President Donald Trump posted remarks on the killing of legendary Hollywood filmmaker Rob Reiner, who was discovered dead on Sunday afternoon in his home in Brentwood with his wife, Michele Singer.
On Monday, Trump, a lifelong antagonist of his own politics, criticised Reiner, who supported Democratic causes and was a leading critic of Trump, in a social media post that complained that Reiner had the Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Michele Singer and Rob Reiner, husband and wife, were murdered in a possible case of double murder.
What did Trump say?
In one of his posts on Truth Social, Trump said, A very sad thing happened last night in Hollywood. The tortured and struggling but once very talented movie director and comedy star, Rob Reiner, is dead, along with his wife, Michele, allegedly of the anger he caused others by his gigantic, unyielding, and incurable illness called TRUMP DERANGEment SYNDROME, also known as TDS.
The US president went ahead to further his comments by stating that Reiner had been obsessed with him and had angered many people due to his opposition to the Trump administration.
He wanted to drive people CRAZY by his flames of obsession, President Donald J. Trump, and his apparent paranoid was even more heightened as the Trump Administration had exceeded all expectations and goals of greatness, and once the Golden Age of America was here, maybe never before. May Rob and Michele rest in peace!
Rob Reiner vs Donald Trump
Reiner had also repeatedly criticised Trump and his policies. In his recent interview with MSNBC, the director cautioned that the US would turn into an autocracy in case Trump were to have more power over institutions. We are a year away from becoming the full-fledged autocracy of this country, and democracy is totally out of us, Reiner told MSNBC (since it was renamed MS NOW) in October.
And we are also looking at 2026, the election, and Donald Trump is aware that when it comes to a free and fair election, he will lose. He will lose the House, and the House will turn and will fall into the hands of Democrats. Also, there will be committee chairs, who will be in a position to hold meetings, and that is the last thing he wants.
Is Trump Derangement Syndrome a genuine mental illness?
On 25 March 2025, a Bill was presented to the State of Minnesota by five Republican senators in a proposal to come up with Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) as a mental illness that would be listed among the recognised ones in the state.
Their Bill determines TDS as a state of paranoia, hysteria, strong hostility against Donald Trump, and aggression against his supporters.
It is not the first time that a president has been diagnosed with a presidential syndrome. It is, nevertheless, the very first instance of a president pathologising his rivals. In 2003, psychiatrists and conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, who co-authored the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnosed those who alleged conspiracy secrets by George W. Bush in 9/11 with the Bush Derangement Syndrome.
A short lived phenomenon was the use of the term Obama Derangement Syndrome during the presidency of Barack Obama, and was rooted in the erroneous assumption that Obama was not born in the USA.
Others even proposed that the decision of Obama to use Dijon mustard instead of ketchup to put on his cheeseburger was also an indicator of foreignness.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is not the first diagnosis of a so-called presidential syndrome. The difference between Trump, however, is that he has owned it, and used it to his benefit.
The distinguishing factor about Trump is that he and his supporters have adopted the term TDS and used it as a weapon to their favor. Trump asserted that the individuals who had criticised his relationship with Vladimir Putin were afflicted by TDS:
Tweet by Donald Trump in which he states that people are suffering Trumps Derangement Syndrome because they despise the fact that he can get along with Vladimir Putin.
Trump Derangement Syndrome: Why it justifies aggression and enmity
Manipulation in the use of psychiatric language to polarise the masses does not simply increase the level of disagreement but indicates that the opponents are mentally unstable, dangerous or socially and politically malfunctioning. It justifies aggression, dehumanisation and even violence.
Such language by a political leader who has an immense amount of influence can be used to normalise the same with citizens, where people are encouraged to pathologise each other in their daily encounters.
Polarising the masses with weaponising psychiatric language does not only make the discourse even more locked in argument; it authorises the dehumanisation.
