You know it’s bad when even a MSNBC regular is calling out a MSNBC host’s nutty theories. But that’s what happened on Tuesday as liberal Dana Milbank compared fellow liberal Lawrence O’Donnell to 9/11 truthers, birthers and people who worry about mind-controlling fluoride.

On April 8, O’Donnell opened his MSNBC program by speculating that Vladimir Putin "might have orchestrated what happened in Syria this week" to assist Donald Trump, "his friend in the White House." In his March 10 column, Washington Post columnist Milbank chided, “Maybe we should muzzle the wag-the-dog talk.”

After prefacing that he was a “fan” of O’Donnell, the Post journalist went in for the kill against his liberal MSNBC colleague:

But by that logic, we can never prove to everybody’s satisfaction that there wasn’t a second gunman on the grassy knoll, that Vincent Foster wasn’t murdered, that there wasn’t a controlled demolition inside Building 7, that former president Barack Obama didn’t forge his birth certificate, or that the government isn’t controlling our minds with fluoride.

Ouch. Milbank went on to highlight a growing liberal trend to believe bizarre conspiracy theories:

Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth government professor, explained in the New York Times in February why left-wing conspiracy theories appear to have gained since the election: “Political psychology research suggests that losing political control can make people more vulnerable to misinformation and conspiracy theories.” How else could people have fallen for the satirical report in a British outlet alleging that Queen Elizabeth II said she can legally kill Trump with a sword if he enters Buckingham Palace?

How bad are things getting on the left when Dana Milbank is the voice of reason?