Analysis: Ask Sally Yates, under oath, if she knows how classified inf...

9y ago May 8, 2017 at 2:43 PM

Ask Sally Yates, under oath, if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after she explained it to W.H. Counsel.

0:00 0:00

AI Analysis

Machine-generated analysis of the post above on 2026-03-11. Not written by the author of the post.

Danger Level

None

Narcissistic State

Grandiose

Authorship

Uncertain

Intensity

50%

This post, a corrected repost of an earlier misspelled version, demonstrates a characteristic deflection pattern in response to narcissistic injury from exposure. Sally Yates's testimony that she warned the White House about Flynn being compromised by Russia threatened Trump's narrative. Rather than address the substance, Trump employs projection (accusing Yates of leaking), displacement (redirecting to leaks rather than Flynn's conduct), and prosecutorial framing ("under oath") to recast Yates as the wrongdoer. The gaslighting dimension is notable: the post attempts to shift public perception from "the White House ignored warnings about a compromised National Security Advisor" to "Sally Yates leaked classified information." The corrected spelling from "Council" to "Counsel" provides a rare window into the editing process—either self-correction or aide intervention. Psychologically, this reflects the paranoid features of the personality profile, where adversaries are presumed to conspire and whistleblowers are reframed as saboteurs. The pattern of attacking investigators and witnesses rather than addressing allegations is consistent across the longitudinal record.

Authorship Analysis

Uncertain

Indicators:

Earlier version had 'Council' misspelling (authentic indicator)
Corrected to 'Counsel' suggests aide cleanup
Business hours posting (10:43 AM ET)
Accusatory rhetorical style is characteristic Trump
Reactive to same-day testimony—emotionally driven

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Grandiose State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Exposure (Sally Yates testimony revealing White House was warned about Flynn)

Rage: Intensity 50% targeting Sally Yates

Proportionality

40%

Sentiment

-0.50

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

40%

Antisocial

30%

Paranoid

50%

Sadism

20%

Defense Mechanisms:

projectiondisplacementrationalization

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

60%

Parasocial Techniques:

Inviting audience to join prosecutorial stance against YatesFraming shared enemies

Danger Assessment

None

Gaslighting Detected:

Reframes Yates from whistleblower to suspect
Redirects narrative from 'WH ignored warnings' to 'who leaked?'

Reality Distortions:

Implies Yates was responsible for classified leaks without evidence
Reframes the story from Flynn compromise to leak investigation

Fact Checks (1)

"Classified information got into the newspapers soon after Yates explained it to White House Counsel"

Half True

Yates warned WH Counsel Don McGahn about Flynn on Jan 26-27, 2017. The Washington Post published details of Flynn's calls with Russian Ambassador Kislyak on Feb 9, 2017—about two weeks later. The timeline is roughly accurate but the implication that Yates was the source is unsubstantiated.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Analysis: Post x_861592420043157504 (2017-05-08)

Context

This post was published the same day Sally Yates testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee about warning the White House that Michael Flynn was compromised. Trump is attempting to reframe the narrative away from Flynn's vulnerability to Russian blackmail and toward the question of classified leaks—a classic deflection.

Note: A nearly identical post was made earlier with "Council" (misspelling) which was corrected to "Counsel" in this version—indicating Trump noticed the error or an aide corrected it.

Authorship

Posted at 14:43 UTC = 10:43 AM ET. Trump was likely in Washington, D.C. This is business hours, and the corrected spelling of "Counsel" (from the earlier "Council" version) suggests possible aide involvement in the correction. However, the rhetorical style—accusatory, deflective, directed at a specific adversary—is characteristically Trump. The original "Council" misspelling in the earlier version is a strong authentic indicator. This corrected repost could be aide-assisted cleanup of an authentic post.

Psychological Analysis

The post is a textbook example of deflection through counterattack. Rather than addressing Yates's testimony about Flynn being compromised, Trump redirects to the question of who leaked classified information. This serves multiple functions:

Reframes Yates from whistleblower to suspect
Implies she is the source of leaks (projection)
Positions the White House as victim of unauthorized disclosure rather than as having ignored warnings about a compromised National Security Advisor

The phrase "under oath" is an implicit threat—suggesting Yates could face perjury if she doesn't answer satisfactorily, while also signaling to his base that he believes she is lying.

Defense Mechanisms

Projection: Accusing Yates of impropriety when the underlying issue is the White House's failure to act on her warnings about Flynn
Displacement: Redirecting anger about damaging testimony toward the leak itself
Rationalization: Framing the leak as the real crime rather than Flynn's conduct

Rhetorical Techniques

The rhetorical question format ("Ask Sally Yates...") is a prosecutorial technique that implies guilt without directly stating it. It invites the audience to become investigators focused on his preferred narrative.

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"Classified information got into the newspapers soon after Yates explained it to White House Counsel"	Half True	Yates warned WH Counsel Don McGahn about Flynn on Jan 26-27, 2017. The Washington Post published details of Flynn's calls with Russian Ambassador Kislyak on Feb 9, 2017—about two weeks later. The timeline is roughly accurate but the implication that Yates was the source is unsubstantiated.

Overall Veracity: 50%