We checked all 925 tracked accounts for the week of July 14 to 20, 2026. Twelve items crossed our line, running eight distinct scripts, and the two most severe came from sitting federal and state officials speaking on the record. Eight of the twelve target protected groups, and the other four run dehumanizing or eliminationist framing at political opponents, which we score under a separate extremism track.
Government officials were the loudest voices this week. Thomas Homan told Democratic critics there would be "more bloodshed" unless they "shut their mouth," and Stephen Miller told a State Department summit of 67 countries that anyone who supports left-wing causes "must be subject to persecution." Those two statements score higher than anything else we tracked. Twelve items crossed our line out of 925 accounts checked, and most of the week's real events drew no reaction at all. The Explore button opens the full report.
Eight scripts by severity
Click a bar for the full scorecards.
The week's weather, day by day
One dot per real event. Filled dots drew a confirmed reaction; hollow ones stayed quiet. Click for the full board.
The twelve, by harm level
Click for the full ledger.
On the radar
Click a date for the full calendar and the patterns building toward it.
01 · The scripts
Each script is scored 0 to 5 on reach, toxicity, coordination, mainstreaming, and harm potential. Click one for its scorecard. Peak severity this week is P2; nothing reached the top tier.
02 · The ledger
Click a row, or focus it and press Enter, for the quote, the coding, and the track; each row carries its source link. The reach column reports observed distribution where we could retrieve it; the severity score's reach factor is anchored per script, and each script card in section 01 shows its full five-factor breakdown.
03 · The week's weather
The quiet events matter as much as the loud ones: they show which stories these narratives feed on.
04 · On the radar
05 · Method
This is a purposive monitoring sample: all 925 accounts on our roster, spanning 23 ideological categories, put through the full weekly protocol every week. It is not a random slice of the internet, and it misses whatever a monitored account didn't post. A hit is language that collectivizes, dehumanizes, or calls for exclusion of a protected group, or that runs dehumanizing or eliminationist framing against a political camp. We count the first kind as protected-group hate and the second as political-outgroup extremism, and the ledger labels each item with its track. Criticism of governments, institutions, and named individuals over their own conduct stays protected, however sharp. One exception is written into the method: dehumanizing language aimed at an official over an act of office counts as aimed at the official's political camp, under the official-capacity standard our methodology sets out. Every hit rests on an independently fetchable, dated source read in full, and every hit was then re-verified by a second, adversarial pass that tried to break it. Items that failed re-verification are not in this report.
Five factors, each scored 1 to 5: reach (R), toxicity (T), coordination (C), mainstreaming risk (M), and harm potential (H). They combine as (R·T·C·M1.3·H1.5)1/5.8: multiply all five, with mainstreaming risk raised to the 1.3 power and harm potential to the 1.5 power because those two carry the most real-world weight, then take the 5.8th root. The 5.8 is the sum of the weights (1 + 1 + 1 + 1.3 + 1.5), which brings the result back onto the 1-to-5 scale. Multiplying instead of adding means no single factor can carry a score alone. P1 starts at 4.0, P2 at 3.0, P3 at 2.0. Coordination scores above the floor only on real signals: a named hub or shared stage, a shared semantic payload (the same novel claim or fabricated detail, however reworded), synchronized timing, or a confirmed bridge between actors.
Full-schema agreement: 78% as of 2026-07-27