HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_020072.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
that somebody was getting a leg up at his expense. His was a zero-sum ecosystem. In the
world of Trump, anything that he deemed of value either accrued to him or had been
robbed from him.
Scarborough and Brzezinski had taken their relationship with Trump and amply
monetized it, while putting no percentage in his pocket—and in this instance, he judged
his commission should be slavishly favorable treatment. To say this drove him mad would
be an understatement. He dwelled and fixated on the perceived injustice. Don t mention
Joe or Mika to him was a standing proscription.
His wounded feelings and incomprehension at the failure of people whose embrace he
sought to, in return, embrace him was “deep, crazy deep,” said his former aide Sam
Nunberg, who had run afoul of his need for 100 percent approbation and his bitter
suspicion of being profited from.
OK Ok
Out of this accumulated rage came his June 29 tweet about Mika Brzezinski.
It was classic Trump: there was no mediation between off-the-record language and the
public statement. Referring to “low I.Q. Crazy Mika” in one tweet, he wrote in another
that she was “bleeding badly from a facelift” when she and Scarborough visited Trump at
Mar-a-Lago on the previous New Year’s Eve. Many of his tweets were not, as they might
seem, spontaneous utterances, but constant ones. Trump’s rifts often began as insult
comedy and solidified as bitter accusations and then, in an uncontainable moment, became
an official proclamation.
The next step, in his tweet paradigm, was universal liberal opprobrium. Almost a week
of social media fury, cable breast-beating, and front-page condemnation followed his
tweet about Brzezinski. That was accompanied by the other part of the Trump tweet
dynamic: by unifying liberal opinion against him, he unified its opposite for him.
In truth, he was often neither fully aware of the nature of what he had said nor fully
cognizant of why there should be such a passionate reaction to it. As often as not, he
surprised himself. “What did I say?” he would ask after getting severe blowback.
He wasn’t serving up these insults for effect—well, not entirely. And his behavior
wasn’t carefully calculated; it was tit for tat, and he likely would have said what he’d said
even if no one was left standing with him. (This very lack of calculation, this inability to
be political, was part of his political charm.) It was just his good luck that the Trumpian 35
percent—that standing percentage of people who, according to most polls, seemed to
support him no matter what (who would, in his estimation, let him get away with shooting
someone on Fifth Avenue)—was largely unfazed and maybe even buoyed by every new
expression of Trumpness.
Now, having expressed himself and gotten in the last word, Trump was cheery again.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_020072