What exactly did rob reiner post on X after the attempted assassination of trump?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social and spoke in the Oval Office the day after Rob Reiner and his wife were found dead, calling Reiner “a tortured and struggling, but once very talented” director and asserting the couple were killed “reportedly due to the anger he caused others” by what Trump labeled “TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME” (TDS) [1] [2]. The remark drew swift bipartisan condemnation, including rebukes from GOP members and prominent outlets describing the post as inflammatory and unsubstantiated while police investigate the deaths and Reiner’s son is in custody [3] [4] [5].
1. What Trump actually posted and said — the language and platform
Trump’s public comments appeared on Truth Social and in remarks to reporters from the Oval Office; he described Reiner as “tortured and struggling” and said the deaths were “reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME,” a phrase he and allies commonly use to deride critics [1] [2]. Politico and other outlets quote him as repeating those characterizations to reporters and in an online post while noting he did not offer condolences in the conventional form [4].
2. Immediate reactions — bipartisan backlash and GOP rebukes
Major figures across the political spectrum condemned the tone of Trump’s post. Lawmakers including Thomas Massie and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene publicly criticized the suggestion that Reiner’s political views caused his killing, calling the comments inappropriate and disrespectful in the face of a brutal homicide [6] [7]. Media outlets characterized the remarks as inflammatory and unsubstantiated while reporting the investigation is ongoing [3] [8].
3. How news organizations framed the post — “inflammatory,” “shocking,” “unsubstantiated”
AP, The Guardian, The Washington Post, Axios and other outlets described the post as a political attack delivered in close temporal proximity to the discovery of the deaths and while authorities were still investigating; many labeled the suggestion that Reiner’s criticism of Trump caused his killing as unsubstantiated [2] [9] [3] [8]. Coverage emphasized both the content of Trump’s wording and the broader pattern of partisan commentary after politically charged killings earlier in the year [10] [6].
4. Context: why the comment resonated and why it drew special scrutiny
Reporting highlights that the comment came after a high-profile assassination earlier in the year that had prompted public vows by some conservative voices not to celebrate political violence; Trump’s framing was therefore judged by many as undermining that stance and as a departure from expected condolences following a homicide [10]. News outlets note that investigators had arrested Reiner’s son and that authorities had not established any motive connecting Reiner’s politics to the killings at the time of Trump’s post [3] [5].
5. Alternative viewpoints in the coverage — support, deflection, and silence
Some MAGA-aligned commentators defended or downplayed the president’s comments by pointing to Reiner’s long history of anti-Trump activism and arguing a punitive reading was warranted; other conservative figures explicitly rebuked Trump, demonstrating a split within his base [10] [6]. Several reports also stress that Trump framed his remarks as a critique rather than an expression of sympathy, and that he reiterated the point when questioned in the Oval Office [4] [11].
6. Limitations of reporting and what sources do not yet say
Current reporting documents Trump’s wording and the political fallout, but available sources do not mention any presented evidence linking Reiner’s political remarks to the killings; they make clear the suggestion was unsubstantiated and that the homicide investigation was active with the couple’s son arrested [3] [2]. Available sources do not mention any legal or White House disciplinary consequences stemming from the post beyond public criticism [8] [7].
7. Why this matters — precedent and public norms
Journalistic accounts treat the episode as important because it tests norms about how political leaders should respond to violent deaths and because it may influence public discourse about political violence; outlets underscore the risk that assigning blame publicly, absent evidence, can inflame partisan tensions and erode standards of civility [8] [10]. Coverage also notes the tactical dimension: Trump used the moment to reiterate a familiar insult (“TDS”), tying a personal tragedy to a long-running political narrative [1].
Sources cited: AP [2]; The Washington Post [3]; The Guardian [9] [12]; Axios [10] [6]; Politico [4]; CNBC [5]; WABE [8]; Variety [1]; The Hill [7]; TMZ [11].