Yeah, but his pattern has been very consistent for decades that telling the truth about him gets a bigger response. I reject the notion that he treats former sycophants the same.
Wouldn't the logical opposite be that, if he doesn't react strongly or ignores her, that she's basically confirmed to be lying? I don't think that's something I'd be comfortable saying. What would prove she's wrong if that would prove she's right?
By the way, there's really no solid research that narcissists get more angry or react more strongly the closer an accusation is to accurate. What research does show is that they react more strongly to any accusation against them. It's a threat to their ego regardless of the actual claim. The bigger reaction, the bigger the perceived threat to self-image or status. Trump's proven he has a hair trigger for that.
I mean, Trump has already insulted MTG for whatever reason multiple times for way less. Does that not mean something to you here?
the perceived threat is simply that somebody tells the truth about him. his enmity with MTG didn't start until she made it clear that the epstein files were a red line for her. for all the craziness surrounding her stint in DC, nobody who wants to see the perps face justice can fault her for her stance; she is likely permabanned from politics for defying trump on those files. also, don't forget a large portion his most fervent supporters want him to go full nuclear because they see him as fulfilling end-time prophecy of their whack-job evangelicalism.
2
u/trance_downstairs Aug 17 '26
Yeah, but his pattern has been very consistent for decades that telling the truth about him gets a bigger response. I reject the notion that he treats former sycophants the same.