From§Each

Page A3From§Eachthe early evening edition — 6 October 2026

New York Post declares Trump didn't say what the White House just defended him for saying.

“White House defends Trump comment to let Iran 'take out' LA and San Diego”, 6 October 2026 (Photo via BBC News — the original report)

As it ran on the front

I had this written down. Give me a second—I keep everything in one notebook, church bulletins, the vet's number, all of it jammed together, so it takes a minute. Here. October sixth. Here it is.

What I wrote, word for word, off the broadcast: the man told a rally crowd that Iran could "take out" Los Angeles and San Diego. CBS had it that way. So did the Guardian, talking to a hairstylist in L.A. who found out her city had come up at a rally the night before. San Diego called it a disservice—their word, not mine, so I put it in quotes. The governor called it "deranged and dangerous" to one network and just "deranged" to another, same week, like he wanted it to land twice.…

…(cont) Then there's the page I keep coming back to, not because it's the strangest thing in the stack, but because somebody got paid to write it: the White House said the man was warning about the risk of a nuclear Iran. I underlined it, because that's a specific kind of sentence built around a specific other sentence, and I wanted to see if they'd still fit together read side by side.

I drive out to the turnpike most Thursdays—old car, fan belt's been complaining since summer, and I don't trust the toll box not to rattle loose—and there's a camera over the gantry that takes your picture whether you want it to or not. If I called up the turnpike authority and told them the camera never caught me that Thursday, what do you suppose they'd send back—my own bumper, or an apology?

So here's the New York Post, that same week, same rally, headline saying he never asked Iran to do any such thing. Their own writing underneath says he was comparing a short-term bump in gas prices to the cost of Iran going nuclear. Which one is that—the thing the governor heard twice, or the thing about gas prices? I wrote both down. They're on the same page.

Down in the corner, smaller writing, there's a note about a man named Hasan Piker, who streams for a living, saying his own 2019 remark was far less damaging than this one. I don't know what a remark is worth measured against another remark. I just know it was in that same stack of paper, so I wrote it down the way I write down everything that ends up in front of me.

I was about to close the book—the dog's been waiting by the door through all of this—when I saw I'd dog-eared a page from the end of August without remembering why. It's a post from the man himself, five weeks before any of this: a video, made up out of nothing, of American forces bombing the island where Iran keeps its oil terminal. The next day's page says that if Iran hit back, they'd be hit again "at a much harder and higher level." That one's dated too. September first.

So which one was the warning—the one he gave at that rally in October, or the one he posted in August, five weeks early? I've got the page. I just can't find the one that says which.

“Trump says it on camera in front of a room full of phones, and by lunch there's a newspaper telling you your own ears were wrong. That's not a correction, that's a two-step con — one outlet scares you, the other gaslights you, and either way you're the one left holding a president who put two American cities in the same sentence as a country he's been threatening with annihilation since August. Pick whichever version you like; the threat's still yours to live under.”
Sal
“Look, the president wasn't threatening those cities, he was making a cost-benefit point — gas prices versus the cost of letting Iran go nuclear — and the White House's own word for that is "warning," which is responsible, actually, except didn't the Post say he never said any of it? Either he said it and it was a warning, or he didn't say it and there's nothing here to defend, and I don't see why I can't hold both — did I just say that, that doesn't sound like me.”
Chip

The receipts

LA and San Diego residents ‘horrified’ by Trump suggesting Iran bomb them Trump said Iran could 'take out' Los Angeles and San Diego
The Guardianmainstream§

As Angelenos bemoan ‘sad situation’, those in San Diego say remark a ‘disservice’ to town with multiple naval bases Donald Trump’s extraordinary implication that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego have sparked condemnation across the political spectrum. As residents of the two major west coast cities awoke on Tuesday to…

· 'The President of the United States Is Mentally Unwell': Deranged Trump Posts AI Slop of Iran Bombing from the morgue, 31 Aug 2026

· Trump Issues New Mass Murder Threat, Warning Iran of 'Biggest Attack of Them All' from the morgue, 1 Sep 2026

· 'By Annihilating Iran, We've Created Peace': Trump's Genocidal Rhetoric Takes Orwellian Turn in Time Interview from the morgue, 1 Oct 2026

· Carville says Piker 'not a Democrat': 'Don't use our name' from the morgue, 22 Sep 2026

This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front. The byline is a pen name for a column drafted by a machine and checked by the editor: how this is made.