🚨 BREAKING: Trump ERUPTS After Jimmy Kimmel & Rosie O’Donnell EXPOSE Him LIVE On TV — Inside the On-Air Meltdown That Shocked Everyone 🔥

NEW YORK — Few personal rivalries in American public life have endured as long, or played out as publicly, as the feud between Donald Trump and Rosie O’Donnell. Nearly two decades after their first clash on daytime television, the dispute has resurfaced again, this time amplified by late-night comedy and the politics of a polarized era.

The most recent flare-up followed a segment on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, in which Jimmy Kimmel revisited Mr. Trump’s history of personal attacks against critics, particularly women. The segment featured archival clips and commentary recalling Mr. Trump’s past remarks about Ms. O’Donnell and his broader pattern of responding to criticism with insults focused on appearance and character.

The origins of the feud date to December 2006, when Ms. O’Donnell, then a co-host on The View, criticized Mr. Trump’s handling of a controversy involving a Miss USA pageant winner. Mr. Trump owned the pageant at the time and had publicly defended the contestant. Ms. O’Donnell questioned his moral authority, citing his personal history, and mocked his public persona. Mr. Trump responded swiftly, threatening legal action and unleashing a series of personal insults that would become a defining feature of their relationship.

Over the years, the dispute has resurfaced repeatedly. During the first Republican presidential debate in 2015, when asked by the moderator about his history of derogatory comments toward women, Mr. Trump interrupted to say “only Rosie O’Donnell,” prompting laughter from the audience. The remark underscored how central the feud had become to his political brand, serving both as a punchline and a rallying cry for supporters.

Mr. Kimmel’s recent segment framed the history as more than a celebrity spat, presenting it as an illustration of how personal grievance has shaped Mr. Trump’s public conduct. The comedian contrasted Mr. Trump’s fixation on Ms. O’Donnell with his role as president, arguing that the behavior reflected an inability to tolerate criticism. Mr. Kimmel also highlighted polling data and public reactions that suggested the feud had become emblematic, for some Americans, of Mr. Trump’s leadership style.

Ms. O’Donnell, who has spoken openly about the emotional toll of the attacks, has described the experience as the most severe bullying she has faced, including in childhood. In interviews, she has said that the relentlessness of the insults — and their normalization in public discourse — made the episode uniquely damaging.

The controversy has taken on added significance in recent years as debates over free speech, political retaliation and the power of the presidency have intensified. Legal scholars have repeatedly noted that U.S. citizenship cannot be revoked as punishment for speech, pointing to the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment. Nonetheless, statements by political leaders suggesting such actions, even rhetorically, have drawn concern from civil liberties advocates.

Mr. Trump’s allies dismiss the criticism as exaggerated and politically motivated, arguing that his remarks are often intended as humor or provocation rather than policy threats. They also contend that comedians and entertainers wield disproportionate influence in shaping public narratives without being subject to the same scrutiny as elected officials.

Yet the episode has underscored the evolving role of late-night television as a forum for political commentary. Shows like Jimmy Kimmel Live! have increasingly blurred the line between entertainment and critique, using satire to revisit past statements and contextualize them within broader debates about power and accountability.

For Ms. O’Donnell, the renewed attention has been a reminder that the dispute is not merely historical. She has said that the persistence of the attacks — spanning from reality television to the presidency — illustrates how personal animus can be magnified when combined with political authority.

As the exchange continues to circulate online, it serves as a case study in how modern political conflicts endure across platforms and years, fueled by media repetition and public memory. What began as a daytime television argument has evolved into a symbol of a larger cultural divide, one in which comedy, politics and personal grievance intersect — and where the boundaries between them remain increasingly difficult to draw.