# Post ts_111624308230477293 - Post ID: `ts_111624308230477293` - Platform: Truth Social - Posted: 2023-12-22T13:29:33.609Z (UTC) - Deleted: no - Repost: no - Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293 - Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293/analysis - Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/ts_111624308230477293.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording) ## Post text > “DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY” ## What the media says **Video transcript** (12:01), transcribed automatically, so names and numbers may be wrong. Speakers aren't identified, so a voice in it may not be his: > -The 2024 election, turning into a free-for-all, maybe. Well, a dozen states could follow Colorado in kicking Donald Trump off their ballots, or at least trying to. And now Republicans are vowing to retaliate against Joe Biden. -We should all be encouraged by any action that makes it less likely that he will return to the president. -It's just a question of law. It's like if a 14-year-old tried to run for president, would that person be kept off of the ballot because the Constitution says you have to be 35 years old to run for president? -What's the limiting principle for that? Why could we just say that Biden can't be on the ballot because he led in 8 million illegals into the country and violated the Constitution, which he has? -Maybe we should take Joe Biden off the ballot in Texas. -California now looking to copy Colorado's ballot ban, and that's the lieutenant governor who's trying to run for governor next year, so that's very political. And despite serious legal questions, the Golden State's lieutenant governor, she said she's exploring all options. Listen to her here. -We are in uncharted territory in our country, and the decision out of Colorado is a very significant fact. When the Supreme Court of Colorado determines in an examination of the facts that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist and therefore is disqualified from being on the ballot, certainly here in California, we have to look at that information and make the same determination here. -So all these developments putting pressure on the Supreme Court to intervene to allow Americans to vote for Donald Trump, legal experts argue it should be an easy case. -The core problem here is the denial of due process. It was a five-day hearing. There was no jury. It was before the judge. They were not able to subpoena witnesses and compel the attendance of witnesses. The process here was a procedural Frankenstein. And what Colorado did was wrong. It was wrong legally, but it was wrong in terms of our values. -Colorado tried to sort of take this state-level proceeding that's not really made for this type of insurrection determination and force a square peg into a round hole, and I think that violates Donald Trump's due process rights. -But some in the liberal media seem to be arguing that Trump doesn't even deserve a fair shake. -So many of these people are serving jail time and Donald Trump's not, for one simple reason, because unlike Donald Trump, they are not rich and powerful. So, please, spare me the anti-democratic lectures. -All right, Judge, I think people would be anxious and eager to hear from you and your thoughts on all of this. -Well, first of all, let me say I'm glad to be back at the table. It's a terrible house to be saying that. -I'm glad you're back, Amanda. -It's a pleasure to see you all. First of all, the 14th Amendment was never intended to be used the way the court in Colorado used it. First of all, the whole idea of an insurrection and the idea that's encompassed in Section 3 of Article 14 is that they would keep a Confederate off the ticket for president post-Civil War. That's number one. Number two, the question as to whether or not what happened on January 6th is an insurrection is still an open issue. The question is, did anybody go in with guns? Was there a plan to actually take over the government to seize control? And then the other thing is, whether Subdivision 3 applies to a president, it's not clear in the 14th Amendment. It talks about judicial officers of any state. It doesn't speak specifically about the president and insurrection. So, right on the face of the 14th Amendment, they lose. But let's talk about who made this decision. Just as judges on the Supreme Court in Colorado, from Harvard, University of Pennsylvania, UVA, and Penn. All those elite schools that are very anti-Trump to begin with. So then you say to yourself, well, now look at the results. A lieutenant governor in California is looking to follow Governor Newsom. This woman is so smart, she thinks the president, according to the Constitution, has to be 40. I mean, it's 35, number one. But number two, she said it creates a precedent. She doesn't understand the legal system. Colorado doesn't create a precedent for California. Higher courts declare precedents for lower courts. And finally, this is all about disqualifying a political foe. There is absolutely no basis for it. And I wanna know, what are the Democrats so afraid of? What are you so afraid of? You've tried criminal cases, civil cases. You've impeached them. Now you wanna throw 'em off the ballot. What next? Why are you so desperate to take this issue away from the American people? - And Greg, the media and the left seem to be conditioning the environment for any decision that comes from the Supreme Court to be political if it doesn't go the way that they want. - Exactly, I mean, it is so obvious why this has happened. The Dems are freaking out about the poll numbers. And rather than play fair, they're gonna take the player out. This is the equivalent of like drugging the opposing star player before the big game. You know, this is why they're doing the insurrection hoax. They Hitler hoax. The media's all in and it's hysterical. They've totally overplayed this. And the Dems are in a bind. They've normalized Hitler. I mean, everybody's a Nazi. You know, meanwhile, they made sure that young people in our education system aren't really sure what Hitler is anymore because they've been calling everybody Hitler. They use Hitler the way surfers use the phrase awesome. You know, that's so Hitler, man. Wow, Hitler's speech today. That's a Hitler jacket, dude. Why are they doing this? Here's why. Imagine if the election were a blind taste test. You got two products and you list the accomplishments on both sides, side by side. The policies, what was done. Well, one would taste like pure non-pulp orange juice and the other one would be horse piss. Trump is the orange juice, Biden's the horse piss in that blind taste test. 'Cause if you focus on what matters, everyone would favor Trump. So you have to label that brand as something bad. Hitler, right? And so people against their own needs and core concerns would end up voting for the horse pee pee. When you say someone is Hitler and the followers are Nazis, I said it before, you're telling people it would be immoral and even evil not to do everything possible to stop him. If you have a chance to kill Hitler before he enacted the Holocaust, who wouldn't do that? So that's why they're pushing these hoaxes in order to demonize it. So you can't, you can't support him. You would be just as bad. This is why millions of people didn't trust the election process of 2020. Because one side, you know, they use the government, the media and the tech basically to exploit every single avenue, illegal or not, lie, cheat, spy in order to get their way. They're doing it now, but now it's on meth. Colorado has really lit a match and the Supreme Court, I hope acts quickly because if all these other states are gonna try this, they need direction from the highest court to say yay or nay. - Well, I'm leaving for vacation tomorrow and usually I say something controversial before vacation. - Okay. - So I'm gonna pass. - Okay. (laughing) I'll give you a pass. - I'm kidding. We're gonna, so do you know who else got knocked off the ballot? Lincoln. The Southern Confederates knocked him off 10 state ballots. Another glaring similarity between Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump. Excuse me? Also-- (laughing) Also-- - My colonizer. (laughing) - Donald Trump was acquitted in the Senate of insurrection and he was never charged criminally with insurrection. And the Democrats are always saying how it's vote suppression when they have to wait in line for an hour to vote for their candidate. Well, what if you never get to vote for your candidate? That is crazy. They are talking about stealing our votes and they're happy about that. Now, I don't know if you read Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal. - I did, I did read that. - Did you read Karl Rove? - Yes, I did. - Okay. - I did. - He makes the point that there were 51 former Confederate soldiers and legit Confederates that ended up becoming federal officials. The Confederacy's former vice president became a federal official. One of the chief secessionists became an interior secretary and a Supreme Court justice. - You don't say. - Well, I don't. Karl said it. (laughing) And he mentions the fact that after the Civil War, the Republican Congress passed this great amnesty package where it kind of provided for a little bit more of reconciliation to allow some of these people to be brought back into the Union. So if there is more of a spirit of reconciliation and national unity after the Civil War than there is today in 2023, that is bananas. - We do hear a lot from people on both sides of the aisle that there's a concern about the crisis of confidence in our institutions. And this seems to actually, again, throw a match on a problem that the court, hopefully, that the Supreme Court can push forward. But if the Supreme Court rules and says this is ridiculous and it's not 9-0, do you think it will just turn into another political food fight? - I think we'll certainly analyze the makeup of the votes for pushing this back. I think, well, I said yesterday, I thought it'd be overruled. What I think will likely happen, and by the way, John F. Kennedy talked about that same guy and his profiles and courage, but he wrote about the fellow that Karl talked about. - Wrote? - And profiles and courage. So a couple things, our nation is not perfect. We strive every day to make it more perfect. And I believe that the engine that allows, the most important part of that engine that allows us to do that is the fact we're built on a rule of law. And the rule of law allows for steadiness, allows for fairness, allows for accountability and predictability. In this instance here, Democrats may be upset with me for saying this, but the record that they looked at in Colorado, it appears as I read the thing, they looked at the political hearing that took place in the January 6th hearing and viewed that as a tribunal and looked at those facts when the subject of that matter, the target of that matter, Mr. Trump, didn't have a chance for cross-examination. There were not witnesses that he was able to put forward. So there are a bunch of questions that the judge knows this better than anybody. I think that they're likely the court because they don't wanna deal with all the questions around, is he an officer? There's just so many, there's so many difficult questions. And Bill Barr said it best when he said it's just basically the denial of due process. So I think these questions will, to Dana's point, I think they're just gonna push it back to that court and say, look, answer all of these questions, allow witnesses to come before, because Barr said it best, you can't have a few days of a hearing, not allow someone who's gonna be disallowed to be on a ballot, to be elected to office, to be decided by, and I hear everybody says, I hope there's, the reason I hope there's a 9-0 vote, and Judge, you were making a point about some of the law schools, is that I think Americans need to see that judges are impartial agents of adjudicating the law. And when the law is clear, and I think in this case here, there's just not enough of a record here for this to be decided like it's been decided. And I was frustrated hearing the California Attorney General, I don't think you just look at another state because you like their politics or like the politics of the decision and say that we have to look at it. Well, you look at the law, and if the law allows you to do this, then you have to look at it whether you agree with it or not to determine whether or not your own laws are consistent with that. But I'm hopeful that the court will look at this quickly, and that we can find ourselves not talking about this like we have been. ## Media - video: https://static-assets-1.truthsocial.com/tmtg:prime-ts-assets/media_attachments/files/111/624/307/465/473/355/original/666772cde5adf455.mp4 ## Engagement - Likes: 4,830 - Reposts: 1,698 - Replies: 483 - Views: unknown - Metrics collected: 2026-02-01T01:19:51.386Z (UTC) # Analysis _Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-03-24T16:41:18.882Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._ ## Summary This four-word post is a case study in DARVO at maximum compression. Issued three days after the Colorado Supreme Court became the first court in U.S. history to disqualify Trump from a ballot under the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause, it encodes a complete inversion of the documented record: the accountability mechanism for anti-democratic conduct is relabeled as the anti-democratic act. The defense mechanisms — projection, distortion, splitting — are consistent with the malignant narcissism profile documented across Trump's communications, here activated under severe narcissistic injury (institutional defeat, existential electoral threat). The post functions as an epistemic loyalty test: followers who accept "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" must simultaneously reject the documented record of January 6, the 14th Amendment's text, and a state Supreme Court ruling. The same-day cluster — including defensive denial about confusing Biden and Obama, and multiple grievance amplifications — suggests an extended reactive episode. The post is too brief for cognitive assessment, but the day's broader output warrants longitudinal attention. Danger level is elevated: framing an opposing party as enemies of democracy in a high-tension electoral environment contributes to an ambient threat atmosphere, though the specific post lacks the targeting precision of stochastic terrorism. # "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" — December 22, 2023 ## Contextual Frame This four-word post, paired with a video attachment, arrives three days after the Colorado Supreme Court's 4-3 ruling (December 19, 2023) that Trump is disqualified from the state's primary ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for engaging in insurrection. The ruling constitutes a severe narcissistic injury and an existential political threat, making it the unambiguous trigger for this post and the cluster of posts surrounding it on the same day. --- ## Authorship Attribution **Local time:** Trump was almost certainly at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida during the week before Christmas 2023. UTC 13:29 converts to **8:29 AM EST** — early morning, consistent with Trump's documented early-morning media consumption and Truth Social activity patterns. The ALL-CAPS format, the headline-style brevity, and the video attachment suggest this is a *shared media clip* (likely a produced graphic or news segment) rather than a spontaneous text post. However, the rhetorical inversion encoded in the four words is stylistically consistent with authentic Trump: simple, maximally oppositional, no grammatical complexity to trip over. Assessment: **Likely hybrid** — a media asset produced by communications staff (Scavino), shared by Trump or at his direction, at a time consistent with his personal activity window. The phrasing reflects his rhetorical fingerprint. **Confidence:** medium --- ## Trigger Analysis **Primary trigger:** Narcissistic injury via institutional defeat. The Colorado ruling is the most consequential legal threat to Trump's electoral viability to date — it is a court of law formally labeling him an insurrectionist and removing his name from a ballot. This activates both grandiose rage (the court dared to exclude *him*) and vulnerable narcissism (persecution, martyrdom). **Secondary trigger:** The post fits a broader December 22 cluster that includes reactive denial ("I Never Mix Up Biden and Obama"), grievance amplification (New York legal proceedings), and a prior all-caps post ("THEY WANT TO REMOVE TRUMP"). The pattern suggests an extended reactive episode across the day. --- ## Defense Mechanisms **DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender)** — This is the textbook case. Trump was removed from a ballot by a court that found he attacked democracy on January 6. His response: *Democrats turned on democracy.* The accountability mechanism is recast as the attack; the person held accountable becomes the victim; the institution enforcing accountability becomes the aggressor. **Projection (immature, Level 2):** The charge against Trump — that he engaged in insurrection against democratic governance — is inverted and attributed wholesale to his accusers. "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" projects the very conduct for which he was disqualified onto the Democratic Party. **Distortion (pathological, Level 1):** The ruling was issued by a state Supreme Court (a nonpartisan judicial body with Republican-appointed members in the majority) based on a constitutional provision enacted after the Civil War. Framing this as "DEMS" acting suggests reality is being grossly reshaped: a court becomes a partisan weapon; a constitutional disqualification clause becomes anti-democratic. **Splitting:** The post's structure is binary and absolute — Democrats are against democracy, implicitly positioning Trump as democracy's only defender. No ambiguity, no nuance, no acknowledgment of the substance of the ruling. --- ## Psychological State **Narcissistic state:** Mixed — the post oscillates between grandiose (I *am* democracy; excluding me *is* anti-democratic) and vulnerable (I am being persecuted, removed, targeted). The same-day post cluster shows both poles: "THEY WANT TO REMOVE TRUMP" (vulnerable/martyrdom) and the implicit claim that his removal threatens democracy itself (grandiose/messianic). **Narcissistic rage:** Present, but *channeled* rather than raw. The brevity and the video attachment suggest a produced response rather than an unmediated outburst. Intensity is high but formally contained. Compare to the more free-associative grievance post about New York ("Their were no Victims, only success...") which shows less editorial control. **Malignant narcissism components:** - **Narcissistic features:** High. The framing that excluding *him* constitutes an attack on democracy requires extraordinary grandiosity — conflating personal political survival with democratic integrity. - **Antisocial features:** Moderate. Implicit contempt for the legitimacy of judicial rulings, pattern of labeling inconvenient legal outcomes as corrupt or rigged. - **Paranoid features:** Elevated. "DEMS" as a unified conspiracy against democracy (and against him) rather than a legal process. - **Ego-syntonic sadism:** Not present in this specific post. --- ## Rhetorical & Propaganda Techniques **Semantic inversion / The Big Lie rhetorical move:** The Colorado ruling was explicitly about protecting democratic processes from an insurrectionist. Calling this act itself anti-democratic requires the audience to accept a complete inversion of the documented record. This is not mere spin; it requires epistemic closure to accept. **Alliteration and mnemonic compression:** "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" — three D's, four words, maximally memorable and shareable. This is engineered political messaging. **False dichotomy / Us vs. Them:** Democrats vs. Democracy — the implication being that Democrats *are not* democracy, and the speaker's coalition *is*. **Firehose of falsehood (volume dimension):** This post is one of at least five Truth Social posts on December 22 alone, each reinforcing overlapping grievance frames. Volume creates a reality-distortion field through repetition and saturation. **Stochastic terrorism assessment:** The post identifies Democrats as enemies of democracy — a charged accusation in a political environment where "anti-democratic" actors have been the target of threats and violence. However, this specific post lacks direct target identification, explicit grievance articulation, or implied call to action sufficient to cross the threshold. Rating: **elevated but not stochastic terrorism**. --- ## Gaslighting & Reality Distortion The post exhibits **institutional gaslighting** — not directed at a single person but at the audience's capacity to assess the Colorado ruling on its own terms. The ruling is publicly documented, 4-3, based on specific constitutional text, citing specific events. The post asks followers to override that record and accept a diametrically opposite characterization. This is a loyalty test encoded as a headline: accepting "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" as true requires rejecting the documented record of January 6 and the constitutional text of the 14th Amendment. **Epistemic closure:** The framing forecloses engagement with the ruling's substance. There is no argument to rebut — just a counter-label to accept. --- ## Cognitive Status Note (Longitudinal) The same-day post "I Never Mix Up Biden and Obama, They Are BOTH Responsible for Ruining Our Country" is a significant cognitive marker. This appears to be a defensive response to widely-reported incidents in which Trump confused Biden and Obama at a rally (a documented pattern across late 2023 and 2024). The response is formally coherent as denial-and-deflection, but the *need to deny it* signals awareness of, or reaction to, public scrutiny of the confusion. Name confusion between prominent figures — particularly those occupying related cognitive categories — warrants longitudinal tracking against his 1980s–2000s baseline. **The present post itself (four words) provides insufficient data for cognitive assessment.** --- ## Archetypal Analysis **Primary archetype activated:** Victim/Martyr + Hero/Savior (compound). The post positions Trump as the figure being sacrificed by corrupt forces (victim) while simultaneously implying he embodies the democratic principle under attack (savior). This is a powerful compound that transforms legal defeat into mythological persecution. **Shadow projection:** The "shadow" here — anti-democratic impulse, contempt for constitutional constraint, willingness to subvert electoral outcomes — is the precise content of the 14th Amendment disqualification finding. It is projected wholesale onto Democrats. **Order/Chaos positioning:** Trump positions Democrats as *chaos agents* attacking the democratic order, while positioning himself as *order defender* and *order restorer*. This is an inversion of the Colorado court's framing, in which Trump is the chaos agent and the constitutional disqualification mechanism is the order-restoring institution. --- ## Fact Verification | Claim | Verdict | Evidence | |-------|---------|----------| | "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY (implicit: Democrats are attacking democracy by removing Trump from ballot)" | **Mostly False** | The Colorado Supreme Court ruling was issued by a judicial body, not the Democratic Party. The court applied Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a constitutional provision. The ruling's characterization as anti-democratic is contested — proponents argue enforcing constitutional disqualification criteria is itself a democratic process. Misattributing a judicial ruling to a political party and characterizing constitutional enforcement as anti-democratic renders the claim mostly false. | Overall Veracity: 20% ## Summary This four-word post is a case study in DARVO operating at maximum compression. Issued three days after the Colorado Supreme Court became the first court in U.S. history to disqualify Trump from a ballot under the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause, it encodes a complete inversion of the documented record: the accountability mechanism for anti-democratic conduct is relabeled as the anti-democratic act. The defense mechanisms deployed — projection, distortion, splitting — are consistent with the malignant narcissism profile documented across Trump's communications, here operating under extreme narcissistic injury (institutional defeat, existential electoral threat). The post functions as an epistemic loyalty test: followers who accept "DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY" as true must simultaneously reject the documented record of January 6, the 14th Amendment's text, and the legal reasoning of a state Supreme Court. The same-day cluster — including a defensive denial about confusing Biden and Obama, grievance posts about New York proceedings, and other reactive amplifications — suggests an extended reactive episode following the Colorado ruling. The post itself is too brief for cognitive assessment, but the day's output warrants longitudinal attention. Danger level is elevated: framing an opposing party as enemies of democracy in a high-tension electoral environment contributes to a threat atmosphere, though this specific post lacks the targeting specificity of stochastic terrorism. ## Authorship Analysis **Uncertain** (score: 55%) ### Indicators - ALL-CAPS format consistent with authentic Trump style - 8:29 AM EST timing consistent with his early-morning media consumption window - Video attachment suggests produced media asset (aide-created) - Four-word structure is headline-style, possibly from a produced graphic - Rhetorical inversion encoded in phrasing matches Trump's own framing patterns ## Psychological Profile ### State **Mixed State** **Trigger:** Narcissistic Injury — Defeat (Colorado Supreme Court 14th Amendment disqualification ruling (December 19, 2023)) **Rage:** Intensity 72% targeting Democratic Party / Colorado Supreme Court (conflated) - Proportionality: 15% Sentiment: -0.78 ### Clinical **Malignant Narcissism:** - Narcissistic: 88% - Antisocial: 62% - Paranoid: 74% - Sadism: 15% **Defense Mechanisms:** - projection (immature) - distortion (pathological) - splitting (immature) - denial (pathological) **Cognitive Complexity:** - Complexity: 10% **Parasocial Techniques:** - Loyalty test encoded as headline — accepting the framing requires rejecting documented record - Epistemic closure — no argument presented, only a counter-label to adopt - Mnemonic compression for maximum shareability and repetition ## Danger Assessment **ELEVATED** ### Indicators - Framing of opposing political party as enemies of democracy in high-tension pre-election environment - Part of day-long pattern of institutional delegitimization following historic disqualification ruling - Epistemic closure mechanism that requires followers to reject documented reality — group radicalization precondition - No direct target identification or call to action, keeping below stochastic terrorism threshold ### Gaslighting - Institutional gaslighting: asks followers to override documented record of January 6 and 14th Amendment text - Misattributes judicial ruling to political party (DEMS) to activate partisan rejection of constitutional process - DARVO structure: reverses victim (Trump disqualified for insurrection) and offender (Democrats labeled anti-democratic) - Loyalty test: accepting the framing requires rejecting consensus reality about the Colorado ruling's basis ## Fact Checks (1) _The model's verdicts from 2026-03-24._ > DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY (implicit: Democrats are attacking democracy by removing Trump from ballot) **MOSTLY FALSE** The Colorado Supreme Court ruling was issued by a judicial body, not the Democratic Party. The court applied Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a constitutional provision. The ruling's characterization as anti-democratic is contested — proponents argue enforcing constitutional disqualification criteria is itself a democratic process. Misattributing a judicial ruling to a political party and characterizing constitutional enforcement as anti-democratic renders the claim mostly false. Sources: Colorado Supreme Court ruling, December 19, 2023; 14th Amendment Section 3, U.S. Constitution; Provided historian context: Colorado Supreme Court ruled 4-3 on December 19 Overall Veracity: 20% ## Tags - DARVO (95%) - narcissistic_injury (93%) - Colorado_ballot_disqualification (95%) - semantic_inversion (90%) - projection (88%) - epistemic_closure (85%) - institutional_delegitimization (85%) - reactive_episode (78%) - 14th_amendment (90%) - democracy_framing_inversion (92%) ## That day _From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._ **Colorado Ruling Aftershock: 48-Post Defensive Barrage Reveals Sustained Narcissistic Injury Response** Trump spent the day in full reactive mode from Mar-a-Lago, flooding Truth Social with 48 posts -- nearly all responding to the Colorado Supreme Court's ballot disqualification ruling from three days earlier. The posting came in intense bursts: evening campaign-style attacks, a morning wave of curated legal defense articles, and an afternoon blitz of friendly media links mixed with personal grievance posts. His mood swung between defiant confidence when celebrating polls and wounded fury when attacking judges, prosecutors, and rivals by name. The single most alarming moment was a post recycling his "poisoning" immigration metaphor, while a lengthy tirade about the NY fraud case targeted specific officials as enemies. It was one of his highest-volume posting days of the period, driven almost entirely by compounding legal pressure. Full digest for 2023-12-22: https://trump.fm/date/2023-12-22/analysis ## Citation - APA: Trump, D. J. (2023, December 22). “DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY” [Social media post]. Truth Social. trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293 - MLA: Trump, Donald J. "“DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY”" Truth Social, 22 Dec. 2023. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026. - Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "“DEMS TURN ON DEMOCRACY”," Truth Social, December 22, 2023, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293. ## For agents - Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt - API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json - MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth) - This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/ts_111624308230477293 - Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/ts_111624308230477293 - All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/ts_111624308230477293 - Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2023-12-22 - The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/ts_111624308230477293.md?analysis=false _Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._