Day 36, continued. The subject promotes the Super Bowl, perhaps as a way of indirectly promoting his interview, which airs beforehand. Subject ends his communication with the all-caps version of his campaign slogan. Study continues.

Day 36, continued. The subject again lashes out at the Judicial Branch, one of the three branches of government. As this is the only branch of the three that the subject's party does not control, it is not unexpected that the subject would be in opposition. However, the obsessive nature of the subject's tweets on said judge's ruling suggests that the previous reports of his inability to let even the smallest perceived insults go may be accurate. Study continues.

Day 36. Subject continues to complain about the judge that upheld the temporary stay of his selective Muslim ban, a judge known as a "mainstream Republican" who was appointed by George W. Bush. The fact that the subject's last tweet of the previous day and first tweet of the current day relates to said judge, it is clear that the subject is bothered by having his authority constrained. Such behavior is in lines with traits of authoritarianism. Study continues.


Day 35, continued. The subject is back to fuming about the judge that overruled his selective Muslim ban. He attempts to portray the situation as the judge allowing "bad people", "potential terrorists", and those that "do not have our best interests at heart" into the country when, in actuality, the people he is trying to ban have not committed a terrorist attack in the U.S. in at least 15 years. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. The subject expresses excitement at being featured in a television interview. Previous behavior indicates the subject is particularly sensitive about TV ratings, a trait which would be consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. The subject again appears shocked that the executive branch does not hold 100% of the power in the government. The subject also appears significantly bothered by the fact that his order was not immediately upheld, which may be observed by his use of three tweets, and is a behavior consistent with narcisistic personality disorder.However, it is still not clear whether the subject is truly surprised or whether he is feigning surprise in order to manipulate others into believing that the judicial branch is doing something wrong. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. In a concerning turn of events, the subject appears to use the online equivalent of shouting to reiterate his campaign slogan. Could this represent a psychological break or an organic disorder affecting temporal awareness? Indeed, recent concerning video of the subject failing to recognize his own advisor sitting across from him has been brought to the authors' attention. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. The subject again attempts to discredit a media organization that has won more Puliztzer Prizes than any other news organization. While the subject attempts to make the news organization sound as if it is failing, latest reports of its earnings are up and it has added the most digital subscriptions in 6 years. Again, it is not clear if the subject suffers from delusional thinking or if he is attempting to deceive his audience. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. The subject attacks the legitimacy of the judge that temporarily halted his selective Muslim ban. The subject rails that the judicial system 'takes law-enforcement away from our country', which indicates either: i) a complete lack of civics knowledge; ii) poor cognition; and/or iii) an incorrect, authoritarian view on the role of the judicial branch as subservient to the executive branch. Study continues.

Day 35, continued. Subject proclaims that 'certain Middle-Eastern countries' agree with his selective Muslim ban that was recently stayed temporarily by a judge, while offering no proof of such a fact. Instead, the ban is reported to have helped a terrorist group with recruitment. Is the subject displaying a pattern of delusional beliefs or manipulative lies? Study continues.

Day 35. The subject expresses his frustration that a judge put a temporary stay on his selective Muslim ban. In attempting to rationalize his ban, the subject invokes 'safety' and 'security', despite the fact that the U.S. has had zero terrorist acts in the past 15 years that were committed by people from the seven banned countries and the fact that the countries of the 9/11 attackers were not included in the ban. Such ineffective decision-making could be due to delusional thinking, confused thinking or manipulative intent. Study continues.


Day 34, continued. The subject uses an 'us vs. them' type of tactic to gain support by pushing the idea that other countries are taking advantage of the U.S. Such behavior may be characterized as manipulative. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject throws out a vaguely-worded tweet about "evil", which the subject puts in quotes as though he may not actually believe in it. Presumably the subject is referring to either his selective Muslim ban or his border wall, although the meaning is not entirely clear. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject condemns an atack on a group of foreign soldiers in a foreign museum (which actually took place outside in a plaza) by a man yelling in Arabic, an incident in which one soldier was slightly injured. Despite the subject's quick condemnation of this attack, a similar condemnation was not issued for the recent attack by a white-supremacist on a mosque in a neighboring country that killed six people and injured five others. Such distinction highlights the subject's implicit racial and religious discriminatory beliefs. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject complains about those individuals who are exercising their First Amendment rights and accuses them of being 'professionals' and 'paid', perhaps in response to having his appearance at a Harley Davidson cancelled due to planned protests. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject makes more unsubstantiated claims with a characteristic word in all-caps as an attempt to sell the message as more sincere than it might otherwise be taken as. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject attempts to smooth over reports that he 'badgered, bragged and abruptly ended his phone call' with the leader of a long-time ally. To counter the reports, the subject points to said leader's appropriately professional comments as proof that their phone call was not abnormal. Thus, the subject appears to have a diminished sense of emotional intelligence. Study continues.

Day 34, continued. The subject uses threatening language towards a foreign country that recently conducted missile tests. The subject attempts to portray himself as a sort of 'strong-man', in a manner that is not dissimilar from an authoritarian dictator, while authorizing additional sanctions against said foreign country. Study continues.

Day 34. The subject picks a Twitter fight with another celebrity. Could this be a means of distraction from other stories that might be of more concern (e.g., the lifting of sanctions on a foreign country implicated in election interference on behalf of the subject; the sale of 19.5% of said foreign government's oil company to an unknown party, which is remarkably similar to the 19% named in the dossier accusing the subject of traitorous acts with a 0.5% brokerage fee; the on-going selective Muslim ban; or the subject's poor approval rating)? Study continues.


Day 33, continued. The subject thanks a company for considering building some products in the U.S., news that was released last month. Study continues.

Day 33, continued. The subject appears to criticize what he calls the 'Iran Deal'. However, this reading may not be accurate as it was later announced that the subject may seek to strengthen the Iran Deal. Study continues.

Day 33, continued. The subject "formally" puts another country "on notice" with a tweet, a rather informal means of communication. It is likely that the subject relishes the sense of power of he gets from his electronic saber rattling. Study continues.

Day 33, continued. Instead of releasing a dignified public statement, the subject instead feels that Twitter is the proper outlet to inform the public of his trip to witness the return of the remains of the first U.S. service member killed under his direction. Said service member was killed during a raid in a foreign country, which has been characterized by a senator of the subject's same party as 'not succesful, that's obvious.' Study continues.

Day 33, continued. Subject makes a prediction for the future of his secretary of state. It remains to be seen if said secretary, who has ties to a foreign government accused of interfering in the previous election, will, indeed, "be a star!". Study continues.

Day 33. The subject appears to threaten the removal of federal funding to a university where students protested the speaking invitation of a writer for a white-power website. The subject was likely encouraged on this line of thought by his chief strategist, a former head of said white-power website and newly appointed member of the U.S. National Security Council. Unfortunately, the subject may be easily influenced by others, allowing him to be manipulated by craftier individuals. The subject appears particularly vulnerable to manipulations in matters he poorly understands because admitting to anything less than complete understanding (e.g., by asking questions or requiring further analysis) risks the appearance of inferiority, in the subject's view. Study continues.


Day 32, continued. The subject clearly feels threatened by what he perceives to be a deluge of illegal immigrants from Australia, a close U.S. ally. In fact, the agreement the subject disparages was to accept 1,200 refugees, not 'illegal immigrants' from Australia. The subject's poor ability to distinguish real versus false information could be indicative of a cognitive disorder. Study continues.

Day 32, continued. The subject makes an inflammatory comment against a foreign nation despite having no evidence to back up his claim. Could this be part of a larger pattern of delusional thinking? Study continues.

Day 32. The subject attempts to deflect controversy away from the bizarre insistence that the subject's selective Muslim ban is not a 'ban', despite that word being used in the days prior by the subject and his press secretary. Study continues.


Day 31, continued. The punctuation and proper use of capitalization suggests that this message was sent by a staffer, as opposed to the subject himself. Study continues.

Day 31, continued. Subject again promotes his televised announcement. However, the lack of words in all-caps suggests that the comment may have been sent by an aide. Study continues.

Day 31, continued. The subject begins to hype his upcoming announcement of his Supreme Court nominee. In an effort to attract the most viewers, the subject scheduled his announcement during prime-time and, if past behavior is to be believed, he will likely follow the ratings closely. Study continues.

Day 31, continued. The subject appears confused at the long-established fact that the Senate must confirm his nominees. It has likely been a long time since the subject's last civics lesson. Bizarrely, the subject fails to mention that he just fired the acting Attorney General because she 'betrayed' the D.O.J. by doing exactly what she said she would do if faced with an illegal order from the President. Ironically, the subject's own nominee for Attorney General asked the now-fired Attorney General that question during her confirmation hearing. Study continues.

Day 31. The subject takes a jab at two political rivals for their response to the subject's selective Muslim ban, mocking one opponent for showing tears that the subject determined must be "fake". It is possible that the subject feels little empathy for others and, hence, does not understand why one might get emotional talking about the plight of others less fortunate. Indeed, the subject's criticism of his opponents' rally focused on a microphone that did not work, suggesting the subject feels that such a technical problem proves he is superior. Study continues.


Day 30, continued. The subject appears annoyed at the fact that his cabinet nominees have not been swiftly confirmed, even after choosing the least diverse cabinet in 36 years. The subject appears to forget that his predecessor's nominee for the Supreme Court waited 293 days for the Senate to take up his confirmation, which they ultimately refused to do. Thus, the subject's claims of obstructionism highlight the subject's proclivity for double standards. Study continues.

Day 30, continued. The subject continues to make grandiose promises. Despite his outsized claims, the subject's Muslim ban has spooked investors, resulting in a drop in stock prices. However, leaders from some companies such as Ford, Intel and others are speaking out against the subject's ban. Regardless, pressure may not be met with constructive action on the part of the subject. Study continues.

Day 30, continued. The subject calls the media the "opposition party", indicating a hostile relationship with those who report facts without his authorization. Consistent with the definition of "malignant narcissism", the subject is "often grandiose, and always ready to raise hostility levels", and "undermines organizations in which they are involved, and dehumanizes the people with whom they associate." Study continues.

Day 30, continued. The subject hypes the announcement of his choice for Supreme Court nominee. It is clear that the popularity of his choice is important to him, although he has made no indications of attempting to alter his choice to ensure bipartisan support. Study continues.

Day 30, continued. The subject is capable of reasoning that "bad 'dudes' out there" might move up their travel plans if a Muslim ban were announced in advance. However, the subject appears to be incapable of reasoning that said "bad 'dudes' out there" could also delay their travel plans by the 90 days covered by the Muslim ban as well. This poor grasp of logic is indicative of either poor reasoning skills (possibly due to an organic disorder) or an intent to manipulate, which is consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 30, continued. The subject continues his attempt to justify his ill-advised Muslim ban. Despite his claim that he is attempting to prevent terrorists from entering the country, the subject did not include any countries where his family's companies operated, even if those countries were linked to the 9/11 attackers. Thus, it is clear that the subject's primary interest is one of self-interest, consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 30. The subject makes a poor attempt at deflecting blame for the order that caused chaos at airports and hundreds to be stuck following cancelled flights. Despite the fact that no one believes the chaos is related to a Delta computer outage, the subject proffers the impossible explanation in a desperate attempt to shift blame away from himself. Indeed, the subject may be particularly sensitive due to criticism from his even-keeled predecessor. Study continues.


Day 29, continued. Subject promotes an interview of himself on TV to help boost his ratings. In some ways, it is almost sad that the subject must peg his own self worth to the number of TV viewers during his appearances. Study continues.

Day 29, continued. The subject tweets a link to a statement he posted on his Facebook page, most likely because the statement consisted of too many characters to easily copy and paste into his Twitter account. In the Facebook statement the subject makes the following points: 1) his predecessor did something similar (despite the fact that this is not true); and 2) the ban is not a Muslim ban, although no non-majority Muslim countries were included. Symptoms are consistent with the "gaslighting" technique of manipulation. Study continues.

Day 29, continued. The subject accuses two Senators, one of which was a prisoner of war for five and a half years, of wanting to "start World War III". This type of claim is often known as "gaslighting", a form of manipulation that may be used by those with malignant narcissism. Study continues.

Day 29, continued. The subject attempts to appeal to Christian emotions in justifying his "Muslim ban", which bans people from select Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S.. However, despite the subject's attempt at garnering support, many Christian leaders oppose the ban. It was notable that the Muslim-majority countries that the subject has business dealings with, and were often implicated in terrorist attacks, were not included in the ban. Such flexible proclaimed morals would be consistent with the insincere malignant narcissist. Study continues.

Day 29. Subject's first concern this morning is attempting to discredit a newspaper that has been continuously published since 1851 and has won 117 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other news organization. The subject feels by calling said newspaper "FAKE NEWS" and "failing" that he can make these things true, despite said newspaper being the second-largest print paper in circulation. It is likely that the subject is projecting his own insecurities onto the newspaper, as the subject himself has been accused of spreading fake news. Indeed, sufferers of malignant narcissism tend to use projection as a defense mechanism. Consistent with this condition, the subject has been noted for his use of projection. Study continues.


Day 28, continued. The subject tweets a remembrance of a national tragedy 31 years ago. Based on the presence of correct punctuation and the absence of words in all-caps, it may be assumed that the subject himself did not send this particular message. Study continues.

Day 28. As of 13 hours after posting, the subject has still not corrected the typos throughout these three messages railing against two established media sources. The presence of typos may indicate that the subject issued the tweets while in an overly emotional state (while it is also concerning that an aide has not alerted the subject to the typos). Furthermore, the subject accuses two media sources of having "dwindling subscribers and readers", despite subscriptions being at an all-time high. It is not clear whether subject is convinced that he is correct, in which case the subject is experiencing delusions, or whether the subject is putting forth a false claim in an attempt to prop up his own fragile sense of self-esteem. Study continues.


Day 27, continued. Subject's message is unclear. Perhaps it was directed towards a certain foreign leader? Study continues.

Day 27, continued. Subject tweets a video of the swearing-in of one of his new secretaries. In the video, the subject appears to stand uncomfortably off to the side, with the exception of a handshake at the end. Study continues.

Day 27, continued. The subject promotes the statement he issued for the international day of Holocaust remembrance. However, confusion and concern were expressed over the fact that the subject's statement failed to even mention the Jews, who were particularly targeted for genocide, resulting in 6 million deaths. In breaking with traditional language used by his predecessors on both sides of the political aisle, it appears that the subject does not understand there is any tradition to the issuance of such a statement and/or delegated the task to someone who failed to research previous statements. Aditionally, the subject proclaims in the statement that "together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world." Despite this claim, hours later the subject signed an executive order to halt admission of new refugees, ban entree of Syrian refugees and suspend entry of citicizens from several Muslim-majority countries. Potential reasons include cognitive disconnect, dual standards based on racist beliefs, and/or mental deficiencies. Study continues.

Day 27, continued. The subject uses two tweets to promote a march championing a pet cause of his vice president. Considering that the subject has at various times advocated for punishing women who have abortions and "joked" that he unsuccessfully attempted to convince an ex- to have an abortion. It is not clear whether the subject actually has an opinion on the subject. Regardless, it is clear that the subject is less concerned about the welfare of his wider female constituency by the fact that the subject did not tweet once about the more-inclusive and widespread women's marches. Study continues.

Day 27, continued. Subject continues to aggravate one of the country's biggest trading partners in response to his failed attempt to bully said trading partner into paying for an expensive and ineffective border wall. In effect, the subject attempts to bully in response to a failed attempt to bully. Such behavior may be indicative of a serial bully. Indeed, such serial bullies display a number of behaviors consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 27. Subject points to the creator of a partisan app as a source for citing 3 million illegal votes. Despite pressure, the app creator has so far refused to release any data or other evidence to support his claim. Regardless, the subject continues to believe voter fraud was the reason he lost the popular vote, against the opinion of multiple independent experts and bipartisan election officials. Study continues.


Day 26, continued. Subject has signed an executive order to strip certain cities of federal funding in an effort to intimidate those cities into changing policies regarding illegal immigrants. As with many of the subject's other decisions, this decision does not align with his proclaimed values of smaller federal government and greater local control. Study continues.

Day 26, continued. Subject promotes a new interview with a friendlier media outlet than the previous interview, likely as a means to distract from the first interview that was described as "bizarre" and which highlighted the subject's obsession with his own popularity. Study continues.

Day 26, continued. Subject thanks his supporters and shares a video of himself, consistent with a need for constant attention. However, reports that the subject's speech left his own party in stunned silence at his erratic comments are highly concerning. Some have suggested evaluations for dementia or mental illness. Study continues.

Day 26, continued. The subject begins by criticizing a trade deal with one of the country's biggest trade partners and bordering neighbor, despite the fact that revoking said trade agreement would cost American jobs. In the accompanying text, the subject then goes on to aggressively suggest that the leader of the neighboring country should cancel their scheduled meeting if they are not going to pay for the border wall that the subject had promised voters as one of the central tenets of his campaign. It is possible that such bluster was an attempt by the subject to unnerve the other country to get an upperhand on negotiations; however, the subject misjudged and the other country called his bluff by cancelling the meeting. Subject's failed negotiation tactic clearly offended his sense of superiority, as could be seen in the form of a retaliatory announcement proposing a 20% tax on Mexican imports, which was later walked-back as "just an option". The reversal was likely due to widespread criticism that not only would U.S. citizens pay for the initial construction of the border wall but would also be required to pay 20% more for goods originating in Mexico, such as fruits, vegetables, construction materials and medical devices. It is not clear how the subject was convinced to soften his message. Study continues.

Day 26. The subject complains, without a hint of irony, about someone criticizing (in the subject's view) his predecessor. In the article written by the woman the subject is complaining about, the criticism of the subject's predecessor was that said predecessor was too compromising with political opponents. Yet, the subject himself has criticized his predecessor in much stronger terms. This behavior illustrates the double standard that the subject holds for others versus himself, which is in line with symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.


Day 25, continued. Subject is clearly excited to be on TV and attempts to promote his rambling interview. Subject's belief that this interview may increase his popularity is, perhaps, indicative of a poor understanding of other people. Study continues.

Day 25, continued. Subject again promotes his nearly incoherent TV interview by tweeting a photo of himself. Study continues.

Day 25, continued. Subject claims to be concerned about protecting American lives. Despite such a claim, the subject's repeal of a healthcare law is estimated to result in more than 43,000 additional deaths per year. Subject's claim is further evidence of disordered thinking. Study continues.

Day 25, continued. Subject continues to promote his wall by tweeting a video of himself, which is consistent with narcissistic tendencies. Study continues.

Day 25, continued. Subject promotes his first TV interview, perhaps because he is concerned about the ratings for the interview. During the interview, the subject used the words "tremendous" eight times, "great" nineteen times, "big" seventeen times and "crowd" ten times. The subject's limited and repetitive vocabulary, which has been making difficult work for translators, could be indicative of a learning disability. For example, in one exchange where the subject is asked about illegals voting, he replies, "Sure. And I do--and I'm very...and I mean it. But just so you--it was supposed to be a confidential meeting. They turned it into not a con...Number two, the conversation lasted for about a minute. They made it--somebody said it was, like, 25 percent of the...It wasn't. It was hardly even discussed. I said it. And I said it strongly because what's going on with voter fraud is horrible. That's number one. Number two, I would've won the popular vote if I was campaigning for the popular vote." The incoherence of such an answer is highly concerning. Study continues.

Day 25, continued. The subject shares his plans to pick a nominee for the Supreme Court. Reports indicate the nominee will be an extremely conservative white male, which would be in line with the subject's narcissistic beliefs that people like himself are superior. Study continues.

Day 25. Subject is still clearly bothered by the fact that nearly 3 million more people voted for his opponent in the election several months ago, as indicated by the issuance of two tweets. The subject cannot allow this fact to upset his belief that he is superior and popular and thus he is forced to claim that voter fraud occurred, despite his own lawyers conceding that there is no evidence of voter fraud. Despite this fact, the subject cites a friend who told him he saw "illegals" voting in Florida, a story that has been called into question. The subject specifically mentions investigating people registered to vote in two states. Interestingly, the subject's own daughter and chief strategist are registered to vote in two states. It is not clear if subject intends to investigate his daughter and chief strategist. Study continues.


Day 24, continued. Subject is excited to announce that he plans to spend $10 to $25 billion to solve a problem that is declining and is at its lowest magnitude in 40 years. It is not clear if the subject truly believes this problem is more important than allocating money to domestic issues such as health care, which could be indicative of delusional thinking. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject appears to be tweeting about things he sees on TV. Indeed, reports indicate the subject is substantially influenced by television and some aides are concerned about the time the subject spends watching TV. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject praises a media outlet for having the highest ratings for his inauguration and accuses the other news outlets with lower ratings of being "FAKE NEWS". It appears the subject is obsessed with measuring his popularity in TV ratings. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject sounds as though he may be star struck by meeting with real businessmen. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject proudly declares that he has signed orders to move forward with heavily-opposed oil pipelines, one of which is being built by a company the subject has (and may or may not continue to have) stock in and whose CEO donated to his campaign. Both pipelines have potential negative impacts on the environment, despite the subject describing himself as an "environmentalist" just hours earlier. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject shows a photo of himself attending a meeting at his job. It is likely that the subject feels this shows he is accomplishing something. Study continues.

Day 24, continued. Subject continues to ruminate on the low turnout to his inauguration, as evidenced by his tweeting of a panoramic of the event. The fact that the subject feels injured by his lack of popularity is consistent with severe narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) but repetitive, intrusive thoughts could be indicative of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Indeed, research shows that men with OCD are "...more likely to screen positively for personality disorders (PDs) in general, cluster A PDs, antisocial, obsessive-compulsive and narcissistic categories." However, further study is required to assess the possibility of OCD. Regardless, the subject's narcissistic tendencies were corroborated by reports from senior officials of the subject's sensitivity to the criticism. Study continues.

Day 24. Subject appears to have mistaken his Twitter account for his calendar. Regardless, the subject attempts to portray himself as a jobs-creator, despite freezing hiring and promotions in the federal government and freezing EPA grants that employ a significant number of people. Study continues.


Day 23. Subject's rate of tweeting has significantly declined, perhaps as a result of greater than expected demands on his time at his new job. Indeed, the subject did accomplish three notable things in his new position today. First, the subject signed an executive order to pull out of a trade agreement negotiated by his predecessor. Second, the subject enstated a federal government-wide hiring freeze, a tactic that has been shown to be ineffective in controlling federal employment or effecting cost savings, according to a study of the last two major hiring freezes. Thus, while the subject attempts to direct public attention towards manufacturing jobs with his tweet, he simultaneously eliminates opportunity for hiring and job advancement in the federal government. The third thing the subject accomplished today was to sign another executive order that reinstates the "global gag rule" prohibiting U.S.-funded international aid organizations from informing women of all their healthcare options. It must be noted that the motivation for this executive order could be due in part to the women's march drawing three times the number of people as the subject's inauguration. As research shows, narcissistic individuals with low self-concept clarity (i.e., self-beliefs are not clearly and confidently defined, internally consistent, and stable") often react with anger and aggression after a perceived failure, which is always "directed toward the source of ego-threatening feedback". Study continues.


Day 22. Subject has now been informed that peaceful protests are a Constitutional right and the cornerstone of a free democracy. Subject shares his new knowledge, possibly with the hopes of softening his previous criticism of the peaceful protests. Study continues.

Day 22. Subject displays continued anxiety that his inauguration was not "the best", as it had fewer people in the crowds and 7 million fewer TV viewers than at his predecessor's first inauguration. It is clear that the topic bothers the subject, likely because it challenges his view of self superiority. Indeed, the subject's press secretary gave a speech containing similar lies and attempts to gaslight, which a spokesperson later attempted to brand as "alternative facts". Study continues.

Day 22, continued. Subject appears to believe that winning an election means that those who disagree with him should not express their views in peaceful protest, highlighting the subject's inordinate sense of entitlement. It is likely that the subject's sense of superiority was injured by the fact that 3 times as many people attended the women's march in D.C. than attended the subject's inauguration. Subject then uses a victim-blaming tactic in which he attempts to blame protesters for not voting for his opponent and allowing him to become elected instead. Subject's cognitive dissonance is highlighted by subject's failure to acknowledge that nearly 3 million more people did indeed vote for his opponent. Study continues.

Day 22. Subject boasts about his speech, which was described as a "despicable display of self-aggrandizement in front of CIA's Memorial Wall of Agency heroes". During said speech, the subject stated he has a "running war" with the media because of reports of poor attendance at his inauguration. Constant admiration is necessary to those with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) and one way to achieve the appearance of constant admiration is through the use of self-praise, self-promotion and "gaslighting". Study continues.

Authors' Note (ed. 1.27.2017): It is now clear that the subject's team brought his own staff to clap and cheer for him during his speech, followed by the subject bragging that his speech had a standing ovation. While bizarre, this type of behavior strongly suggests the presence of narcissistic personality disorder.


Day 21, continued. The subject retweets a tweet from his work account, suggesting that he has assigned the work account to a staffer while maintaining his own personal account. The authors believe that this arrangement will facilitate the continuation of this behavioral study by separating staffer tweets from the subject's own tweets. Study continues.

Day 21. Subject thanks a friendly media outlet and other unspecified media outlets for what he calls, "GREAT reviews" of his inauguration speech. However, the thanking of the media may in large part be an attempt to obfuscate the widespread criticism of the subject's speech. For example, one media outlet called the speech, "unprecedented", "divisive" and "rancorous". Another described it as "uncompromising in tone" and said the subject "dispensed with appeals to unity or attempts to build bridges to his opponents." Yet other media outlets called the speech "radical" and "dark". The quantity of subject's tweets has declined today relative to baseline measurements, perhaps as a result of the learning curve for Twitter on his new secured phone. Another potential reason may be that the subject was busy giving a talk to an intelligence agency, where he complained about the media. Additionally, the attempt by subject's press secretary to gaslight the public regarding the inaugural attendance was widely criticized and may be another contributing factor to the low rate of tweet release today. Study continues.


Day 20, continued. The use of all capital letters for some words indicates that the subject may be back to sending his own tweets. It is possible that this was a test tweet to instruct the subject on how to use Twitter on his new secure phone. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. What does this mean? Was the subject's phone pried from his (dainty) hands when the Secret Service took his phone away? Although the authors were initially concerned that the subject would end the present study by ceasing to tweet, subject allayed concerns by committing to his continued tweeting despite the phone change. However, it is unclear how long the transition will take for the subject to continue his tweeting. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. Subject espouses an ideal that he does not hold himself to, as it is public knowledge that he does not buy American or hire American with his own companies. This type of behavior is indicative of subject's belief that he is superior and above what he requires of others. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. Subject repeats promises he made while campaigning, without providing concrete ideas or expanding on how he will do the things he promises. It should be noted that the turnout for the inauguration was low, which prompted the subject to use a photo from his predecessor's inauguration for his Twitter background. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. The subject refers to "forgotten men and women" but it isn't clear who these people are. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. This tweet, while neutral at its surface, carries a subtle implication that the subject was chosen by the people of the nation, despite nearly 3 million more people voting for a different candidate. Thus, the subject attempts to inflate his achievement. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. This tweet, a relatively unremarkable comment in the speech that was perhaps added by a speechwriter for the purpose of tweeting, follows more powerful language in the subject's speech, stating that, "...there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land", despite the objective fact that the subject is starting a job where the predecessor left an economy with annual GDP growth not seen since 2006, the longest streak of jobs gains on record and the lowest uninsured rate (for health insurance) on record. Given these conditions, the likely behavior of a NPD-type is to claim that conditions are bad so that he/she may claim credit for positive gains made following his/her installment. Study continues.

Day 20, continued. The subject, who is presumably attending his own inauguration during this and subsequent tweets, is clearly using staff to tweet out selected lines from the speech given by the subject. This assumption is further supported by the appropriate use of capitalization observed in the tweets (e.g., failure to write in all-caps). The subject claimed to have written his own speech; however, such a claim, when made by one who displays all 12 of the DSM-5 criteria for NPD, must be heavily weighed against objective evidence because NPD-types often inflate their own contributions. In order to evaluate this claim, the full speech was analyzed and found to be quite similar to his speeches on the campaign trail. While likely polished by speechwriters, the message was consistent with subject's dark viewpoint. Thus, it is the authors' opinion that the subject's oral speech was mostly representative of the subject's own thoughts, with some exceptions; however, the tweets (by a staffer) reflected a less divisive and more inclusive message, in an attempt to soften the subject's image. Study continues.

Authors' note (ed. 1.22.2017): It is now widely acknowledged that the subject did not write his own inauguration speech. Regardless, it is the opinion of the authors that because the message was similar to the subject's speeches during the campaign, the message, if not the precise words themselves, can be used as behavioral clues.

Day 20. Subject starts a new job today and appears excited. However, subject still displays typical NPD behaviors: i) overestimating his achievements (e.g., as in the use of the words "the movement", despite entering his new job with the lowest public approval of any modern president); and ii) admiration-seeking (e.g., stating "the work begins" even though subject decided not to begin work for two more days). Study continues.


Day 19, continued. Subject continues self-promotion throughout the day, consistent with a sufferer of Overt Narcissism (ON). While some component of narcissism may or may not be genetically heritable, unhealthy narcissism has been shown to be associated with "involved but lenient parenting". In short, psychological control of a parent over a child was positively associated with unhealthy narcissism scores. Subject's father, now deceased, has been identified as an important potential factor in subject's poor psychological development. Study continues.

Day 19, continued. Subject declares he is on his way to the inauguration festivities that will occupy his weekend, waiting until Monday to start his new administration. It is unclear whether or not the subject will stay in the capitol for over a week, however, as it has been reported that he would like to go home to NY on weekends. Study continues.

Day 19, continued. Subject is clearly excited for his big day tomorrow and shows his exuberance with a double tweet. Study continues.

Day 19. Subject quotes a controversial and divisive televangelist in an effort to appear less divisive. Many of subject's behaviors, such as grandiosity, entitlement and self-absorption, are characteristic of Overt Narcissism (ON), one of two known types of narcissism. Recent findings show that those with ON are "self-centered" and, hence, "awareness of others is compromised by preoccupation with their own concerns." Subject's behavior is consistent with ON. Study continues.


Day 18, continued. Interesting development. The subject commends deserving heroes without excessive self-promotion. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. The subject promotes a musician who will play at his inauguration and, by extension, himself. Subject's behavior is thus consistent with previous observations. It should be noted that such consistency in behavior, if observed in the long term, may facilitate the development of a predictive behavioral model. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. The subject makes a show at thanking dignitaries for a letter, as a way to aggrandize himself by association. This motivation is clear by the subject's use of a public medium (i.e., Twitter) to message two elderly people in the hospital, as opposed to another method with a greater probability of success in reaching the intended recipients (e.g., calling by telephone). Study continues.

Day 18, continued. Using a staged photo, the subject attempts to promote his upcoming inauguration, possibly due to the news that scalpers are losing money on tickets. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. Subject praises a band in a message that is innocuous at face value. However, the subject feels compelled to mention the specific number of dignitaries he met with, likely as an attempt to maintain a feeling of superiority. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. Subject continues to expound on his exaggerated jobs creation, indicating the level of emotional attachment he feels to the topic. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. Subject continues to exaggerate his own achievements, consistent with NPD. Increased behavior of this kind may be due, in part, to: i) increased public criticism of the subject (e.g., in areas related to collusion with a foreign government, nominee selections, etc.); ii) his predecessor's high approval rating coupled with subject's historically low approval rating; and iii) concerns over subject's impending inauguration, for which opposition marches are planned and, perhaps more importantly to the subject, a Springsteen tribute band pulled out. Study continues.

Day 18, continued. Subject slips back into his delusion that he has achieved great jobs gains, despite company denials and other evidence to the contrary. Exaggeration of one's own achievements, a NPD trait, once again is observed. Study continues.

Day 18. Subject starts the day out with some self promotion. This behavior could be an attempt to distract himself from the latest poll that shows his predecessor is the most admired man in the world, which would be especially threatening to a sufferer of NPD. Study continues.


Day 17, continued. Without directly taking credit, subject continues to highlight job increases that were long planned, thereby attempting to indirectly assume credit. Study continues.

Day 17, continued. Subject clearly continues to ruminate about a perceived slight by a civil rights hero, thus devoting two tweets to the subject. In order to prove how superior he is in his own mind, the subject decries a misstatement that was made by said civil rights hero and points to a flawed previous election that many thought was unfairly won. Perhaps the subject does not make that connection? Study continues.

Day 17, continued. The subject continues to take credit for jobs he did not create (e.g., Ford, Fiat). The subject continuously employs this tactic to exaggerate his own achievements, another symptom of NPD.

Day 17, continued. The subject displays hypersensitivity to criticism and attempts to discredit the reports that he has the lowest approval rating of any modern incoming president, suggesting self-esteem dysregulation. Within narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), this type of self-esteem regulation (i.e., "I am superior because I am perfect") "...serve[s] as protection against a delusional state of powerlessness or incompetence and potential suicidality." Study continues.

Day 17. The subject cites a record number of people coming to Washington as a way to reinforce his fragile self-worth, conveniently disregarding the fact that three times as many bus permits were issued for the scheduled Women's March than for the inauguration. The subject's use of the phrase "record numbers" is also indicative of his preoccupation with being seen as superior to all others, again a symptom of NPD. Study continues.


Day 16, continued. The subject continues to prop up his own fragile self-esteem by praising his daughter, whom he sees as an extension of himself. Study continues.

Day 16, continued. Subject continues to discredit media while promoting a report by said media on his daughter, thus creating an internal conflict between self-promotion (i.e., promotion of his daughter as part of himself) and the belief he (and by extension, his daughter) is superior to the organization promoting him. Study continues.

Day 16, continued. Subject continues to call the media dishonest, although subject himself is a compulsive liar. The belief that the subject cannot be understood by the regular media because he is too special/superior is a common trait for sufferers of NPD. Study continues.

Day 16. Subject praises one civil rights hero, despite disparaging another civil rights hero just days before because Subject feels he must retaliate over any criticism or perceived slight. This deep-seated need to retaliate is likely due to the infringement of criticism on the subject's need for constant admiration. In the subject's mind, he believes he is superior and deserving only of praise; thus, criticism from well-respected people threatens his exaggerated sense of self-importance. All of these symptoms could be ascribed to NPD. Study continues.


Day 15, continued. Subject lashes out at a leader in the intelligence community because said leader criticized Subject's understanding of Russia. Inexplicably, Subject points to aggressive actions by Russia but continues to denounce NATO as obsolete, despite the fact that NATO undertook a series of measures in response to Russia's aggressive actions. Thus, Subject appears to prove the point made by the intelligence leader that Subject does not understand Russia. Study continues.

Day 15, continued. Subject clearly feels the need to defend himself against a comedy show, illustrating his intense need for constant admiration, another symptom of NPD. Although true diagnosis is not possible without an in-person assessment, the subject displays 12 out of the 12 DSM-5 criteria for NPD. Study continues.

Day 15, continued. Subject attempts to borrow the credibility of others to claim that the accusatory dossier is false. Study continues.

Day 15, continued. Subject decries the divisiveness that he himself sows, as directly evidenced by his previous two tweets. This type of behavior is often termed "gaslighting" and may be used as a tool of manipulation by those afflicted with NPD. Study continues.

Day 15. Subject again attempts to take credit for jobs that he did not create (e.g., Ford was not planning to move to Mexico and Fiat stated its new U.S. jobs had nothing to do with the subject). Exaggeration of one's achievements is a symptom of NPD. Study continues.


Day 14, continued. Subject continues to soothe himself with his grandiose ideas of his inauguration day, as one more performer cancels an inauguration appearance. Study continues.

Day 14, continued. Despite calls from fellow Republicans to tone it down, the subject continues to disparage a civil rights icon, long-time public servant and American hero. Subject makes further attempts at deflecting scrutiny away from himself by attacking others, thereby highlighting the insecurity he feels in defending himself. Subject's preoccupation with fanatasies of success and power is another symptom associated with NPD.

Day 14, continued. Subject uses all capital letters, as if to yell via text, that unspecified "intelligence insiders" claim the accusatory dossier is a "fraud", despite other emerging sources that support facts in the dossier. Observations suggest that subject may suffer from a form of NPD. Indeed, a recent study found that patients with NPD had gray matter deficits, compared to healthy controls, in the prefrontal cortex, an area of the brain that is thought to be responsible for executive function (e.g., "differentiate among conflicting thoughts, determine good and bad, better and best, same and different, future consequences of current activities, working toward a defined goal, prediction of outcomes, expectation based on actions, and social "control" (the ability to suppress urges that, if not suppressed, could lead to socially unacceptable outcomes)"). Study continues.

Day 14. Subject verbally attacks a civil rights icon and U.S. Representative serving since 1987 due to said gentleman's opinion that he does not see the subject as a "legitimate president" following a classified briefing on the unfolding allegations. Subject's need to be recognized as superior and his "arrogant manner" may be signs of NPD. Study continues.


Day 13, continued. Subject continues his campaign of deflection in an attempt to manipulate the public narrative. Study continues.

Day 13, continued. Subject continues to bring up his political opponent in the election two months ago as a way to deflect criticism away from himself. Such manipulative behavior is consistent with NPD. Study continues.

Day 13, continued. Subject lashes out at the highly respected agent who compiled the dossier of allegations and has been likened to a real-life James Bond. Continuing his child-like name-calling, the subject then continues to rant against his political opponents on both sides, ending with again citing the implicated foreign government as a source that the allegations aren't true. Despite the subject's protestations, the Senate Intelligence Committee has announced a bipartisan investigation into links between the subject's campaign and the alleged foreign government, indicating others are taking the matter seriously. Subject fails to see any potential conflict of interest from having his own staff investigate his own campaign, thus his assertion that he will have his "people" produce a report in 3 months. Subject's expectation of "special favors and unquestioning compliance" is another symptom consistent with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Study continues.

Day 13. Subject praises his nominees, one of which received a medal of friendship from the foreign government implicated in the allegations against the subject. Monitoring continues.


Day 12, continued. The subject continues his campaign of deflection. Monitoring continues.

Day 12, continued. Subject lashes out at an established media organization because it reported on the scandal surrounding him. This displays a sense of entitlement, consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 12, continued. In perhaps what is a desperate attempt to deflect from the rising allegations of being compromised by a foreign government, the subject promotes a business owned by a supporter. Thus, the subject turns the media towards analyzing the legality of such product endorsements and away from scrutiny regarding the foreign government. This type of manipulative behavior is also consistent with narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 12. Subject again attempts to claim the allegations against him are false. Subject uses the phrase "phony facts", an oxymoron, which could be a subtle indication of his feelings of insecurity regarding the allegations. Study continues.


Day 11, continued. Subject praises his news conference (even capitalizing both words) in an attempt to reassure himself that it was not, as one reputable source called it, "a theatre of the absurd". Multiple behaviors consistent with narcissistic personality disorder were observed during subject's referenced press conference, such as: exaggeration (i.e., showing off props, such as reams of blank paper in unlabeled folders); requiring constant admiration (i.e., paying staff to clap and cheer for him); and behaving in an arrogant manner (i.e., shouting down a reporter trying to ask a question). Monitoring of subject's condition continues.

Day 11, continued. Subject uses hyperbole and blame to deflect from increasingly serious allegations. Study continues.

Day 11, continued. In an attempt to deflect intense personal scrutiny, subject spouts a jumble of buzzwords that he remembered riling up the crowds when he was campaigning, phrases like: "win", "movement", "crooked opponents", "victory", "FAKE NEWS" and "sorry state". Deflection and exaggeration of his achievement are consistent with symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder. Study continues.

Day 11, continued. Subject finally issues a denial of some of the allegations but notably does not deny the alleged behavior that could have led to compromising material being held by the foreign government. Subject expresses emphatically with all capital letters that he has nothing to do with said foreign government, despite a 2013 video of the subject directly stating, "I do have a relationship [with Putin]". Subject's compulsion to lie may be a symptom of a more serious personality disorder, possibly narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Further study required.

Day 11. Subject does not appear to understand that the foreign government he is accused of colluding with is not a more reliable source than his own government's intelligence community. Again, subject does not directly deny the allegations made. Study continues.


Day 10. The subject responds to serious reports of his potential involvement with a foreign government and said government's possession of compromising information on the subject. The subject attempts to portray a forceful protest by using all capitals letters. However, the subject does not directly deny the allegations. Study continues.


Day 9, continued. Subject uses "thanks" as a way of inserting himself into an issue, even though Ford was not planning to move to Mexico and Fiat stated its new U.S. jobs had nothing to do with the subject. Study continues.

Day 9, continued. Subject feels particularly emotional about an actress' comments, as evidenced by three consecutive tweets. The subject's intense need to be accepted by those whom he considers to be "elite" (i.e., rich or famous) clearly underlies much of the subject's behavior. The subject also continues to deny his own previous actions, despite video being readily available. Monitoring continues.

Day 9. Subject attempts to use self-praise as a way to prop up his fragile sense of self-esteem. This behavior could be related to the subject's intense desire to gain his father's hard-won affection. Study continues.


Day 8, continued. Subject accuses media of being "dishonest" and "fake", despite the Mexican President directly telling the Subject via Twitter that Mexico will not be "paying for that fucking wall.". Subject appears to ignore facts that he does not want to be true by blaming the messenger. Very troublig. Study continues.

Day 8, continued. Subject continues to express outrage over the leaking of a hacking report but has yet to express outrage over the hacking itself. This curious behavior of deflecting anger towards a news agency rather than the hackers themselves suggests the subject has poor situational assessment skills. The closing words in the tweet display the subject's need to emphasize the news leak as "so serious" in order to maintain a focus away from the hacking behavior revealed in the report. Such manipulative behavior may be indicative of narcissism. Study continues.

Day 8, continued. Subject displays a shocking lack of knowledge about television editing, given subject's previous and current experience in the industry. Possible memory or learning deficiencies. Study continues.

Day 8. Subject expresses delight at others showing respect for the office of President. Subject's wording suggests he mistakes their sentiment as respect for himself. Grandiose thinking is common in those with narcissism. Further study required.


Day 7, continued. The subject expresses a perfectly acceptable sentiment, indicating a fleeting grasp on reality. Observation continues.

Day 7, continued. Subject attempts to disguise gloating as congratulations. It is clear that the subject considered this a win for himself, as he has put in significant effort to get said candidate elected. Study continues.

Day 7, continued. Subject continues to praise a country with a long list of human rights violations, that backed Assad in Syria, and was implicated in the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight 17, killing all 298 people on board. Thus, the subject is displaying tendencies to look up to those with the appearance of power, and to look down on those who appear weak. Subject's behavior is consistent with narcissism. Monitoring continues.

Day 7, continued. Subject continues to lash out regarding the election, displaying significant insecurity in the fact that his opponent won nearly 3 million more votes than he did. As Michael Kernis writes in his paper, "Following the Trail from Narcissism to Fragile Self-Esteem", "...narcissists are constantly attempting to validate their positive self-feelings through such strategies as self-promotion, attributional reframing, and derogation of others." He goes on to argues that narcissists tend to have unstable high self-esteem and are "more boastful...following successes..." Subject certainly displays many characteristics of narcissism. Study continues.

Day 7. Concern grows that subject has difficulty paying attention to and understanding reports that are given to him. Subject declares that intelligence "stated very strongly there was absolutely no evidence that hacking affected the election results" when the report itself states the following under "Scope": "We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion." It is questionable, therefore, that the subject understood the information presented to him at the intelligence briefing. Behavior is consistent with a possible learning or attention deficit disorder. Study continues.


Day 6, continued. Subject continues typical victim blaming behavior but even more concerning is how the subject knows that Russia did not hack the RNC too. Either subject is making an unfounded assumption or he has inside knowledge from Russia. Observation continues.

Day 6, continued. Subject realizes shockingly late in the day that it is his son's birthday. Hence, subject acknowledges the son with his 13th tweet of the day. Study continues.

Day 6, continued. A tragedy took place today and the subject rightfully acknowledged it. Observation continues.

Day 6, continued. Subject appears to have cycled back to a previous topic of complaint regarding others seeing a report on Russian election interference before him, thus indicating a potentially recurring sense of inferiority. Further examination is required.

Day 6, continued. Subject appears to engage in the practice of "name-dropping" in order to build up his own sense of self-worth. This type of behavior is indicative of the subject's low self-confidence that he attempts to mask with bluster. Monitoring continues.

Day 6, continued. Subject continues to attack others to distract from recent news that it is now certain Russia made a multifaceted effort to influence the election. Study continues.

Day 6, continued. Subject appears to be confused by the nature of the upcoming Presidential inauguration, as his description of it as a "great show" is rather concerning. Overuse of capital letters may also signify subject's intense desire to be noticed. Observation continues.

Day 6, continued. As on day 2, subject's emotions surrounding the events of two months ago continue to run rampant, as evidenced by two sequential tweets. Thus, subject appears to have difficulty with obtrusive thoughts from the past. Observation continues.

Day 6, continued. The subject has now moved on to delusions that he can control others' actions. He continues to believe he can force Mexico to pay for a wall, despite the President of Mexico declaring they will not pay for said 'racist monument' border wall. Monitoring continues.

Day 6, continued. The subject appears to be asking questions he will soon get answers to during his scheduled intelligence briefing, making it unclear if he instead intended to write a memo to himself on his phone to remind him of questions to ask. Study continues.

Day 6. Here the subject displays an inordinate amount of anger at the press receiving information before himself, despite declaring he will skip most intelligence briefings. It is not clear the subject is aware of his chronic hypocrisy or whether he has control over it. Study continues.


Day 5, continued. Subject continues to lash out at others for making the same business choices he has previously made. One hallmark of the subject's condition has been a chronic state of hypocrisy and projection. Perhaps a new disorder for DSM-6? Study continues.

Day 5, continued. Subject appears to be confused about the meaning of "agreement". If one states something that another states, the two are generally in agreement. Thus, the inability of the subject to understand the meaning of this common word is concerning and could be indicative of either a neurological issue or an extremely poor vocabulary. Observation continues.

Day 5, continued. The subject appears not to recognize the hypocrisy in blaming Democrats while in the same sentence criticizing Democrats for blaming an unspecified person or group. Subject displays even more bizarre behavior by suggesting Democrats and Republicans work together directly after making divisive and inflammatory comments that discourage Democrats from working with Republicans. Perhaps some form of cognitive dissonance is at play. Further study required.

Day 5. Who the hell is Jackie Evancho?


Day 4. Subject continues his delusional thinking that the Affordable Care act is causing premiums to rise when, in fact, premiums rose by only 3.1% a year since the ACA, which is less than the 5.6% a year they were rising in the 10 years before the ACA. The subject's prediction that the ACA will "fall of its own weight" is bizarre, considering that the subject himself is trying to get the ACA to be repealed.

Day 4, continued. Here we see the subject display classic victim-blaming behavior, which is typical of men who engage in sexual assault. Further study required.

Day 4. Subject fails to realize he has not been sworn in as President yet and that the current President is entitled to receive the report first, hence the one-day delay that the subject feels enraged over. Thus, subject's behavior illustrates his superiority complex and grandiose beliefs about himself that he uses as a cover for his substantial insecurities.


Day 3, continued. Subject is clearly nervous about answering press questions, as indicated by the unusual capitalization. However, subject's nervousness is warranted in this case, as at the last press conference held by the subject, 162 days ago, he called on a foreign government (i.e., Russia) to hack a rival's campaign, which said foreign government promptly did.

Day 3, continued. Subject has returned to a state of grandiose thinking, apparently forgetting that his policy of subsidizing old technologies (e.g., oil, gas and coal) is allowing China to become a leader in renewable energy jobs, with the recent announcement that China is creating 13 million new jobs in the clean energy sector.

Day 3, continued. Subject has a period of lucidity. How long will this state hold?

Day 3, continued. Subject continues to display criticism of a policy, not by critiquing aspects of said policy, but by quoting others who have called it bad. Thus, the subject distracts from his own lack of knowledge on said topic. By so easily deferring to others' opinions, the subject displays a concerning lack of self esteem. Further observation is warranted.

Day 3, continued. It is clear that the subject is unable to assemble a coherent argument, as evidenced by his enthusiasm to engage in a technique often referred to as "cherry picking of data", which means that the subject ignores other data that shows 20 million of more people have healthcare because of the ACA and that insurance increases are lower with the ACA than prior to the law. Study continues.

Day 3. Subject has directed his anger at General Motors now and issued a threat about charging an import tax or, "big border tax", as the subject calls it. While the subject appears to understand his own facility to react to an exterior stimulus (e.g., place a tax in response to GM importing cars), he appears to lack the ability to forecast others' reactions in response to his own (e.g., tariffs imposed by Mexico, from which we currently import more than we export; or tariffs from other countries in retaliation for breaking trade agreements). Interestingly, subject appears to completely lack the ability to predict others' responses to his actions. Observation continues.


Day 2, continued. Subject now appears to target China with anger over North Korea, without realizing that China recently voted along with the other members of the U.N. Security Council to sanction North Korea for their latest nuclear test. Clear signs of disconnecting with reality. Observation to continue.

Day 2, continued. Subject has discovered that North Korea is making threats of testing an ICBM. While the subject seemingly understands this fact, he clearly shows signs of denial that North Korea plans to keep developing their ICBM. More to follow.

Day 2, continued. Subject is now highly concerned with what others thought he was thinking two months ago; his great concern is evident as he has exceeded his typical communication limit of 140 characters. Thus, it is clear that this topic evokes great emotion in the subject. Observation continues.

Day 2, continued. Subject appears disturbed by gun violence in Chicago. This is an interesting turn, as previous remarks have suggested that the subject would like to get rid of gun-free zones.

Day 2. Subject proclaims that the new year has started, one day late. Perhaps the subject does not have a complete grasp on the concept of time? Highly concerning. Study continues.


Day 1. Only retweets of subject's childrens' posts were observed today. Possible explanations include hangover from drinking champagne with a teetotaler's tolerance, delegation of tweeting duties to intimidated interns or superstitious beliefs. More investigation to follow.


Day 0. The subject appears to be unble to engage in well-wishing without including an insult. Thus, here we observe the subject displaying classic narcissistic behavior. As manipulative personalities are wont to do, the subject ends the communication with the word, "Love!", in an attempt to disorient those whom he has just insulted. Interesting observations thus far. Study continues.