Analysis: The reason the DACA for Wall deal didn’t get done was that a...

7y ago Dec 27, 2018 at 7:35 PM

The reason the DACA for Wall deal didn’t get done was that a ridiculous court decision from the 9th Circuit allowed DACA to remain, thereby setting up a Supteme Court case. After ruling, Dems dropped deal - and that’s where we are today, Democrat obstruction of the needed Wall.

0:00 0:00

AI Analysis

Machine-generated analysis of the post above on 2026-03-16. Not written by the author of the post.

Danger Level

None

Narcissistic State

Vulnerable

Authorship

Self-Written

Intensity

38%

A defensive-explanatory post reflecting vulnerable narcissistic state, triggered by the ongoing government shutdown's public exposure of Trump's failure to deliver his signature campaign promise. The post deploys a tight rationalization narrative — deal existed → court/Democrats sabotaged it → Democrat obstruction — that systematically exonerates Trump while inverting documented causality. Most significantly, Trump who publicly claimed "pride" in shutting down the government on December 11 rewrites the shutdown as Democratic obstruction, a textbook DARVO-lite pattern. The misspelling "Supteme" is a reliable authenticity marker despite business-hours timestamp, suggesting personal authorship while consuming shutdown coverage. Splitting and projection are the dominant defenses; no rage or violent rhetoric is present. Fact-checking reveals the 9th Circuit claim is factually grounded but the deal-collapse narrative is substantially misleading, omitting Trump's own "shithole countries" remarks as the primary breakdown catalyst. Cognitive functioning is within established baseline. The post's psychological function is base maintenance and inoculation against accountability narratives rather than mobilization or attack — consistent with the foiled dealmaker victim narrative that activates when grandiose forward pressure is blocked by self-created obstacles.

Authorship Analysis

Self-Written

Indicators:

Misspelling 'Supteme' for 'Supreme' — strong authenticity marker; aide-written posts are proofread
Idiosyncratic capitalization of 'Wall' and 'Dems' consistent with Trump's authentic style
Stream-of-consciousness causal chain without editorial polish
19:35 UTC = 2:35 PM ET (business hours) argues against authenticity, but typo overrides timing as primary indicator
Reactive, self-justifying tone consistent with Trump composing while watching cable news coverage of shutdown

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Vulnerable State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Exposure (Ongoing government shutdown exposing failure to secure wall funding despite two years in office)

Sentiment

-0.50

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

50%

Antisocial

20%

Paranoid

40%

Sadism

Defense Mechanisms:

rationalizationsplittingprojection

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

44%

Parasocial Techniques:

Shared victimhood framing ('that's where we are today' — 'we' includes audience)Explanation to base as trust-maintenance during accountability pressureGrievance reinforcement: naming external saboteurs for audience's cognitive map

Danger Assessment

None

Gaslighting Detected:

Reframes shutdown — which Trump publicly claimed pride in causing on Dec 11 camera — as 'Democrat obstruction', converting his own agency into victimhood
Selectively narrates DACA deal collapse, omitting Trump's 'shithole countries' remarks (January 2018) as primary breakdown factor and instead attributing failure to Democratic opportunism post-injunction
Presents Trump as passive observer ('that's where we are today') despite his documented active role in creating the impasse

Reality Distortions:

Shutdown causality inverted: Trump's on-camera declaration of pride in shutting down government erased; Democratic obstruction substituted
DACA deal failure attributed primarily to Democratic opportunism post-injunction, reversing actual chronology where Trump's own inflammatory remarks broke bipartisan negotiations first

Fact Checks (4)

"A 9th Circuit court decision allowed DACA to remain"

Mostly True

Judge William Alsup (N.D. Cal., 9th Circuit district) issued a nationwide injunction in January 2018 requiring continuation of DACA renewals. Factually accurate; the court was in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction.

"The court decision set up a Supreme Court case"

True

The Alsup injunction and subsequent circuit rulings did create the path to DHS v. Regents of University of California, decided by SCOTUS in June 2020. Claim is accurate.

"After the ruling, Democrats dropped the DACA-for-Wall deal"

Mostly False

While the Alsup injunction reduced Democratic urgency on DACA, the January 2018 bipartisan framework collapse is widely attributed primarily to Trump's reported 'shithole countries' remarks and his rejection of the bipartisan Gang of Six proposal, not to Democrats opportunistically abandoning a deal they had agreed to. The injunction was one factor but Trump's own actions were the primary breakdown catalyst. Attributing deal failure solely to Democrats 'dropping' the deal post-ruling reverses the documented causal sequence.

"The current situation is 'Democrat obstruction of the needed Wall'"

Mostly False

Trump stated on December 11, 2018 in a televised Oval Office meeting with Pelosi and Schumer: 'I am proud to shut down the government for border security.' Characterizing the resulting shutdown as one-sided Democratic obstruction omits his documented, on-camera ownership of the shutdown decision.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Analysis: x_1078373893822431233 — December 27, 2018

Authorship & Context

Posted at 19:35 UTC = 2:35 PM Eastern Time (Trump had returned from Iraq the previous day; he was almost certainly in Washington or en route). Business hours suggest possible aide authorship — but the misspelling "Supteme" (transposition of 'r' and 'e' in "Supreme") is a highly reliable authenticity marker. Staff-written posts are proofread. The reactive, self-justifying tone, idiosyncratic capitalization of "Wall," and stream-of-consciousness causal chain are all consistent with Trump composing this himself, likely while consuming cable news coverage of the shutdown. Authorship attribution: authentic Trump, moderate-to-high confidence.

Psychological State & Trigger

The post was composed during the partial government shutdown (day 5), itself the product of Trump's stated willingness to shut down the government — he told Pelosi and Schumer on December 11: "I am proud to shut down the government for border security." The shutdown represented an inescapable public exposure of Trump's inability to deliver his signature campaign promise despite two years in office.

The psychological trigger is a narcissistic injury: the wall's non-delivery is becoming impossible to ignore. Rather than rage (the grandiose pole), this post occupies the vulnerable narcissistic pole — the foiled victim of external saboteurs. The shift is notable: Trump cannot attack his way out of a self-created shutdown, so the defensive mode activates.

Defense Mechanisms

Rationalization (neurotic): The post constructs a pseudo-logical causal chain — court ruling → Democrats drop deal → obstruction — that functions to exonerate Trump entirely. The logic is seductive but selective, omitting Trump's own role in deal collapse (his reported "shithole countries" remarks in January 2018 derailed bipartisan negotiations before any court ruling could) and his public ownership of the shutdown.

Splitting (immature): The 9th Circuit is "ridiculous" (all-bad institutional actor); Democrats are pure obstructionists. No complexity, shared responsibility, or multi-causality is acknowledged. The world divides cleanly into Trump-who-had-a-deal and enemies-who-destroyed-it.

Projection (immature): The shutdown — caused by Trump's own stated refusal to sign a funding bill without wall money — is reframed as "Democrat obstruction." Trump's agency in creating the impasse is attributed entirely to the opponent. This is a mild DARVO pattern (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender): Trump becomes the victim of the situation he engineered.

Narrative Identity (McAdams Level 3)

The post activates a contamination sequence: a deal was within reach (good state) → enemies intervened (contamination event) → we are now trapped in obstruction (bad state). Trump's protagonist role is the foiled dealmaker — competent, ready, betrayed. The phrase "that's where we are today" is rhetorically significant: it positions Trump as a passive observer of circumstances, subtly invoking the victim role while avoiding explicit victimhood language. The "contrasting other" is split between an activist judiciary and obstructionist Democrats.

Rhetorical Analysis

The post employs a compressed but effective propaganda structure:

Historical revisionism: The deal-collapse narrative is factually selective; presenting the Alsup injunction as the primary cause of failure while omitting Trump's own inflammatory statements.
Institutional delegitimization: "Ridiculous court decision" is a recurring device in Trump's communications — it conditions the audience to view judicial oversight as partisan obstruction rather than constitutional function.
Labeling: "Democrat obstruction" functions as a political epithet that collapses complex legislative dynamics into a single morally loaded phrase.
Causal oversimplification: The three-step narrative (court → Democrats drop deal → obstruction) mimics logical structure while eliding contradictory evidence.
False dichotomy: Implicitly, there are only two actors — Trump who wants the wall and security, and Democrats who obstruct.

No dehumanizing language or violent imagery is present. This is persuasion in maintenance mode, not mobilization rhetoric.

Gaslighting & Reality Distortion

The post contains a meaningful gaslighting element: it systematically rewrites the causal history of the shutdown, converting Trump's public, on-camera declaration of ownership into Democratic culpability. Consumers of only this post would have no basis to know Trump proudly claimed the shutdown. The 9th Circuit framing, while not entirely false, functions to insert a plausible-sounding external cause that redirects accountability.

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"A 9th Circuit court decision allowed DACA to remain"	Mostly True	Judge William Alsup (N.D. Cal., 9th Circuit district) issued a nationwide injunction in January 2018 requiring continuation of DACA renewals. Factually accurate; the court was in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction.
"The court decision set up a Supreme Court case"	True	The Alsup injunction and subsequent circuit rulings did create the path to DHS v. Regents of University of California, decided by SCOTUS in June 2020. Claim is accurate.
"After the ruling, Democrats dropped the DACA-for-Wall deal"	Mostly False	While the Alsup injunction reduced Democratic urgency on DACA, the January 2018 bipartisan framework collapse is widely attributed primarily to Trump's reported 'shithole countries' remarks and his rejection of the bipartisan Gang of Six proposal, not to Democrats opportunistically abandoning a deal they had agreed to. The injunction was one factor but Trump's own actions were the primary breakdown catalyst. Attributing deal failure solely to Democrats 'dropping' the deal post-ruling reverses the documented causal sequence.
"The current situation is 'Democrat obstruction of the needed Wall'"	Mostly False	Trump stated on December 11, 2018 in a televised Oval Office meeting with Pelosi and Schumer: 'I am proud to shut down the government for border security.' Characterizing the resulting shutdown as one-sided Democratic obstruction omits his documented, on-camera ownership of the shutdown decision.

Overall Veracity: 55%