If I were to write a full analysis of this speech, it would be several times its length, but that is not my purpose. I am trying to convey to the reader the degree and nature of his psychopathology, so that the reader can begin to have an appreciation (not just understanding) of its severity.
It also does not matter that other speech writers have contributed to the content. They share or buttress his psychology, and while they may add knowledge, intelligence, and a semblance of ideology to the speech that he otherwise may lack, they do not alter the psychology of concern.
There is a full context to this “translation”: it is not based on one speech but an enduring pattern, studied over years. As for what he repeats in rote (e.g., “thank you”), I am trying to demonstrate that his stating it is not the same as others’ stating the same. I am trying to impress upon the reader that he does not share the same human experience as most people and is incapable of gratitude — which is difficult to explain).