Trump’s profanity surges as authoritarian threats expand

Trump’s surge – A new report says President Donald Trump’s use of profanity, insults, and combative language has sharply intensified since his January 2025 return to power—rising from about 40% of speeches in his first term to 93% in just the first 16 months of his second. Th

When President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025. the shift many people noticed in his tone didn’t stay vague for long. A new report from the Washington Post put numbers to what critics have long argued: his profanity. insults. and combative language have grown markedly worse in his second term.

During Trump’s first term, about 40% of his speeches included at least one use of vulgarity. In the first 16 months of his second term, the figure reportedly climbed to 93%. The report also says his profane or insulting posts on social media have tripled compared with his first term—and that the timing of those posts has shifted even further into the night. Most of his posts, the report says, are made between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. an hour range that lines up with a pattern Trump has long had. but suggests he is leaning even more into it as he approaches his 80th birthday in June.

The report adds another detail that critics say is less about language alone and more about the posture behind it. It says Trump’s Truth Social posts are more self-referential and egomaniacal. with half of his posts in 2026 using first-person pronouns—sometimes more than 12 times in a single post. That compares to 30% from 2018. For many Americans, the point isn’t only that Trump uses harsh words. It’s that the harshness appears to be hardening into routine.

Supporters and detractors often debate whether Trump’s vocabulary is merely rough-edged politics or a symptom of something deeper. A White House spokeswoman, Olivia Wales, pushed back on the idea that it reflects a problem with American civic life. In a statement to the Washington Post. Wales said: “President Trump doesn’t care about being politically correct. he cares about Making America Great Again. The American people love how authentic. transparent. and effective the President is. which is why he won in a massive landslide victory on November 5. 2024.”.

In the view of critics, however, the numbers and the style are only part of the story. They argue the language is not incidental, but structural—woven into Trump’s politics, his conception of democracy, and his treatment of opponents.

The report’s account of Trump’s broader political agenda ties the language escalation to what it describes as an accelerated effort to move away from real democracy and the rule of law. enabled by the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority. It characterizes Trump’s approach as advancing competitive authoritarianism through the Big Lie. voter nullification. voter suppression. and the threat of the Insurrection Act and martial law.

Critics also say Trump’s conduct extends beyond rhetoric into policy choices with moral implications. The report describes Trump as having launched a war of choice against Iran and repeatedly threatened to destroy its civilization—actions it frames as crimes against humanity. It also characterizes the administration as “transparently corrupt and ethically compromised. ” adding that his personal and family wealth has been estimated to have grown by billions of dollars.

The report further says Trump has engaged in racist and sexist attacks. It alleges Trump shared an artificial intelligence-generated video of the Obamas as apes. and that he routinely insults the intelligence of Black people—and Black women specifically—calling them “low IQ.” It says Trump has described non-white immigrants as “poison” in “the blood” of the nation and as parasites. and it characterizes him as repeatedly showing himself to be a sexist and a misogynist.

Those accusations—about profanity. but also about power. credibility. and how people are spoken about—sit uneasily alongside the report’s own suggestion that Trump is becoming even less filtered as his influence expands. It says Trump has increasingly appeared to lack filters or self-control. It doesn’t claim definitive answers about why. but it frames the question bluntly: whether the behavior is intentional arrogance or a symptom of a deteriorating mental state is. to critics. “somewhat beside the point.” They argue that Republican institutions and “responsible elites” have not stopped him. and that the “adults in the room” from his first administration are no longer present. replaced by MAGA sycophants and enablers.

Historian Julian Zelizer, speaking to the Washington Post, offers a way critics interpret the language. Zelizer called Trump historically unique in his use of profanity. saying it “meshes with a very aggressive presidency” and a high-dominant leadership style. Zelizer argued that a curse word is more than just a word: Trump’s profanity is a signal and a threat directed at anyone who opposes him. indicating how far he is willing to go.

Public opinion polls and focus groups. the report says. show Trump’s MAGA followers admire a style that “tells it like it is. ” ignores “political correctness. ” and talks like them. The report frames this as a leader-follower dynamic marked by disinhibition—followers. it argues. yearn for power that can act without consequence.

There is another thread to the story, one that shifts from politics to psychology. The report quotes psychologist John Gartner. a contributor to the book “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump. ” who suggested Trump’s worsening behavior could reflect a mind growing “even more disturbed and pathological.” Gartner. speaking to the Daily Beast. said: “First of all. he’s up at all hours of the night. posting all of these lies and crazy stuff.” He added that the pace—“that someone would be up all night tweeting”—could be “a clinical indicator of some kind of either mania or sundowning.”.

Gartner’s deeper concern, as presented in the report, is what the behavior signals about intentions. When Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself pushing a red button with mushroom clouds in the background. Gartner did not treat it as humor. “He never jokes,” Gartner said. “And he doesn’t bluff, either. What he does is groom us. He prepares us for things that would otherwise be unthinkable.”.

The report also depicts a recent Oval Office moment that critics say made the stakes personal and immediate for children. It describes Trump inviting a group of children to the Oval Office earlier this month to celebrate the return of the Presidential Fitness Test. Instead of an age-appropriate discussion about exercise and health. the report says Trump delivered a “crude lesson” about national strength and vitality. Iran. the possibility of imminent nuclear apocalypse. and how Iranian protesters—including women—were shot in the head by snipers.

It says Trump asked the children to think about how much death a nuclear war would cause and whether they would be alive if the United States had not attacked Iran. “You might be too young for this,” Trump told them, according to the report. It adds that he warned them they “can’t let a bunch of lunatics have a nuclear weapon or the world will be in a lot of trouble.”.

In the report’s telling, the lesson included a moment meant to demonstrate harm: Trump pressed his finger to his forehead to show how Iranian protesters were shot “between the eyes.” The report also says he warned the children about transgender women in sports, calling them predatory.

The reaction described is stark. Several children, the report says, looked visibly upset. Critics argue the episode was not just shocking—it was grooming children to fear violence and the “dangerous Other,” framed as organizing values of fascism.

All of this, in the report’s view, lands with a particular historical resonance. It points to Robert Bork’s 1996 book “Slouching Towards Gomorrah. ” which the report describes as a defining work for right-wing culture wars. centered on a moral panic about how liberals’ supposed immorality and crudeness were destroying traditional values. The report then argues that three decades later, Bork’s arguments have found their irony in Trump.

Historian Rick Perlstein. quoted in a 2017 interview with Bill Moyers. is used to push back on the idea that extremist politics were ever safely pushed aside within American conservatism. Perlstein said: “What I got wrong about the American right was the idea that it succeeded in the 1960s by purging its crazier. more reactionary. more paranoid elements and becoming respectable.” He called that framing self-congratulatory and asked: “What if the crazy paranoid fringe was in fact the vanguard?”.

The report closes on a blunt conclusion: it says Trump did not conquer or take over the Republican Party or the conservative movement in a way that corrupted their innocence. Instead, it argues, he gave people “permission to be their true selves.”

What remains. for Americans tracking the news cycle from Washington to their own homes. is a picture defined by escalation: a documented rise in vulgar language. nights filled with posts sent between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m., and a set of criticisms that connect tone to governance. Supporters describe authenticity and effectiveness, as the White House spokeswoman did. Critics see grooming. threats. and a civic culture paying a price for the way power speaks—especially as the calendar moves toward June and Trump’s 80th birthday.

Donald Trump vulgarity profanity Truth Social Washington Post report Olivia Wales Supreme Court voter suppression Insurrection Act martial law Iran Presidential Fitness Test John Gartner Julian Zelizer