How low will he go? Trump blames the killing of Rob Reiner and his wife on 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' in a despicable social media post

How sick do you have to be to still be supporting this dreadful human being?

To read this issue in your browser, click on the headline above.

Tuesdays at 11:30 a.m. I talk with WGN-AM 720 host John Williams about what’s making news and likely to be grist for the PS mill. The WGN listen-live link is here.

No visual jokes this week. I couldn’t assemble a worthy set. But there is still time to vote in the current quip of the week poll!

Our ‘vile, disgusting and immoral’ president hits a new low, but probably not rock bottom

I’m often dismayed, disappointed and infuriated by the unhinged blather of President Donald Trump — his lies, his racism, his pettiness, his bellicosity. But the regular onslaught of ominous nonsense has mostly numbed me to remarks and social media posts, any one of which would have risen to the level of a national scandal under previous presidents.

But his post Monday morning about the slaying of Hollywood icon Rob Reiner and his wife left me truly shocked:

A very sad thing happened last night in Hollywood. Rob Reiner, a tortured and struggling, but once very talented movie director and comedy star, has passed away, together with his wife, Michele, reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, sometimes referred to as TDS. He was known to have driven people CRAZY by his raging obsession of President Donald J. Trump, with his obvious paranoia reaching new heights as the Trump Administration surpassed all goals and expectations of greatness, and with the Golden Age of America upon us, perhaps like never before. May Rob and Michele rest in peace!

Reportedly? No. Not a single news organization I could find was reporting that the Reiners were targeted because of Rob Reiner’s outspoken opposition to Trump, and many were reporting that they were most likely attacked and killed in their home by their troubled son Nick.

Strongly implying that someone brought about his own murder because of his outspoken political views is just the sort of thing that got hundreds of people fired, suspended or disciplined in the wake of the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

The liberal cable network formerly known as MSNBC terminated commentator Matthew Dowd for saying “Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. You can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have saying these awful words, and then not expect awful actions to take place.”

That’s tame compared to what Trump posted, despite how he attempted to bracket his celebratory narcissistic ranting with obsequious platitudes. Later in the day he doubled down when asked if he stood by his post:

He was a deranged person as far as Trump is concerned. He said … that I was a friend of Russia, controlled by Russia, you know, it was the Russia hoax. He was one of the people behind it. I think he hurt himself career wise. He became like a deranged person. Trump Derangement Syndrome. So I was not a fan of Rob Reiner at all, in any way, shape or form. I thought he was very bad for our country.

Yet Trump’s MAGA base, many of whom were outraged at those who did not properly mourn Kirk’s murder, are unlikely to demand that Congress impeach and remove him.

Here’s prominent Trump sycophant Laura Loomer on Monday:

Rob Reiner had a level of TDS that likely exuded a level of craziness around those he spent time with. … Trump is right. Reiner himself sounded insane when he would speak. Imagine how crazy his own kid was.

And here’s Loomer after Kirk was killed:

I will be spending my night making everyone I find online who celebrates his death famous, so prepare to have your whole future professional aspirations ruined if you are sick enough to celebrate his death. I’m going to make you wish you never opened your mouth.

Conservative political consultant Alex Bruesewitz on Monday:

I’m not going to participate in the fake outrage at President Trump for his response to Rob Reiner. Rob Reiner called for Trump to be arrested and charged with treason, a crime punishable by death.

And here’s Bruesewitz fulminating about Kirk murder:

Any Democrat and any member in the media who has used the words fascist or Nazi or threat to democracy to describe President Trump, Charlie Kirk, or any of us has blood on their hands. … They are responsible for this.

As an aside, for Bruesewitz’s information, a partial list of people Trump has accused of treason includes Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Mark Milley, Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Liz Cheney, James Comey, James Clapper and Adam Kinzinger.

At one point, after one of his first-term State of the Union addresses, Trump even suggested that congressional Democrats might have committed treason because they failed to applaud to his satisfaction. (MSNOW)

A few cracks in the Republican wall seemed to open wider, but I have no illusions that it’s close to crumbling.

Reconstructed U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, now a Trump foe, posted about Trump’s reaction, “This is a family tragedy, not about politics or political enemies.”

Kentucky Republican U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, who has also recently established some distance between himself and Trump, posted:

Regardless of how you felt about Rob Reiner, this is inappropriate and disrespectful discourse about a man who was just brutally murdered. I guess my elected GOP colleagues, the VP, and White House staff will just ignore it because they’re afraid? I challenge anyone to defend it.

Christian conservative theologian Russell Moore, an editor at large for Christianity Today magazine, posted:

How this vile, disgusting, and immoral behavior has become normalized in the United States is something our descendants will study in school, to the shame of our generation.

Oklahoma Republican U.S. Rep. Stephanie Bice posted, “A father and mother were murdered at the hands of their troubled son. We should be lifting the family up in prayer, not making this about politics.”

Most of us already knew that Trump is a low-class sociopath with barely a shred of human decency in him. Yet still he manages to surprise and disgust us anew, and I’m sure that as low as Monday’s post was, he’ll go even lower soon enough.

For the record, here is what Reiner had to say after Kirk was gunned down:

Horrible, absolutely horrible. …(It) is beyond belief what happened to him and that should never happen to anybody. I don’t care what your political beliefs are. That’s not acceptable. That’s not a solution to solving problems.

This is what you say in public in the wake of any tragic death, no matter what the victim’s politics. Grown ups know that.

Notes and comments from readers — lightly edited — along with my responses

On garbage collection fees

Marc Martinez — Cate Plys had an excellent op-ed in the Trib — How Mayor Brandon Johnson can help the budget and make the city’s trash fee more equitable” (gift link) —in which she offered some very good ideas that are better than anything from the mayor or city council.

But I disagree with her premise. She says that the city spends $320 million on garbage collection and only collects $60 million in fees. There is no reason for the consumers of a service to not pay the full cost of the service. The fees should cover the total cost of the service.

Hiding that true cost prevents the voters from being able to assess the quality and value of the city operations. It is also another demonstration of the inability of government to properly set the prices for even the most obvious functions.

There is also no reason for the price of services to be graduated. Graduated fees for city services is merely a hidden tax. If government wants to tax residents in order to provide welfare payments to some segment of the population, then they should make it clear to voters and not hide the spending in weird subsidy and rebate programs. Everyone deserves to see the true cost of services.

Zorn — Well, by that logic everyone from Elon Musk to the person who cleans Elon Musk’s house should pay the same dollar amount each year in taxes so as not to “hide” the true cost of government. That would be ultra-regressive.

By the way, in Los Angeles, “Residents living in single-family homes and duplexes will see their monthly fees increase from $36.32 to $55.95. … Over the next four years, fees will rise by $10 to $65.93. Rates will be reduced for those who qualify for the city’s EZ-SAVE or Lifeline programs.”

C Pittman — Everyone is missing the bigger issue — city trash trucks operate with three people per truck. The private haulers operate with two or even one per truck. It is such a money loser for the city because of the bloated union contract.

Trump will not fade away …

Richard Bales —-You wrote the following:

“My thought, my hope, is that as the Trump years fade into the background, history will record this as a very shameful chapter, and many people who like to think of themselves as decent, moral, fair-minded people will be ashamed at having enabled Trump or looked the other way as he degraded our nation and attacked our Constitution.”

I first thought of this when I read of Marjorie Taylor Greene being on “60 Minutes” and talking about how Republicans, when behind closed doors, disparage Trump.

And now I wonder: Four years from now, when Trump is out of office and a normal person is president, will these Republicans start to come forward, one by one, and ask for forgiveness or at least understanding? And if they do, what do we say to them? Do we forgive them? Or do we at least say, “That’s okay, understand.”
I hope not.

Joan P. — Sadly, the Trump years will not “fade into the background”. We will be stuck with the ramifications of his actions, and the Supreme Court decisions upholding them, for decades to come.

Zorn — I’ve yet to see a good chart showing things about the Trump years that will return to normal soon enough and things we’re stuck with for the foreseeable future. It’s probably too early to know what the wreckage will look like some 1130 days from now. We may indeed need a robust truth and reconciliation program.

… and he still has defenders

David Leitschuh —As a conservative I strongly support Trump’s policies that support smaller government, decreased regulation and lower taxes.

Philosophically I also support free trade as that benefits all nations. But most of the world has been taking advantage of the US with artificial barriers, limits and tariffs against our products and services, and Trump is now using tariffs to achieve much more balanced trade agreements which I support.

I support Trump’s efforts to eliminate DEI which I believe wrongly sees people primarily as members of pre-assigned groups, and treats them differently because of their group identification. I believe everyone should be treated equally and based upon their merits and actions as individuals. Similarly, I strongly support protecting women in sports against biological males competing as women.

I differ strongly with Trump on his treatment of Russia’s invasion of The Ukraine. I served in NATO Command during the height of the Cold War and see Putin’s aggressive expansionism for what it is, an attempt to reconstitute a forced union of neighboring countries subservient to Moscow. I am very frustrated with the way that Putin continues to fool Trump time and again, and believe that we should more strongly join with our allies to make the costs of Putin’s invasion unacceptable to Russia and force him to withdraw.

I also believe that Trump has made a mistake in reining in Israel before Hamas has been thoroughly disarmed and defeated. As things stand now, they apparently remain in place with full intention to continue governance and that is a prescription that will result in another attack on Israel in the future and more war and bloodshed.

I did not support weaponization of the justice system against Trump, and I do not support weaponization of the justice system against Trump’s enemies.

And, I am disgusted with many of Trump’s unnecessarily bellicose and crazy statements. I reject his recent repugnant statement that Somalis are a dirty people that are not wanted here. I am also offended when I see Trump selling Bibles and doing things of that nature.

So in summary, I do support the great majority of Trump’s policies which I believe fit very well with my conservative philosophy. I disagree with Trump and some of his policies, and I certainly do not support his brash and arrogant and too often offensive manner. I hope that gives you an understanding of my perspective of Trump and our political scene as a conservative.

Zorn — I will not counter any of your views here, tempting though it is, but only say I’m glad you’re back to offer some balance to the Z-mail section.

Circular tariff logic

Bob E. — Let me get this straight: Trump is now going to make big bailout payments to farmers, paid out of tariff revenues, because their income is down because of tariffs. Brilliant!

Why we should have the right to die

David White — Back in January, my wife was in a lot of pain, and went to the hospital to get relief. She was given multiple tests, and although she had problems in many of her organ systems, none were treatable (she was 84 years old), but her doctor said she could live several years like this. She was given a morphine prescription for her pain, and was sent home. She weighed eighty pounds, could only eat small amounts of solid food due to a dysfunctional esophagus, couldn’t get out of bed, was on a catheter, and I was responsible for her care. Her only wish at this point was to die, but that was not permitted. If she had been a dog or a cat, her veterinarian would have had the compassion to help her out of her physical and emotional pain. But she was a human in the United States of America, where we have no problem killing men, women, and children in other countries; but keep Americans alive against their will, and at all costs. So she stopped eating and drinking entirely. After eight days she starved to death.

Wendy C. — Being forced to watch a loved one go through such torture is inexcusable. My mother suffered intense pain from sciatica and was terrorized by hallucinations caused by her dementia. The medication she was offered could not give her relief. She required 24 hour supervision so she would not hurt herself; we took turns caring for her. A former nurse, she asked for a no resuscitation order, as she had seen too many people brought back to life in these situations. But she would not have been allowed to benefit from the new law in Illinois.

K. Mason — I am so very very tired of the ‘slippery slope’ arguments against medical aid in dying. If I want to go down the slope, why is it of any concern to anyone else? I want to be able to sign a document while I still have my marbles that would go into effect if/when I lose them. Instead we have those who say “She might have changed her mind in the years between the signing and today.” So they won’t do the humane, kind, reasonable thing and put an end to my misery, pretending that 1) I had a mind left to change and 2) that people who have never met me will know better than I do what that choice would be! If others wish to live indefinitely without hope for recovery, I fully respect their choice. Just as I want my choice to end my life with dignity to be respected.

Why we should be cautious about allowing the right to die

Lynne Allen Taylor — Ending life for people with dementia is not as simple as throwing people with memory loss on some metaphorical ice flow. How do you define personhood? By memory? By executive function? We often describe persons with memory loss as “not themselves.” Do people with dementia have a “self?” Is it a new self? One the observer is uncomfortable with? Should relatives be able to make decisions based on a feeling that “Grandpa wouldn’t want to live like this” even though the person with memory loss might be content? (As a note, my own mother went through periods of contentment, anger and hallucinating as she suffered Alzheimers.)

Wendy C. —Dementia is not, on its own, a condition that justifies ending a life. Obviously, in most cases, the person is unaware they’re suffering from a loss of mental ability. It’s relevant in this discussion, as dementia prevents the patient from giving legal consent to a decision regarding their medical options and treatment. The physical health of the patient, including unbearable pain and lack of function due to disease or organ failure should be the primary concern.

Zorn — We should all be allowed to sign living will-type documents when we are of sound mind spelling out the conditions under which we would like to have medical aid in dying. Because, as K. Mason points out above, dementia patients no longer have the capacity to request or consent to treatment.

The Sun-Times Monday quoted Illinois Republican House Leader Tony McCombie of Savanna’s objection to the law that Gov. JB Pritzker signed Friday, “When my mother passed at home, I know she would have chosen this path to ease our pain, not her own,” which, by God, ought to have been her right. I do not want to put my children or my wife through what the families of loved ones with severe dementia must go through.

The AI debate goes on

Joanie Wimmer — Regarding your “Sloppy Thinking” dialogue last week with the man who objected to your use of an AI image to illustrate a story, let me add that I really hate AI “art” and AI “music.” In fact, I don’t think the terms “art” and “music” should even be applied to AI creations. Art and music are created by people, often, at least in part, to express powerful emotions or feelings, which can bring about catharsis in the viewer or listener.

The creation of art and music is a uniquely human endeavor. When I sing in concert in the choral groups I belong to, I often experience intense catharsis and joy, along with stirring of powerful memories. Computers and machines don’t have emotions or feelings, so what they generate is, indeed, fraudulent “slop.” It’s worse than elevator music or Muzak.

I experience anger when I see or hear I generated “art” and “music” because as soon as I realize that it’s AI generated, I feel that someone was trying to fool me. It’s utterly fraudulent. It’s not real in the sense that it is not what it purports to be.

There is no such thing as machine intelligence or artificial intelligence. Computers and machines simply do what we program them to do. They don’t have intelligence in any real sense. They just have the capacity to sift through data incredibly quickly because we program them to do so.

Wendy C. — Is art unique to humans, only humans? I don’t agree. We see many examples in nature: birdsong, the formations of icebergs, the beauty of flowering plants. Are they less artistic because a human didn’t design them? Does it require emotions to create art, or merely to interpret it?

People use computers to photoshop pictures, creating another form of art. Isn’t it a natural progression to directly program a computer to create art, obviously using information programmed into by humans? Computers aren’t, as of yet, sentient, but if they were, could we then object to their creations as “slop”? I don’t think so.

Joanie Wimmer — I do think art and music, as we know them, are unique to humans. I don’t know of any animals that create art or music. Even the early cave drawings were done by homo neanderthalensis and homo sapiens, both considered human species. Icebergs certainly form in the ocean, but not as a result of any thought or creative process engaged in by the water molecules or the weather. The same can be said of flowers. What we consider to be their beauty was not the result of any creative process, but rather it is the result of millennia of evolution. And I do not consider the mating calls of animals to be art or music. Again they seem to be the result of millennia of natural selection. So, yes, I consider the creation of art and music to be a uniquely human endeavor. As you say, computers are not sentient. And I think that the concept of sentient computers is a little like the concept of interstellar travel—neat ideas for science fiction, but ideas that will never cross the boundary into reality. Maybe instead of investing trillions into “artificial intelligence,” we should invest more in cultivating real intelligence by promoting education and the enrichment of human lives.

JakeH. — Something can be beautiful and affecting to us without qualifying as art. I agree with Joanie that art is, by definition, a human creation. If one believes in a creator God, one might say that the wonders of nature are such God’s art. But, in any case, the word implies intentional creation for its own sake, a work of aesthetic expression typically containing some combination of emotional and intellectual elements, and not, as evolutionary science has it, a mere accident of biology.

I’m skeptical that any other species has the cognitive capacity to create something in an analogous way. When a bird sings, it doesn’t know what it’s doing. It surely has a purpose from the bird’s perspective -- just as many dogs experience a deep-seated biological imperative to howl at sirens, to alert the other wolves -- but it’s not a purpose the bird is capable of understanding or evaluating. Its beauty resides entirely in our heads, just as when Wordsworth encountered “A host, of golden daffodils; Beside the lake, beneath the trees, Fluttering and dancing in the breeze,” his poem was the art, not the daffodils.

I think AI-produced material *can* be art, but it’s not the art of the machine, which, like the bird, and like the accidental forces of evolutionary biology, doesn’t know what it’s doing. Rather, it’s the art of the human prompter and refiner of the AI product. In this view, the AI is the artist’s tool in creating a work of art. I recently read an article about the creator of Tilly Norwood, the pretty AI-generated character meant to offer a glimpse into a world of AI “actors.” (By the way, my antipathy toward the character softened just a bit upon learning that her Frankenstein was a woman and not a creepy dude.)

I don’t say that this is great art or even good art. But it is certainly art, and it did take a good deal of work and talent to create.

Unpopular opinions?

I’m as staunch a believer in keeping church and state as separate as possible. I don’t want the Ten Commandments posted in public buildings, I don’t want public school students to have to say “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, I don’t care for “in God we trust” on our currency or nativity scenes in public squares, and I object to mandatory moments of silence in the classroom intended to induce students to pray.

But …

I believe that winter holiday choral concerts in public schools should include a generous sampling of openly religious songs along with the generic celebrations of cold weather, anthropomorphic snowmen and gift exchanges. The Winter Solstice is the reason for the season, let’s be honest, but major faith traditions have claimed it and generated some of the greatest traditional music in the canon.

Public schools are understandably shy about seeming to proselytize, and that’s good. A former Chicago Public Schools music teacher recently told me that Santa songs were OK by her administration, but Jesus was not to be named. Fair enough. But that means ignoring the a major part of the historical and cultural context of December celebrations in the name of religious neutrality.

As long as a range of faiths are presented in song, and as long students are reminded that we sing them not because we necessarily believe the message of the lyrics, but because they are part of our rich musical heritage, I’m all for it. “Silent Night” can be on the right side of the wall between church and state.

Last week’s result

My opinion lost out!

355 votes

Stephen Isaacs — I see no problem with requiring incumbents to provide petition signatures. What bothers me is a discrepancy between signature requirements for the two major parties and other parties in state and county elections. For example, Democrat and Republican candidates for statewide office must get 5,000 signatures, but independents or other parties have to get 25,000 signatures. This is a built-in protection for the established parties at the expense of choice for the voters. I don’t buy the argument that requiring more signature for anyone who is not a Democrat or a Republican keeps frivolous candidates off the ballot. Voters can distinguish between legitimate candidates and frivolous candidates (there have a been a few exceptions in the past, but not often enough to justify this signature difference). Why are candidates who are not from the two major parties required to go through more work? It looks like the two major parties got together to pass this law to protect themselves.

John Houck — Incumbents already have enough advantage just being the incumbent. No need to let them skip the petition process. That said, I do think it’s counterproductive to only allow a voter to sign one petition. It doesn’t hurt to have robust primaries, and allowing voters to sign multiple petitions might lead to better candidates participating instead of just the one who got those signatures first.

NewsWheel

Inspired by the WordWheel puzzle in the Monday-Friday Chicago Tribune and other papers, this puzzle asks you to identify the missing letter that will make a word or words — possibly proper nouns; reading either clockwise or counterclockwise — related to a story in the news or other current event. The solution is at the bottom of the newsletter.

Thanks to paid subscribers for supporting the Picayune Sentinel. To help this publication grow, please consider spreading the word to friends, family, associates, neighbors and agreeable strangers.

Info

Eric Zorn is a former opinion columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Find a longer bio and contact information here. This issue exceeds in size the maximum length for a standard email. To read the entire issue in your browser, click on the headline link above. Paid subscribers receive each Picayune Plus in their email inbox each Tuesday, are part of our civil and productive commenting community and enjoy the sublime satisfaction of supporting this enterprise.

Contact

You can email me at ericzorn@gmail.com or by clicking here:

I read all the messages that come in, but I do most of my interacting with readers in the comments section beneath each issue.

Some of those letters I reprint and respond to in the Z-mail section of Tuesday’s Picayune Plus, which is delivered to paid subscribers and available to all readers later Tuesday. Check there for responses.

If you don’t want me to use the full name on your email or your comments, let me know how you’d like to be identified.

Social media

• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ejzorn

• Twitter: https://x.com/EricZorn

• Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/ericzorn.bsky.social

• Threads: https://www.threads.net/@ejzorn

• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ejzorn/

• TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ericzorn5

Help?

If you’re having troubles with Substack — delivery, billing and so forth — first try “Picayune Sentinel Substack help, Frequently Asked Questions.” If that doesn’t work check out the Substack help page. And if that doesn’t work, shoot me an email and I’ll be happy to help.

Answer to the NewsWheel puzzle

DERANGED