That the president and his administration maintain a tenuous relationship with the media is not a bad thing. The press isn’t supposed to be his propaganda outlet, and the media challenging, and sometimes attacking, the government by publishing articles that call his integrity, veracity and propriety into question is pretty much the point. Whether you want to characterize it as “speaking truth to power” or “just the facts, ma’am,” the press is not supposed to be the president’s friend.

Then again, it’s not supposed to be the president’s enemy either.

For a while, the media eschewed journalism in favor of what it delightfully called “moral clarity,” which was essentially yellow journalism directed at damaging Trump, facts be damned. This was all too prevalent during his first term, where nothing he could say or do wouldn’t be twisted into some catastrophically wrongful act. Ironically, there were more than enough legitimately bad acts to criticize, but that didn’t stop the media from turning every act, no matter how anodyne or banal, into a federal offense.

As a result, there was a significant loss of public faith in the media. It couldn’t all be bad, or at least as bad as the press made it appear. Worse, it became obvious that news stories read more like op-eds, sadly lacking in facts and far more adjectives than nouns. We were told only as much as the media decided we deserved to know to reach the conclusion they demanded of us. This wasn’t journalism, and this wasn’t satisfactory to a public, even one that despised a vulgar, deceitful, ignorant narcissist.

The press came to recognize the error of its ways, and morphed back toward journalism, the reporting of facts without necessarily inherent editorialization. Not every reporter. Not every story. But far more, and far better, than it had done during Trump 1, when his cries of “fake news” weren’t entirely wrong.

But as the press got better, Trump got worse.

Trump: We were in the midst of negotiating and a lot of stupid people said why aren’t you putting Russian sanctions—

Collins: But you said you didn’t give anything for his release

Trump: If I didn’t do that, you wouldn’t have him coming back.

Collins: So you did give something.

Trump: You don’t know anything. You’re fake news CNN.

Collins: You’re saying you lifted the sanctions in exchange for his release?

Trump: You don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re a low IQ person. You’re a dummy. https://t.co/PTT9uWYY7a

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 21, 2026

This is one of innumerable examples of Trump responding to a perfectly legitimate question with a childish persona attack. While it mostly happens with female reporters, that isn’t always the case.

President Donald J. Trump eviscerates imbecile “journalist” Andrew Feinberg for misbehaving in the Oval Office:

“What’s wrong with you? Are you a sick person? I actually think there’s something wrong with you.” https://t.co/NjowIx8x14

— Vice President JD Vance (@VP) October 20, 2026

That was one of three times Trump lashed out at reporters during his Oval Office presser. But then came the “lawyer letter” from White House counsel, Will Scharf, to Politico, which had earlier been banned from the White House along with CNN and MSNOW, demanding that it retract “fake” stories about Chief of Staff Suzy Wiles and apologize to the president.

I therefore demand that Politico immediately correct or retract these publications, issue a prominent and public apology to the President of the United States and to Ms. Wiles, and remove the false reporting from your digital archives. Failure to do so  or otherwise respond justifying Politico’s publications within 48 hours will prompt an immediate review of Politico’s relationship with the White House, and, of course, consideration of all other appropriate and available legal remedies.

The Trump administration has long taken the position that it is the most transparent administration ever, based upon the fact that Trump gives a never-ending stream of press conferences on almost a daily basis. Indeed, it’s nearly impossible to shut him up when he’s on a roll, even if he rarely provides an actual answer to the question asked or responds in a fashion that most people would consider truthful or coherent. But hey, that’s who we elected.

There are ways in which the administration can shut out media outlets that don’t write what Natalie Harp wants the president to see. There are ways that go too far. The media, on the whole, realizes that its tenuous position has become even more subject to Trump’s whims, and it could well be “them,” whether that’s a television network or a major newspaper, the next time. They could decide to shut down their coverage and deny Trump mainstream coverage. Does a presidency fall in the forest if there is no one there to report it?

But the alternative is denying the public a contemporaneous report of what the president and his administration is doing to violate the Constitution, destroy American history, engage in corruption or wantonly murder people upon Trump’s command.

There are a lot of folks who would love to see Kaitlan Collins drop her professional demeanor when Trump attacks her, and would gladly contribute to her gofundme should CNN fire her for smacking back hard. How long can Trump behave like this before the press decides not to take it any longer?