh-volume posting across the same evening (multiple posts on Sept 11–12)Pressured quality: multiple targets, multiple accusations compressed into single postEmotional intensity disproportionate to specific trigger (Pomerantz has been a minor figure for 18+ months)

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

82%

Antisocial

55%

Paranoid

70%

Sadism

35%

Defense Mechanisms:

projectionsplittingrationalizationdisplacement

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

42%

Cognitive Markers:

perseveration

Parasocial Techniques:

Shared moral outrage invitation ('Can you believe...' parallel from same-day posts)Rhetorical question framing creates parasocial alignment with audienceThird-person self-referencing invites audience to share his self-perception

Danger Assessment

Elevated

Indicators:

Named individual (Pomerantz) targeted with explicit call for prosecution by a specific named official (Bragg)
Implicit intimidation of legal actors who participate in proceedings against Trump
Pattern across multiple posts of identifying legal adversaries for audience-directed hostility
Call for weaponizing prosecutorial apparatus against prosecutors who investigated Trump — threatens independence of legal institutions
Post contextually adjacent to broader pattern of targeting Bragg, Smith, Willis across same-period posts

Gaslighting Detected:

'He was FIRED' — rewrites documented resignation as termination, preemptively delegitimizing Pomerantz's credibility
Characterizing the prosecution as an 'act against justice' attacks the reality perception of anyone who views the proceedings as legitimate
Framing Pomerantz's Democratic affiliation as self-evidently disqualifying implies anyone who disagrees is naive or complicit

Reality Distortions:

'He was FIRED' — Pomerantz resigned voluntarily; firing is fabricated
'Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer' — implies direct Clinton representation not in evidence
'Admonished by all' — significant overgeneralization bordering on fabrication
Framing the prosecution itself as an 'act against justice and a free and fair trial' inverts the ordinary meaning of those terms

Fact Checks (5)

"Mark Pomerantz was a Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer"

Mostly False

Pomerantz made Democratic political donations and is a registered Democrat, but 'Hillary Clinton lawyer' implies direct representation of Clinton which is not documented. He was a prominent white-collar defense attorney at Paul Weiss.

"He left his firm to go to the DA without fee"

True

Pomerantz served as a volunteer/special prosecutor without compensation, an unusual arrangement reflecting his personal motivation to bring the case.

"He was FIRED"

False

Pomerantz resigned in February 2022 after DA Bragg declined to authorize moving forward with the case against Trump. His resignation letter publicly stated his disagreement with Bragg's decision. He was not terminated.

"He WROTE A BOOK during the Grand Jury process"

Half True

Pomerantz's book 'People vs. Donald Trump' was published February 2023; a grand jury had been reconvened in late 2022. The temporal overlap is real. Ethical concerns about the book's publication were raised by legal commentators, though contested. The framing implies greater impropriety than is documented.

"He was admonished by all"

Mostly False

Pomerantz received criticism from some legal commentators and defense attorneys regarding timing of book publication. He also received significant support from legal scholars and journalists who praised his transparency. 'Admonished by all' is a gross overstatement.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Psychological Analysis: Trump Truth Social Post — 2023-09-12

Authorship Attribution

Local Time: Post was made at 02:36 UTC. In September 2023, Trump was typically at Bedminster, NJ (EDT, UTC−4), placing the post at 10:36 PM local time on September 11. This falls squarely in the late-evening/early-night window associated with authentic Trump posts. Style corroborates: third-person self-reference, rhetorical question lead, ALL CAPS emotional emphasis, parenthetical digressions, redundant phrasing ("was FIRED, left"), and the signature single-word sentence close ("BAD!"). Confidence of authentic authorship: high.

Trigger & Narcissistic Dynamics

The trigger is a narcissistic injury cluster: Trump is under simultaneous indictment in multiple jurisdictions (Georgia arraignment the prior month, Manhattan proceedings ongoing). Pomerantz — who publicly criticized Bragg for not prosecuting Trump aggressively enough — represents a uniquely galling figure: someone who, in Trump's framing, devoted career capital to destroying him and then profited from the attempt via a book deal.

The post employs the classic DARVO inversion (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender): the prosecutor becomes the criminal who should be prosecuted. This is not merely rhetorical — it reflects a deeply narcissistic schema in which any legal accountability is, by definition, a crime against the self.

The narcissistic state is mixed, oscillating between:

Grandiose pole: Third-person self-reference ("President Donald J. Trump"), framing his prosecution as a historical outrage requiring moral correction
Vulnerable pole: Implicit victimhood running through every clause — he was targeted, he was wronged, others were "admonished" for attacking him

Defense Mechanisms

Projection (immature): Trump accuses Pomerantz of "horrible and outrageous acts against justice and a free and fair trial" — language that mirrors the accusations leveled at Trump himself. The attributes of the persecutor are projected outward onto the target.

Splitting (immature): The post constructs a clean moral universe: Pomerantz = evil operative for Clinton/Democrats; Trump = legitimate victim of illegitimate process. No complexity, no ambiguity.

Rationalization (neurotic): The political affiliation of the prosecutor ("Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer") is offered as self-evident proof of improper motive, preemptively delegitimizing the legal proceedings without engaging their substance.

Displacement: Rather than addressing the charges against him, Trump redirects entirely to attacking the character and motives of the prosecutor — a safer, more emotionally satisfying target.

Rhetorical Techniques

Rhetorical question as demand: Opening with "Is Mark Pomerantz... going to be prosecuted?" frames a political demand as a neutral inquiry, while signaling clearly what Trump believes should happen.
Ad hominem character assassination: "horrible," "outrageous," "obnoxious," "BAD!" — the entire post substitutes character attacks for substantive engagement.
Political contamination: "Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer" is a deliberate framing device, invoking the most emotionally resonant villain in Trump's political universe to taint Pomerantz by association.
Third-person self-reference: "President Donald J. Trump" — a grandiosity marker functioning as implicit self-coronation; he uses the full formal title, asserting legitimacy.
Selective capitalization for emotional emphasis: "FIRED," "WROTE A BOOK" — caps function as performative outrage, signaling to the reader where to direct moral indignation.
Compressed narrative arc: The post condenses a complex legal history into a villain-does-bad-things story, stripping procedural and evidentiary nuance entirely.
Moral inversion: Positions the prosecutor as the threat to "justice and a free and fair trial" — appropriating the language of rule-of-law advocacy for an anti-accountability argument.

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"Mark Pomerantz was a Hillary Clinton/Democrat lawyer"	Mostly False	Pomerantz made Democratic political donations and is a registered Democrat, but 'Hillary Clinton lawyer' implies direct representation of Clinton which is not documented. He was a prominent white-collar defense attorney at Paul Weiss.
"He left his firm to go to the DA without fee"	True	Pomerantz served as a volunteer/special prosecutor without compensation, an unusual arrangement reflecting his personal motivation to bring the case.
"He was FIRED"	False	Pomerantz resigned in February 2022 after DA Bragg declined to authorize moving forward with the case against Trump. His resignation letter publicly stated his disagreement with Bragg's decision. He was not terminated.
"He WROTE A BOOK during the Grand Jury process"	Half True	Pomerantz's book 'People vs. Donald Trump' was published February 2023; a grand jury had been reconvened in late 2022. The temporal overlap is real. Ethical concerns about the book's publication were raised by legal commentators, though contested. The framing implies greater impropriety than is documented.
"He was admonished by all"	Mostly False	Pomerantz received criticism from some legal commentators and defense attorneys regarding timing of book publication. He also received significant support from legal scholars and journalists who praised his transparency. 'Admonished by all' is a gross overstatement.

Overall Veracity: 38%

Cognitive Status

The post reflects characteristic Trump syntactic patterns: long run-on constructions with embedded parentheticals, redundant verb clusters ("was FIRED, left"), and emotional terminal phrases. The "FIRED, left" construction in particular appears to be a spontaneous self-correction or perseverative addition rather than deliberate stylistic choice. Complexity is consistent with 2022–2023 baseline posts; no marked deviation. One mild instance of redundancy/perseveration noted.

Danger Assessment

Elevated. The post is an explicit, named call for the prosecution of a specific individual who participated in a legal proceeding against Trump. While framed as a rhetorical question, the context and rhetorical posture leave no ambiguity about Trump's desired outcome. Pomerantz is named, his law firm is named, and the mechanism of retaliation (prosecution by Bragg) is specified.

This represents a pattern — observed across multiple posts — of using presidential/quasi-presidential platform to identify legal adversaries as targets for state retaliation or public hostility. The danger is less stochastic-terrorism (physical violence) and more intimidation of legal actors and erosion of prosecutorial independence through implied threat of counter-prosecution. This is consistent with an autocratic playbook: using the machinery of law to punish those who apply it.

Narrative Identity (McAdams Level 3)

The protagonist is the wrongly persecuted sovereign: a legitimate president (he insists on the title) against whom a corrupt partisan legal apparatus has been weaponized. The narrative sequence is contamination: a great man brought low by corrupt operatives acting for political enemies. Pomerantz functions as the contaminating agent — an outsider who infiltrated a legal institution with malicious purpose.

The contrasting other in this post is dual: Pomerantz personally (corrupt operative) and Clinton/Democrats (systemic evil). Trump defines himself against both.

Jungian Archetypes

Primary: Victim-Warrior hybrid. The post oscillates between the persecuted innocent and the righteous fighter demanding justice. The call for counter-prosecution is the Warrior breaking through the Victim's passivity.

Shadow projection: The accusations against Pomerantz — using legal processes for partisan political ends, benefiting personally from a prosecution, operating "without" normal constraints — map precisely onto criticisms leveled at Trump himself. Classic Jungian shadow dynamics: what is most disowned about the self is most forcefully projected onto the enemy.

Order/Chaos Dynamics

Trump positions himself as an order attacker — attacking the existing legal/prosecutorial order as corrupt and illegitimate. The call for Bragg to prosecute Pomerantz is simultaneously a chaos agent move: it would weaponize the same DA's office against its own former employee, destabilizing norms of prosecutorial independence. The implicit message: legal institutions only have legitimacy when directed at Trump's enemies, not at Trump himself.