President Trump's recent escalation against the press, including his September 18 announcement barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House over "fake news" coverage and his direct September 19 Oval Office remark calling Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey "terrible," has reinforced trader expectations for continued personal attacks before the September 30 resolution. Ongoing second-term friction with courts, the Federal Reserve's rate decision, and midterm messaging has coincided with repeated public rebukes of female reporters and political figures, consistent with patterns seen at the July correspondents' dinner and in August exchanges. With the UN General Assembly address and other scheduled appearances still ahead in the narrow window, market pricing on options such as Obama, Hochul, and James reflects the crowd's assessment of elevated near-term risk for targeted statements.
Experimental AI-generated summary referencing Polymarket data. This is not trading advice and plays no role in how this market resolves. · Updated$135,806 Vol.
Sep 30, 2026
Mark Carney
75%
Tucker Carlson
69%
Jon Ossoff
73%
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
54%
Alex Jones
50%
Hillary Clinton
38%
Zohran Mamdani
30%
Elon Musk
41%
Letitia James
39%
Friedrich Merz
22%
Andy Burnham
30%
Emmanuel Macron
17%
Marjorie Taylor Greene
17%
Jerome Powell
16%
Benjamin Netanyahu
10%
Norah O'Donnell
7%
Stephen Colbert
27%
Mohammed bin Salman
6%
Pope Leo XIV
6%
Kevin Warsh
6%
Pam Bondi
4%
J.D. Vance
4%
Xi Jinping
3%
Karoline Leavitt
2%
Vladimir Putin
2%
Megyn Kelly
44%
Candace Owens
48%
Melania Trump
32%
Jimmy Kimmel
55%
Kathy Hochul
39%
Ilhan Omar
59%
Elizabeth Warren
51%
Adam Schiff
49%
$135,806 Vol.
Mark Carney
$4,756 Vol.
75%
Tucker Carlson
$2,951 Vol.
69%
Jon Ossoff
$123 Vol.
73%
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
$236 Vol.
54%
Alex Jones
$204 Vol.
50%
Hillary Clinton
$1,985 Vol.
38%
Zohran Mamdani
$2,510 Vol.
30%
Elon Musk
$163 Vol.
41%
Letitia James
$742 Vol.
39%
Friedrich Merz
$2,214 Vol.
22%
Andy Burnham
$3,715 Vol.
30%
Emmanuel Macron
$4,523 Vol.
17%
Marjorie Taylor Greene
$1,515 Vol.
17%
Jerome Powell
$2,078 Vol.
16%
Benjamin Netanyahu
$1,642 Vol.
10%
Norah O'Donnell
$72 Vol.
7%
Stephen Colbert
$321 Vol.
27%
Mohammed bin Salman
$440 Vol.
6%
Pope Leo XIV
$1,386 Vol.
6%
Kevin Warsh
$76,892 Vol.
6%
Pam Bondi
$263 Vol.
4%
J.D. Vance
$1,522 Vol.
4%
Xi Jinping
$2,169 Vol.
3%
Karoline Leavitt
$300 Vol.
2%
Vladimir Putin
$2,685 Vol.
2%
Megyn Kelly
$407 Vol.
44%
Candace Owens
$3,097 Vol.
48%
Melania Trump
$101 Vol.
32%
Jimmy Kimmel
$913 Vol.
55%
Kathy Hochul
$2,198 Vol.
39%
Ilhan Omar
$419 Vol.
59%
Elizabeth Warren
$457 Vol.
51%
Adam Schiff
$61 Vol.
49%
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes any public statement in which he insults the listed individual between market creation and the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.President Trump's recent escalation against the press, including his September 18 announcement barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House over "fake news" coverage and his direct September 19 Oval Office remark calling Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey "terrible," has reinforced trader expectations for continued personal attacks before the September 30 resolution. Ongoing second-term friction with courts, the Federal Reserve's rate decision, and midterm messaging has coincided with repeated public rebukes of female reporters and political figures, consistent with patterns seen at the July correspondents' dinner and in August exchanges. With the UN General Assembly address and other scheduled appearances still ahead in the narrow window, market pricing on options such as Obama, Hochul, and James reflects the crowd's assessment of elevated near-term risk for targeted statements.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes any public statement in which he insults the listed individual between market creation and the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
Market Opened: Sep 2, 2026, 5:15 PM ET
Volume
$135,806End Date
Sep 30, 2026Market Opened
Sep 2, 2026, 5:15 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes any public statement in which he insults the listed individual between market creation and the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.President Trump's recent escalation against the press, including his September 18 announcement barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House over "fake news" coverage and his direct September 19 Oval Office remark calling Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey "terrible," has reinforced trader expectations for continued personal attacks before the September 30 resolution. Ongoing second-term friction with courts, the Federal Reserve's rate decision, and midterm messaging has coincided with repeated public rebukes of female reporters and political figures, consistent with patterns seen at the July correspondents' dinner and in August exchanges. With the UN General Assembly address and other scheduled appearances still ahead in the narrow window, market pricing on options such as Obama, Hochul, and James reflects the crowd's assessment of elevated near-term risk for targeted statements.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald Trump makes any public statement in which he insults the listed individual between market creation and the specified date (ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
A public statement is any written, verbal, or recorded statement which is either made in a public setting, published by the speaker, or on the record to media, and the direct language of which is made publicly available within the specified timeframe. Pre-recorded public statements will count for the date (ET) that they are made publicly available. Statements made in private that are subsequently leaked will not qualify, even if credibly reported. Narrations and paraphrasings do not qualify.
Images and videos posted on verified social media accounts will only qualify if they contain insulting language clearly directed at the individual, whether within the content itself or in an accompanying caption. Language within the content of a video will only qualify if Donald Trump is clearly portrayed as saying it. Insulting language within the content of a video said by anyone other than Donald Trump or a portrayal thereof will not qualify.
A quote post will qualify if added language independently qualifies as an insult, or endorses insulting language directed at the individual within the quoted post; a repost of another account's post will not qualify.
A public statement qualifies as an insult if it mocks, degrades, or disparages the individual either personally or professionally. This includes calling the individual a clearly insulting trait (e.g., weak, stupid, disloyal, a failure), using an insulting nickname (e.g., Crooked Hillary), using other clearly derogatory language, or using the negative form of a positive trait in a clearly derogatory manner (e.g., “He isn’t smart”, “He has no judgment”). Disparaging the individual in their professional capacity will qualify (e.g., "He is a disaster candidate," "He is terrible at his job"); however, negative comments directed at the individual's specific actions, policies, or decisions will not qualify (e.g., "He has bad policies," "He is wrong about healthcare").
A statement made in direct reference to the individual will qualify even if they are not named, so long as it is reasonably clear from context that they are the subject.
The resolution sources will be public statements made by Donald Trump and a consensus of credible reporting.
Volume
$135,806End Date
Sep 30, 2026Market Opened
Sep 2, 2026, 5:15 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...President Trump's recent escalation against the press, including his September 18 announcement barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House over "fake news" coverage and his direct September 19 Oval Office remark calling Bloomberg correspondent Catherine Lucey "terrible," has reinforced trader expectations for continued personal attacks before the September 30 resolution. Ongoing second-term friction with courts, the Federal Reserve's rate decision, and midterm messaging has coincided with repeated public rebukes of female reporters and political figures, consistent with patterns seen at the July correspondents' dinner and in August exchanges. With the UN General Assembly address and other scheduled appearances still ahead in the narrow window, market pricing on options such as Obama, Hochul, and James reflects the crowd's assessment of elevated near-term risk for targeted statements.
Experimental AI-generated summary referencing Polymarket data. This is not trading advice and plays no role in how this market resolves. · Updated
Beware of external links.
Beware of external links.
Frequently Asked Questions