Analysis: Where’s the Collusion? They made up a phony crime called Col...

8y ago Aug 20, 2018 at 11:48 AM

Where’s the Collusion? They made up a phony crime called Collusion, and when there was no Collusion they say there was Obstruction (of a phony crime that never existed). If you FIGHT BACK or say anything bad about the Rigged Witch Hunt, they scream Obstruction!

0:00 0:00

AI Analysis

Machine-generated analysis of the post above on 2026-03-15. Not written by the author of the post.

Danger Level

Elevated

Narcissistic State

Mixed

Authorship

Self-Written

Intensity

80%

Direct reactive response to the NYT revelation that White House Counsel McGahn cooperated with Mueller for 30+ hours — a significant narcissistic injury (insider exposure). The post deploys textbook DARVO: Deny ("phony crime that never existed"), Attack ("Rigged Witch Hunt"), Reverse victim-offender (casting self-defense as persecution). The circular legal claim — obstruction cannot attach to a crime that never occurred — is legally incorrect but psychologically coherent as a defensive schema protecting against unbearable exposure. Three defense mechanisms operate simultaneously: pathological denial (flat rejection of investigative legitimacy), projection (attributing bad faith/coordination to investigators), and rationalization (pseudo-legal framework). The "they scream Obstruction" framing constructs an undifferentiated adversarial collective — paranoid-adjacent, diffuse, omnipresent. This post is part of a rapid-fire five-post cluster in 48 hours, all targeting Mueller with escalating intensity, consistent with mild hypomanic pressured output under perceived existential threat. Authorship is highly authentic (7:48 AM EDT, ALL CAPS, emotional repetition, matching "Councel" misspelling cluster). Danger level is elevated: systematic institutional delegitimization primes sympathizers toward adversarial framing of federal investigators. No specific individual targeting or violent imagery present. Longitudinal note: McCarthy comparison from prior day replaced by legalistic framing — suggests overnight coordination with counsel, but emotional delivery remains entirely unmediated.

Authorship Analysis

Self-Written

Indicators:

7:48 AM EDT posting time — within authentic early-morning window
ALL CAPS emphasis ('FIGHT BACK') — characteristic authentic marker
'Collusion' repeated 4 times in 83 words — emotional repetition, not editorial polish
Rhetorical question opener — authentic stream-of-consciousness entry point
Circular, compressed emotional syntax without professional formatting

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Mixed State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Exposure (NYT report of McGahn's 30-hour Mueller cooperation disclosing obstruction-relevant testimony)

Rage: Intensity 65% targeting Mueller investigation / undifferentiated 'they'

Proportionality

20%

Sentiment

-0.75

Baseline Deviation: slight

Mildly Hypomanic

Five posts in 48 hours on same theme — pressured output clusterCompressed, rapid-fire sentence structure suggesting accelerated ideationALL CAPS emotional activationEscalating rhetorical intensity across cluster: NYT attack → McCarthy comparison → 'Angry Democrat Thugs' → legal obstruction argument

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

75%

Antisocial

45%

Paranoid

80%

Sadism

15%

Defense Mechanisms:

denialprojectionrationalization

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

35%

Cognitive Markers:

perseveration

Parasocial Techniques:

Direct audience address implying shared persecution ('if you FIGHT BACK')Tribal us/them framing recruiting audience into victim coalitionEpistemically closed frame demanding audience accept investigative illegitimacy as premise

Danger Assessment

Elevated

Indicators:

Systematic delegitimization of federal law enforcement as coordinated persecution apparatus
Epistemically closed framing demands audience reject legal proceedings as valid reality
Cumulative post cluster (5 posts/48 hrs) builds adversarial framework around federal investigators
Prior-day posts in cluster called Mueller's team 'Thugs' — this post is comparatively restrained but contributes to escalating institutional adversarialism

Gaslighting Detected:

DARVO pattern: Deny (phony crime), Attack (Rigged Witch Hunt), Reverse victim-offender (fighter becomes accused obstructor)
Characterizes legally grounded federal investigation as manufactured fiction ('never existed')
Frames documented legal proceedings as pure persecution, attacking audience's shared factual ground
Inverts legal reality: positions subject's resistance to investigation as proof of investigation's illegitimacy

Reality Distortions:

'phony crime that never existed' — characterizes investigation with documented evidentiary basis as pure fabrication
Obstruction cannot apply to unproven predicate crime — legally incorrect; established law says otherwise
'They scream Obstruction' if you 'FIGHT BACK' — mischaracterizes specific documented obstruction acts as mere verbal criticism
Constructs coordinating malevolent 'they' where independent actors (investigators, prosecutors, courts) are operating

Fact Checks (3)

"They made up a phony crime called Collusion"

Mostly False

Investigation was initiated on documented counterintelligence grounds. Russian interference was documented (Senate Intel Committee, Mueller Report Vol. I). Legal predicates were conspiracy/coordination under 18 U.S.C. § 371, not the colloquial 'collusion.' Evidentiary basis included June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, Manafort data sharing with Kilimnik, and extensive documented contacts.

"when there was no Collusion they say there was Obstruction (of a phony crime that never existed)"

False

Obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1512 is cognizable regardless of whether the predicate crime is proven — established in U.S. v. Arthur Andersen (2005) and affirmed in Marinello v. United States (2018). Furthermore, obstruction was investigated concurrently from the probe's initiation, not adopted as a fallback. Mueller Vol. II presents ten distinct obstruction episodes.

"If you FIGHT BACK or say anything bad about the Rigged Witch Hunt, they scream Obstruction!"

Mostly False

Mueller's obstruction theory was grounded in specific documented acts: directing McGahn to remove Mueller, pressuring Comey, potential witness contact in Cohen and Manafort cases, and directing subordinates to alter records. Verbal criticism of the investigation was explicitly NOT cited as obstruction. The characterization fundamentally misrepresents the obstruction theory's evidentiary basis.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Psychological Analysis: Trump Twitter Post, August 20, 2018

Context & Trigger

This post arrives in direct response to the New York Times revelation that White House Counsel Don McGahn cooperated with Mueller's team for 30+ hours, providing detailed accounts of potential obstruction episodes — the Comey firing and Trump's attempts to remove Mueller. This constitutes a textbook narcissistic injury (exposure by insider) and the post is a reactive, real-time attempt to control the legal and public narrative around that exposure. It is the fifth post in a rapid-fire 48-hour cluster, all targeting the Mueller investigation with escalating intensity.

Authorship Attribution

Post time: 11:48 UTC = 7:48 AM EDT (Trump was likely at Bedminster NJ or the White House; August is his Bedminster period, but either location places him in EDT). 7:48 AM falls squarely within Trump's established authentic early-morning posting window — pre-staff, pre-briefing, reactive. Style markers reinforce authentic attribution: ALL CAPS ("FIGHT BACK"), "Collusion" repeated four times in 83 words, rhetorical question opener, compressed emotional syntax, circular stream-of-consciousness logic, zero professional polish. The same-day prior posts include the persistent "Councel" misspelling for "Counsel" — a reliable authentic-Trump marker. Confidence: high.

Level 1: Dispositional Traits (Big Five)

Neuroticism (angry hostility): Dominant, ~0.85. Post is reactive, defensive, rage-tinged.
Agreeableness: Near-absent (~0.08). Combative, contemptuous, zero tender-mindedness.
Extraversion (assertiveness): High (~0.75). Declarative, dominant framing throughout.
Conscientiousness: Low (~0.25). Circular, impulsive reasoning — no deliberative quality.
Openness: Minimal (~0.12). Epistemically sealed; the investigation's legitimacy is axiomatic non-starter.

Level 2: Characteristic Adaptations (Motives & Schemas)

Dominant motive is agency/power at near-maximum intensity — specifically the defense of autonomy against perceived institutional encroachment. The post constructs a three-stage defensive schema: (1) the predicate crime was fabricated; (2) obstruction of a fabricated crime is logically impossible; (3) therefore any claim of obstruction is itself persecution. This schema is not merely rhetorical — it appears genuinely believed, which is psychologically significant. The subject is not cynically spinning; he is constructing a reality in which his legal exposure does not exist.

Level 3: Narrative Identity

Protagonist role: Dual-cast as persecuted victim and warrior ("FIGHT BACK") — the oscillation is characteristic.
Narrative sequence: Contamination — legitimate self-defense is being alchemized into criminal liability by malevolent actors.
Identity claims: "I am innocent," "I allowed transparency," "I will not back down."
Contrasting other: An unnamed, diffuse "they" — omnipresent, coordinating, malevolent. The prior day's posts named McCarthy as foil; this post escalates to a more diffuse persecution construct, which is psychologically more concerning than a named enemy.

Level 4: Clinical Indicators

Narcissistic Dynamics

The McGahn cooperation revelation is the injury: a trusted insider providing damaging testimony is among the most destabilizing triggers in the narcissistic personality structure. The response follows the Kohutian fragmentation sequence: injury → rage → reality restructuring. The "Rigged Witch Hunt" frame functions as a reconstructed reality, not merely a spin operation. Narcissistic state is mixed — vulnerable victimhood ("they scream") coexists with grandiose combat posture ("FIGHT BACK").

DARVO Pattern

Clean three-part structure:

Deny: "phony crime that never existed"
Attack: "Rigged Witch Hunt"
Reverse victim-offender: Casting any self-defense as unfairly labeled "obstruction" — positioning himself as victim of his own defense

Defense Mechanisms

Denial (pathological): Flat rejection of the investigative reality — "phony crime that never existed." Not disagreement with conclusions; rejection of the investigation's ontological standing.
Projection (immature): "Rigged Witch Hunt" attributes bad faith, conspiracy, and coordination to investigators. Note that Trump's operation was attempting to coordinate obstructive acts — the projection maps precisely.
Rationalization (neurotic): The circular legal argument (no crime → no obstruction → calling it obstruction = persecution) provides a pseudo-logical armature for the denial. More structured than typical stream-of-consciousness; possibly reflects overnight coordination with legal team's talking points, absorbed and re-expressed authentically.

Paranoid Features

The "they scream Obstruction" construction is paranoid-adjacent: an undifferentiated, coordinating adversarial collective that activates in response to any pushback. This is not a specific complaint about specific actors — it is a diffuse persecutory "they." Combined with prior posts' conspiracy framing (media, Mueller, Democrats all coordinating), this represents a paranoid gestalt rather than discrete suspicion.

Rhetorical Analysis

Rhetorical question opener: "Where's the Collusion?" — places burden of proof on the absent interlocutor; asserts conclusion while simulating inquiry.
Circular logic as rhetorical structure: The entire argument is a tautology — the investigation is invalid because it's phony; it's phony because they made it up. No external evidence cited.
Semantic anchoring: "Collusion" repeated four times in 83 words; "phony crime" twice. Conditions audience to fuse these terms at the associative level.
ALL CAPS activation: "FIGHT BACK" — functions as both identity claim and call to sympathetic audience.
False legal framing: Obstruction of justice is legally cognizable regardless of whether the predicate crime is proven — this is established in U.S. v. Arthur Andersen and reaffirmed in Marinello v. United States (2018, decided just months earlier). The claim that obstruction requires an underlying proven crime is simply false.
No dehumanizing language: Note the prior day's posts called Mueller's team "Angry Democrat Thugs." This post is comparatively restrained on that dimension — focused on legal argument rather than personal degradation.

Gaslighting & Reality Distortion

The post attacks the audience's ability to accept documented legal proceedings as legitimate. "Phony crime that never existed" is not a legal defense argument — it is an attempt to make the investigation disappear as a shared factual reality. The DARVO structure adds the reversal component: the subject is now the victim of the very process he attempted to obstruct.

Cognitive Status

No concerning markers. Sentences are short but coherent. The circular argument is internally consistent within its false premises — this is not confusion, it is motivated reasoning with intact mechanics. The perseveration on "Collusion" (4x/83 words) reads as rhetorical anchoring rather than symptomatic repetition. Vocabulary is limited and simple, consistent with Trump's established baseline for Twitter. No word-finding difficulties, confabulation, or temporal confusion. Complexity is below his longer-form interview baseline but appropriate to genre and emotional state.

Danger Assessment

Elevated. The systematic delegitimization of law enforcement institutions, cast as a coordinating malevolent "they," creates an adversarial framework that primes sympathizers to view federal investigators as enemies. No specific individual targeting, no violent imagery, no eliminationist language in this specific post. However, within the 48-hour cluster, the prior posts called Mueller's team "Thugs" and compared the investigation unfavorably to McCarthyism. The cumulative framing is institutionally corrosive at elevated level. No stochastic terrorism indicators in this specific post.

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"They made up a phony crime called Collusion"	Mostly False	Investigation was initiated on documented counterintelligence grounds. Russian interference was documented (Senate Intel Committee, Mueller Report Vol. I). Legal predicates were conspiracy/coordination under 18 U.S.C. § 371, not the colloquial 'collusion.' Evidentiary basis included June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, Manafort data sharing with Kilimnik, and extensive documented contacts.
"when there was no Collusion they say there was Obstruction (of a phony crime that never existed)"	False	Obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1512 is cognizable regardless of whether the predicate crime is proven — established in U.S. v. Arthur Andersen (2005) and affirmed in Marinello v. United States (2018). Furthermore, obstruction was investigated concurrently from the probe's initiation, not adopted as a fallback. Mueller Vol. II presents ten distinct obstruction episodes.
"If you FIGHT BACK or say anything bad about the Rigged Witch Hunt, they scream Obstruction!"	Mostly False	Mueller's obstruction theory was grounded in specific documented acts: directing McGahn to remove Mueller, pressuring Comey, potential witness contact in Cohen and Manafort cases, and directing subordinates to alter records. Verbal criticism of the investigation was explicitly NOT cited as obstruction. The characterization fundamentally misrepresents the obstruction theory's evidentiary basis.

Overall Veracity: 13%