BREAKING: Donald Trump unloads on Democratic star Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett with a deranged attack on her intelligence followed by a truly pathetic challenge. The cognitive decline is getting worse for old man Donnie…
Former President Donald Trump has once again launched a personal attack against a female politician of color, this time targeting Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett. In a series of posts on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump described Crockett as “a Low (Very!!!) I.Q. Individual, much in the mold of the AOC Plus Three Gang of Country Destroying Morons – Only slightly dumber.” This latest attack continues a familiar pattern in which Trump publicly disparages the intelligence of prominent women in politics, particularly women of color.
The posts did not stop at mere insults. Trump also challenged Crockett and other Democratic leaders to take a cognitive test similar to one he claimed to have “aced” during his recent physical at a Washington, D.C., military hospital. According to Trump, passing this test is proof of his superior mental faculties, contrasting sharply with the supposed intellectual deficiencies of his political opponents.
“Each of these political hacks should be forced to take a Cognitive Exam, much like the one I recently took while getting my ‘physical’ at our GREAT Washington, D.C., Military Hospital (WR!),” Trump wrote. “As the doctors said, ‘President Trump ACED it, something that is rarely seen!’ These Radical Left Lunatics would all fail this test in a spectacular show of stupidity and incompetence. TAKE THE TEST!!!”
Medical experts have consistently pointed out that Trump’s interpretation of the cognitive exam is misleading. The test in question, known as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), was designed by neurologist Dr. Ziad Nasreddine to detect early signs of cognitive decline. Its primary purpose is to evaluate basic memory, attention, and orientation skills, not to measure intelligence or intellectual prowess.
Dr. Nasreddine has explained that the MoCA “is supposed to be easy for someone who has no cognitive impairment” and “is not an IQ test or the level of how a person is extremely skilled or not.” In other words, passing this test only confirms that an individual’s basic cognitive functions are intact; it provides no meaningful insight into creativity, problem-solving ability, or overall intelligence.
Despite this clarification, Trump has repeatedly used his MoCA performance to bolster his self-image. Public health experts note that this approach can be misleading to the general public, as it equates passing a relatively simple cognitive screening with high intelligence—a misrepresentation that fails to account for the nuanced nature of mental ability. Ironically, Trump’s insistence on publicizing his test results may reveal more about his preoccupation with perception than his actual cognitive capacity.
Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, the target of this latest attack, is widely recognized for her articulate advocacy on issues such as civil rights, social justice, and economic equity. Her legislative work demonstrates a sophisticated grasp of complex policy matters, directly contradicting Trump’s characterization of her intellect. Colleagues describe her as strategic, informed, and highly capable—a stark contrast to the crude personal attacks leveled against her.
Trump’s ongoing attacks on women of color in politics have raised significant concern among political analysts and civil rights advocates. Critics argue that these tactics are designed not only to belittle individuals but also to distract from substantive policy debates, fueling a culture of division and sensationalism. Some analysts suggest that these attacks may energize his political base by framing his opponents as incompetent or unintelligent, even if such claims are factually dubious.
The broader implications of Trump’s rhetoric extend beyond individual politicians. By conflating cognitive functioning with political alignment, he risks reinforcing harmful stereotypes and perpetuating a political environment in which personal attacks overshadow substantive discourse. Experts caution that such behavior undermines public understanding of both cognitive health and intellectual achievement.
The specific cognitive exam Trump references—focused on simple memory tasks such as word recall and animal shape identification—was never intended to serve as a measure of intelligence. Passing it only confirms the absence of cognitive decline, a standard expectation for adults without neurological impairment. Therefore, Trump’s boast that he “aced” the test provides little more than a baseline confirmation of normal cognitive functioning.
The irony in Trump’s narrative is striking. While he presents his MoCA results as evidence of superior intelligence, the test itself is too rudimentary to substantiate such claims. Medical professionals note that repeatedly publicizing and weaponizing these results can unintentionally highlight a focus on self-perception rather than genuine intellectual accomplishment.
Political observers also highlight the potential long-term consequences of these attacks. Persistent personal disparagements can alienate moderate voters while simultaneously reinforcing partisan divides. For voters seeking substantive debate, such tactics detract from the evaluation of candidates’ policy positions, legislative effectiveness, and overall competency in public service.
In the face of Trump’s challenges, Crockett and other Democratic leaders are faced with a strategic decision: respond directly to the personal attacks or maintain focus on legislative priorities and policy achievements. Either approach carries potential benefits and risks, but ignoring baseless claims may ultimately reinforce their credibility and professionalism in contrast to the inflammatory rhetoric.
In summary, Trump’s latest attack on Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett highlights a pattern of personal disparagement, misrepresentation of cognitive assessments, and the blurring of lines between medical evaluation and political performance. While Trump portrays himself as mentally superior, experts and observers alike emphasize that passing a basic cognitive screening is not a valid measure of intelligence. The ongoing exchange underscores the complex interplay of perception, media strategy, and political rhetoric in contemporary American politics, reminding the public of the importance of critical analysis amid sensationalized claims.
As this story develops, one key takeaway remains clear: the difference between normal cognitive functioning and true intellectual achievement is substantial, and using medical tests as political ammunition can distort public understanding. The ongoing dialogue surrounding Trump’s attacks on Crockett exemplifies the challenges of navigating modern political discourse in an era dominated by social media theatrics and polarizing narratives.
