# Post x_270588890698633216

- Post ID: `x_270588890698633216`
- Platform: X (Twitter)
- Posted: 2012-11-19T18:06:33.000Z (UTC)
- Deleted: no
- Repost: no
- Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216
- Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216/analysis
- Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/x_270588890698633216.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording)

## Post text

> ...while her charity is getting less than 5 cents per donated dollar. She should be ashamed!

## Engagement

- Likes: 62
- Reposts: 330
- Replies: 0
- Views: unknown
- Metrics collected: 2026-01-31T23:43:13.259Z (UTC)

# Analysis

_Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-02-13T14:33:06.570Z (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 tweet represents the climax of a multi-tweet retaliation sequence following Cher's public criticism of Trump as a "racist cretin" who promoted birtherism. The attack pattern demonstrates classical narcissistic rage with systematic devaluation across multiple domains (career, family, appearance, morality). The charity accusation is particularly significant as projection: Trump fabricates a "less than 5 cents per donated dollar" efficiency claim against Cher's foundation when IRS records show it actually disbursed 98-99% of expenses to charitable programs in 2011-2012. This moral attack occurs while Trump's own foundation was engaged in systematic self-dealing that later resulted in legal dissolution and  million in damages. The rage is grossly disproportionate - Cher's criticism of a Macy's commercial provokes not defense but character assassination. The tweet employs the Big Lie technique with false precision ("5 cents") to create factual appearance. It reveals core malignant narcissistic features: inability to tolerate criticism, need to totally destroy critics, weaponization of false moral authority, and sadistic pleasure in public shaming. The defense structure is entirely immature (projection, devaluation, rationalization), with no capacity for self-reflection about his own charitable conduct. This exemplifies Trump's 2012 pattern: when injured, fabricate counteraccusations to neutralize legitimate criticism through moral inversion.

# Comprehensive Psychological Analysis: Trump Tweet (November 19, 2012)  ## Context and Timeline  On November 19, 2012, at 1:06 PM EST, Donald Trump posted this tweet as the culmination of a rapid-fire attack sequence against entertainer Cher. The feud began when Cher publicly called Trump a "racist cretin" and announced a boycott of Macy's for selling his product line, criticizing his promotion of birtherism conspiracy theories in a holiday commercial.  Trump's response unfolded in five tweets over one hour: 1. Defensive rationalization about his nature requiring retaliation 2. Political deflection about Obama/Petraeus 3. Unrelated business commentary 4. Direct attack on Cher's relevance and career 5. **This tweet** - fabricated moral accusation about her charity  ## Authorship Attribution  **Assessment: 95% authentic Trump (high confidence)**  While posted at 1:06 PM EST (business hours), multiple factors indicate authenticity: - Part of rapid emotional escalation sequence - Ellipsis beginning signals stream-of-consciousness continuation - Personal, vindictive tone - Moralizing directive ("should be ashamed!") - Pattern consistent with Trump's documented retaliation style  The reactive, personal nature overrides the business-hours timing as a disqualifying factor.  ## Personality Analysis (McAdams Framework)  ### Level 1: Dispositional Traits  **Big Five Profile:** - **Low Agreeableness (15th percentile)**: Extreme antagonism, no empathy for target, zero trust or tender-mindedness - **High Neuroticism - Angry Hostility facet (70th percentile)**: Intense, sustained anger disproportionate to provocation - **Low Conscientiousness (30th percentile)**: No concern for truth or accuracy in accusations; impulsive fabrication - **High Extraversion (75th percentile)**: Public, loud, attention-seeking retaliation - **Low Openness - Values rigidity (30th percentile)**: Black/white moral framing; rigid us-vs-them thinking  ### Level 2: Characteristic Adaptations  **Dominant Motive: Revenge** (0.9/1.0) - Primary goal is punishment and reputation destruction of critic - Agency motives completely dominant (0.9) over communion (0.1) - Zero interest in understanding, reconciliation, or mutual respect  **Activated Schemas:** - Self-as-righteous-crusader exposing hypocrisy - Others-as-attackers who must be destroyed - World-as-combat-zone requiring total victory  ### Level 3: Narrative Identity  **Protagonist Role:** Moral crusader who exposes hypocritical elites  **Identity Claims:** - "I'm the truth-teller who reveals what others hide" - "I'm the fighter who must retaliate - it's my nature" - "I'm the defender of ordinary donors against corrupt celebrities"  **Narrative Sequence:** Contamination - Cher's attack contaminates Trump's business success (Macy's relationship), requiring purification through her destruction  **Contrasting Other:** Hypocritical Hollywood liberals who attack while hiding their own moral failings  ### Level 4: Clinical Indicators  ## Malignant Narcissism Assessment (Kernberg Framework)  ### A. Narcissistic Features (Score: 0.85/1.0)  **Grandiosity:** Claims moral authority to judge and shame others despite own documented charitable violations  **Entitlement:** Believes criticism requires not just defense but total character destruction  **Lack of Empathy:** Zero consideration for truth or impact on Cher; purely instrumental attack  **Interpersonal Exploitation:** Weaponizes false charity statistics to damage reputation  **Envy:** Evidence throughout feud that Cher's cultural status threatens Trump  ### B. Antisocial Features (Score: 0.7/1.0)  **Deceitfulness:** Fabricates specific false statistic ("less than 5 cents per donated dollar")  **Disregard for Others' Rights:** Willingness to destroy reputation with knowing falsehoods  **Lack of Remorse:** No evidence of concern about lying; moral framing suggests self-righteousness  ### C. Paranoid Features (Score: 0.4/1.0)  **Suspiciousness:** Moderate - assumes Cher's charity must have hidden corruption **Counterattack:** Yes - immediate and escalating  ### D. Ego-Syntonic Sadism (Score: 0.75/1.0)  **Public Shaming:** "She should be ashamed!" - direct shame induction **Systematic Devaluation:** Attacks career, family, appearance, morality in sequence **Pleasure in Destruction:** The elaboration and persistence suggest satisfaction in the attack  ## Narcissistic Dynamics  ### Trigger Analysis  **Type:** Narcissistic injury (criticism) **Source:** Cher's public attack calling him "racist cretin" and boycotting his product line **Injury Mechanism:** Public humiliation + threat to business relationship (Macy's) + moral condemnation  ### Narcissistic Rage  **Present:** Yes **Intensity:** 7/10 - sustained, elaborated, multi-vector attack **Proportionality:** 3/10 - grossly disproportionate - **Trigger:** Criticism of commercial/birtherism - **Response:** Five-tweet character assassination including fabricated charity fraud  **Target:** Cher (individual) but generalizable to all celebrity critics  ### State Analysis  **Current State:** Grandiose (dominant) - Moral superiority positioning - Authority to judge and shame - Truth-teller identity claim  **Vulnerable elements** (secondary): - Underlying injury driving the rage - Need to completely destroy rather than simply rebut  ## Defense Mechanisms (Vaillant Hierarchy)  ### Pathological Defenses  **Distortion (present):** - Grossly reshapes reality of Cher's charity efficiency (98-99% to <5%) - Creates alternate moral universe where he has standing to judge  ### Immature Defenses (Dominant Pattern)  **Projection (primary):** - Trump's foundation engaged in systematic self-dealing (portrait purchases, legal settlements, campaign events) - Projects charity misuse onto critic - Moral condemnation of precisely the behavior he practices  **Devaluation (primary):** - Total devaluation across all domains: career ("dying"), family, appearance, morality - No positive qualities acknowledged - Complete character assassination  **Rationalization (secondary):** - Frames personal vendetta as public service - "Exposing" charity fraud as righteous crusade - Creates moral cover for revenge  ### Neurotic Defenses  None observed - no capacity for more mature defense strategies  ## Psychological State Assessment  **Current Affective State:** Narcissistic rage (sustained)  **Impulse Control:** Impaired - cannot disengage from escalating attack  **Reality Testing:** Severely compromised - fabricates statistics without concern for verification  **Moral Reasoning:** Completely self-serving - no actual concern for charity donors; purely instrumental use of moral framing  ## Rhetorical and Propaganda Analysis  ### Rhetorical Devices  1. **Ad Hominem:** Attacking Cher's character rather than addressing substance of her criticism 2. **False Accusation:** Fabricating charity efficiency data 3. **Moral Indignation:** Positioning as defender of charitable donors 4. **Shame Induction:** Direct command to feel ashamed  ### Propaganda Techniques  **Big Lie Technique:** - Specific false statistic ("less than 5 cents") creates appearance of factual basis - Precision creates false authority - Repetition across social media amplifies reach  **Moral Authority Claim:** - Positions self as crusader for proper charity management - Ironic given own foundation's violations (portrait purchase with charity funds, Mar-a-Lago settlement payment, campaign event expenses)  **Deflection Through Counterattack:** - Responds to criticism about racism/birtherism by attacking critic's charity - Shifts conversation from Trump's behavior to Cher's alleged failing  ### Persuasive Structure  The sequence creates permission structure for followers to join attack: 1. Moral framing legitimizes assault 2. Specific "facts" provide ammunition 3. Shame directive provides emotional charge 4. Pattern demonstrates how to handle critics  ## Fact-Checking Analysis  ### Claim 1: "Her charity is getting less than 5 cents per donated dollar"  **Verdict:** FALSE  **Evidence:** IRS Form 990 filings for Cher Charitable Foundation show: - **2012:** 32,729 charitable disbursements / 35,551 total expenses = **99.2% program efficiency** - **2011:** 58,520 charitable disbursements / 63,928 total expenses = **98.0% program efficiency** - Officer compensation: **/bin/sh** in both years  This represents exceptionally high efficiency, among the best possible for charitable foundations. Trump's claim inverts reality: Cher's charity gave ~99 cents per dollar, not <5 cents.  **Sources:** - [ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer - Cher Charitable Foundation](https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200856879)  ### Claim 2: Red Cross CEO salary 51,957 (from previous tweet in sequence)  **Verdict:** FALSE  **Evidence:** This figure came from viral misinformation emails. Gail McGovern was CEO in 2011; her actual total compensation was approximately 61,000, not 51,957.  **Sources:** - [Snopes: Executive Salaries in Charities](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/executive-salaries-charities/) - [PolitiFact: Facebook post on Red Cross CEO pay](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/feb/08/facebook-posts/refurbished-meme-unsubstantiated-red-cross-ceo-pay/)  ## Gaslighting and Reality Distortion  ### Gaslighting Present: YES  **Mechanisms:**  1. **Fabricating Alternate Reality:** Creates completely false statistical basis for Cher's charity efficiency 2. **Moral Inversion:** Accuses critic of behavior (charity misuse) Trump's own foundation systematically engaged in 3. **Shame Manipulation:** Creates false grounds for shame to undermine legitimate criticism  ### Reality Distortions Catalog  1. Cher's charity efficiency inverted from 99% to <5% 2. Red Cross CEO salary inflated by ~00,000 3. Moral standing to judge charity conduct while own foundation engaged in self-dealing  ### Gaslighting Strategy  The specific false statistic serves to make observers question their own judgment: - "Maybe I was wrong to support Cher's criticism" - "Maybe Trump has a point about Hollywood hypocrisy" - "Maybe the real problem is liberal celebrity charity fraud"  This creates confusion that benefits Trump by muddying the waters around legitimate criticism of birtherism.  ## Projection Analysis: The Central Psychological Mechanism  This tweet is a textbook case of psychological projection. Trump accuses Cher of the precise behavior his own foundation engaged in:  **Trump Foundation Violations (later documented):** - 0,000 to purchase portrait of himself for Mar-a-Lago - 58,000 to settle legal disputes for his for-profit businesses - 0,000 to purchase portrait of himself for one of his golf clubs - Campaign events funded with charity money - Foundation dissolved by court order in 2018 - Trump paid  million in damages for misuse of foundation funds  **Timeline Irony:** At the exact moment (2012) Trump is fabricating charity fraud accusations against Cher, his own foundation is actively engaged in self-dealing.  **Psychological Function:** Projection serves to: 1. Deflect from own guilt by attacking others for same behavior 2. Create moral equivalence ("everyone does it") 3. Preemptively neutralize future criticism 4. Maintain grandiose self-image despite contradicting behavior  ## Pattern Recognition: The Retaliation Sequence  This tweet exemplifies Trump's characteristic five-stage retaliation pattern:  **Stage 1 - Defensive Rationalization:** "It's my nature" to hit back **Stage 2 - Political Deflection:** Obama/Petraeus distraction **Stage 3 - Unrelated Assertion:** Hostess commentary (dominance display) **Stage 4 - Personal Devaluation:** "Dying career" attack **Stage 5 - Moral Destruction:** **This tweet** - fabricated character assassination  The pattern shows: - Inability to simply rebut criticism - Need for total victory through complete destruction - Escalation from defense to offense - Moral positioning to legitimize assault  ## Comparative Context: Trump vs. Cher Charitable Conduct  ### Cher Charitable Foundation (2011-2012) - **Program efficiency:** 98-99% - **Officer compensation:** /bin/sh - **Self-dealing:** None documented - **Legal violations:** None documented  ### Trump Foundation (2011-2012) - **Self-dealing:** Active and ongoing - **Personal benefit:** Portraits, legal settlements, business expenses - **Later outcome:** Dissolved by court order, M damages - **Legal violations:** Multiple, documented  The contrast makes the projection especially stark: the person with documented charitable violations fabricates violations by the person with exemplary charitable conduct.  ## Danger Assessment  **Danger Level:** None  This is reputational attack, not physical threat. No eliminationist language, dehumanization, or violent imagery. The danger is to Cher's reputation and to epistemic commons (truth), not physical safety.  ## Hypomania Indicators  **State Assessment:** Mild hypomanic features  **Evidence:** - Rapid-fire tweet sequence (5 tweets in 1 hour) - Escalating intensity across multiple attack vectors - Grandiose moral positioning - Inability to disengage from conflict - Sustained high energy output on vendetta  Not meeting threshold for clinical hypomania but showing elevated activation consistent with narcissistic rage state.  ## Longitudinal Significance  ### For Trump Pattern Recognition (2012 Baseline)  This tweet is entirely typical of Trump's 2012 communication style: - Immediate counterattack to criticism - Fabrication of specific accusations - Moral positioning - Multi-vector character assault - Projection of own failings - Inability to disengage  No cognitive deviation from baseline. Sentence structure, vocabulary, and rhetorical strategy are characteristic of his authentic posts from this period.  ### For Epistemic Commons  This tweet demonstrates a pattern that becomes increasingly significant over Trump's political career: - Willingness to fabricate specific "facts" to damage opponents - Use of false precision to create authority - Weaponization of charity watchdog concerns for personal vendetta - Testing of whether false accusations face consequences  The lack of consequences for this fabrication (no defamation suit, no platform sanction, no reputational cost) arguably reinforced the behavior pattern.  ## Research Implications  ### For Understanding Malignant Narcissism  This tweet provides clear evidence of the four-component structure:  1. **Narcissistic features:** Grandiosity, entitlement, lack of empathy 2. **Antisocial features:** Lying, disregard for others' rights 3. **Paranoid features:** Assumption of hidden corruption in critics 4. **Sadism:** Pleasure in public shaming and reputation destruction  ### For Understanding Projection Dynamics  Demonstrates that projection can be: - Highly specific (charity misuse) - Completely inverted from reality (99% → 5%) - Simultaneous with the projected behavior (self-dealing while accusing others) - Instrumental (serves revenge motive)  ### For Understanding Disinformation Tactics  Shows early development of techniques later deployed at scale: - Big Lie with false precision - Moral authority claims while engaging in accused behavior - Deflection through counteraccusation - Testing of consequences for fabrication  ## Clinical Summary  This tweet demonstrates a malignant narcissistic response pattern characterized by:  1. **Grossly disproportionate rage** following narcissistic injury 2. **Complete reality distortion** to serve revenge motive   3. **Projection** of own documented violations onto critic 4. **Immature defense structure** (projection, devaluation, rationalization) 5. **Sadistic elements** in public shaming and systematic destruction 6. **Instrumental lying** without remorse or reality constraint 7. **Moral inversion** to create righteous cover for retaliation  The psychological pattern is entirely consistent with malignant narcissism as described by Kernberg: narcissistic personality features combined with antisocial behavior (lying), paranoid tendencies (assumption of corruption), and ego-syntonic sadism (pleasure in others' humiliation).  The tweet is clinically significant because it demonstrates: - Complete failure of reality testing in service of narcissistic needs - Willingness to fabricate damaging accusations without factual basis - Projection occurring simultaneously with the projected behavior - Absence of mature defense mechanisms - Pattern that persists and escalates over subsequent years  ## Archetypal Analysis  **Primary Archetype:** Trickster + Shadow  Trump embodies the **Trickster** who: - Breaks conventional rules (fabricating statistics) - Inverts moral order (accuser becomes accused) - Creates chaos through disruption - Speaks what's forbidden (direct accusation of fraud)  The **Shadow** archetype is visible in projection: - Trump's own charity corruption becomes Cher's corruption - His disregard for rules becomes her moral failing - What he disowns in himself he attacks in her  **Mythological Pattern:** The wounded narcissist who must destroy the one who wounded him, creating a permission structure for followers to join the attack as moral crusade.  ## Conclusion  This tweet represents a crystalline example of malignant narcissistic rage, employing projection, fabrication, and moral inversion to neutralize criticism through total destruction of the critic. The complete disconnect from factual reality (inverting 99% charity efficiency to <5%), combined with moral positioning despite documented self-dealing, demonstrates the psychological structure that would later characterize Trump's political communication: reality is subordinated entirely to narcissistic needs, with no capacity for self-reflection or mature defense mechanisms. The pattern is stable, sustained, and resistant to external correction—hallmarks of characterological rather than situational pathology.  ---  **Sources Consulted:** - [ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer - Cher Charitable Foundation](https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200856879) - [Snopes: Executive Salaries in Charities](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/executive-salaries-charities/) - [PolitiFact: Facebook post on Red Cross CEO pay](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/feb/08/facebook-posts/refurbished-meme-unsubstantiated-red-cross-ceo-pay/) - [Digital Spy: Cher slams Trump in online feud](https://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/a438052/cher-slams-donald-trump-in-online-feud-he-is-a-flaming-asshole/) - [E! Online: Trump and Cher's Twitter War](https://www.eonline.com/news/362818/feud-alert-donald-trump-and-cher-s-twitter-war-gets-ugly) - [Village Voice: Trump's Latest Twitter Target - Cher](https://www.villagevoice.com/2012/11/14/donald-trumps-latest-twitter-target-cher-and-her-plastic-surgeries-that-didnt-work/)

## Fact Verification

| Claim | Verdict | Evidence |
|-------|---------|----------|
| "Cher's charity is getting less than 5 cents per donated dollar" | **False** | IRS Form 990 filings show the Cher Charitable Foundation disbursed 98-99% of expenses to charitable programs in 2011-2012. In 2012: 32,729 of 35,551 total expenses (99.2%) went to charitable disbursements. In 2011: 58,520 of 63,928 (98.0%) went to charitable programs. Officer compensation was /bin/sh in both years. This represents exceptionally high efficiency, not the <5% Trump claims. |
| "Red Cross CEO salary in 2011 was 51,957 (from previous tweet in sequence)" | **False** | This figure was from a viral misinformation email. Gail McGovern was CEO in 2011, and her total compensation was approximately 61,000, not 51,957. The viral email incorrectly cited former CEO Marsha Evans. |

Overall Veracity: 0%

## Authorship Analysis

**Self-Written** (score: 95%)

### Indicators

- Posted at 1:06 PM EST (business hours in New York)
- Continuation of multi-tweet attack sequence within same hour
- Stream-of-consciousness reactivity pattern
- Ellipsis continuation from previous tweet
- Personal, impulsive tone attacking individual

## Psychological Profile

### State

**Grandiose State**

**Trigger:** Narcissistic Injury — Criticism (Cher's public attack calling him 'racist cretin' and boycotting Macy's over his product line)

**Rage:** Intensity 70% targeting Cher
- Proportionality: 30%

Sentiment: -0.80

**Mildly Hypomanic**
- Rapid-fire tweet sequence (5 tweets in one hour)
- Escalating intensity of attacks across multiple domains
- Grandiose moral positioning
- Inability to disengage from conflict

### Clinical

**Malignant Narcissism:**
- Narcissistic: 85%
- Antisocial: 70%
- Paranoid: 40%
- Sadism: 75%

**Defense Mechanisms:**
- projection (immature)
- devaluation (immature)
- rationalization (neurotic)

**Cognitive Complexity:**
- Complexity: 60%

**Parasocial Techniques:**
- Moral positioning as defender of charity donors
- Creating permission structure for followers to join in attacking Cher
- Weaponizing charity watchdog concerns to legitimize personal vendetta

## Danger Assessment

**NONE**

### Gaslighting

- Fabricating specific false statistics to create alternate reality about Cher's charity
- Moral inversion - accusing critic of the type of behavior (charity misuse) Trump's own foundation later proved guilty of
- Creating false grounds for shame to undermine legitimate criticism

## Fact Checks (2)

_The model's verdicts from 2026-02-13._

> Cher's charity is getting less than 5 cents per donated dollar

**FALSE**

IRS Form 990 filings show the Cher Charitable Foundation disbursed 98-99% of expenses to charitable programs in 2011-2012. In 2012: 32,729 of 35,551 total expenses (99.2%) went to charitable disbursements. In 2011: 58,520 of 63,928 (98.0%) went to charitable programs. Officer compensation was /bin/sh in both years. This represents exceptionally high efficiency, not the <5% Trump claims.

Sources: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200856879

> Red Cross CEO salary in 2011 was 51,957 (from previous tweet in sequence)

**FALSE**

This figure was from a viral misinformation email. Gail McGovern was CEO in 2011, and her total compensation was approximately 61,000, not 51,957. The viral email incorrectly cited former CEO Marsha Evans.

Sources: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/executive-salaries-charities/

Overall Veracity: 0%

## Tags

- projection (90%)
- devaluation (85%)
- narcissistic_injury (80%)
- disproportionate_rage (70%)
- fabricated_evidence (95%)
- ad_hominem (80%)
- sadism (75%)
- revenge_seeking (90%)
- false_statistics (90%)
- rapid_tweeting (60%)

## That day

_From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._

**Trump Articulates His Aggression Philosophy Then Spends the Day Proving It**

Trump spent a busy afternoon publicly explaining why he loves attacking people — then immediately demonstrated the point by going after Chelsea Handler, Cher, and several major charities using debunked claims from chain emails. The mood was consistently combative and self-assured, with Trump framing his compulsive need to punch back at critics as a personal strength superior to therapy. The only flicker of defensiveness came late in the day when a random Twitter user brought up bankruptcy. A handful of aide-written posts about Hurricane Sandy, Fox & Friends, and holiday warmth provided thin cover for what was otherwise a masterclass in self-congratulatory score-settling.

Full digest for 2012-11-19: https://trump.fm/date/2012-11-19/analysis

## Citation

- APA: Trump, D. J. (2012, November 19). ...while her charity is getting less than 5 cents... [Social media post]. X (Twitter). trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216
- MLA: Trump, Donald J. "...while her charity is getting less than 5 cents per..." X (Twitter), 19 Nov. 2012. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026.
- Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "...while her charity is getting less than 5 cents per...," X (Twitter), November 19, 2012, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216.

## 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/x_270588890698633216
- Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/x_270588890698633216
- All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/x_270588890698633216
- Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2012-11-19
- The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/x_270588890698633216.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`._