Reno Omokri: The Pathological Liar As Influencer

Valentine Obienyem

I had to remind myself of the futility of replying to characters like Mr. Reno Omokri. The man has made a full-time career of shadowing Mr. Peter Obi and readily responds to anything Obi says or does. I am convinced that if Obi were to remark, even casually, that Reno’s father was a good judge, Reno, because it came from Obi, would swiftly protest—insisting instead that his father was Sisamnes, the corrupt judge whom King Cambyses flayed alive and whose skin was used to upholster the judicial chair, so that future judges might never forget the wages of corruption.

Such is the depth of Reno’s contrariness—so consumed by envy and obsession that he would contradict even the truth itself, merely to draw breath from controversy.

When I wrote a couple of articles about him, it was Obi himself who appealed to me to stop, insisting that it was giving Reno attention he did not deserve. In fact, he said wryly: “Reno is a good but hungry man. He uses me to get traffic; why not indulge him in that vanity?”

I remember my engagement with Mr. Tai Obasi. Tai has wisely, perhaps, decided not to touch anything concerning Reno, not even with a long spoon. He once advised that I emulate him, though he admitted that my analyses are always punchy.

I recall explaining to him why I always hit Reno hard with the truth by telling him about Martin Luther (a Rev. Fr.). When Luther’s wife, a former nun, reproached him, “Dear husband, you are too rude towards the Papacy,” he replied, “A twig can be cut with a bread knife, but an oak calls for an axe.” There is no language inappropriate in the exposition of Reno, who is an enemy of truth and civility.

Reno is running amok against all civilised norms. He can go to any extent to sing the praises of those in power or those who lubricate his palms. After a brief observation, I discovered that he places more value on people’s favor than on reputation—and he makes no pretense to the contrary. This informs his support for corruption, indiscipline, incompetence, and shameless philistinism.

Reno reminds me of an ancient sophist named Teng. A certain fellow once recovered a drowned body and demanded a large ransom from the dead man’s family before releasing it for burial. Distraught, the family sought Teng’s counsel. “Wait,” said the sophist with an air of cunning calm, “no other family will pay for the corpse.”

They followed his advice. Soon the man who possessed the body, finding no one willing to meet his price, grew anxious and came to Teng for guidance. Teng, with the same cold detachment, told him: “Wait, nowhere else can they obtain the body.”

Such is Reno’s character—a man so duplicitous that he plays both sides of every quarrel, advising the oppressor and the oppressed in turn, profiting from the confusion he creates. He traffics in deceit as others do in trade, thriving on contradiction and mastering the art of self-serving sophistry. Like Teng, he measures wisdom by advantage and morality by convenience.

Reno is one of the worst sycophants I have encountered. He is insincere, hypocritical, and a perfect artist in acting out opinions he pretends to hold. The way he supports President Tinubu, for example, gives no inkling that he once criticised him fiercely to the point of touting him for senility.

Today, he acts with astonishing devotion to the same man he once condemned—all for material gain. The true character of the man manifests daily. People are still stunned by the lightning speed with which he transformed from Tinubu’s critic to his ardent defender.

He is in the news again recently over his dealings with Mike Arnold. Honestly, I have not read the entire story because anything about Reno nauseates me. However, as reported by credible sources, the story is revealing. In October 2025, Reno Omokri publicly dismissed U.S. Senator Ted Cruz’s claim that Nigeria was witnessing a “Christian genocide.”

He argued that while Christians were indeed victims of attacks, so too were Muslims, insisting that the violence stemmed from terrorism, banditry, and communal conflict rather than a state-sponsored campaign against any faith. To bolster his argument, Omokri said he invited a U.S. fact-finding delegation—led by former Texas Mayor Mike Arnold and filmmaker Jeff Gibbs—to assess the situation on the ground.

However, after their visit, Mike Arnold contradicted Omokri’s account. He accused Omokri of misrepresenting the findings and called him a “pathological liar” after evaluating his longstanding dealings with him.

The summary of Arnold’s point is that Reno is a pathological liar. His written and spoken lies could fill a book—many were not written, and some were not “writable.” Arnold almost called him a Judas who betrays all, a mad dog who bites everybody.

Check all those he has worked with—he is today their number one antagonist. Reno must have pushed the normally taciturn Arnold to the bursting point with his lies and misrepresentations, such that he felt compelled to expose him.

When Reno lies or fights, he does so without restraint or truce; he uses every device of satire, ridicule, and vituperation—he is an expert in the crafty distortion of truth. Reno does not care about his reputation. He is always eager to do anything to finance his vanity.

I am sure that if the devil would pay his bills, he would offer him his services. He wants to enjoy the pleasure of every impulse. At over fifty, it is incredible that honor still means nothing to him. People like him probably think a good name is a posthumous bauble which fools pay dearly for but cannot enjoy—this is probably his mindset.

Honestly, Reno is a fascinating character. I have never seen a man whose every action is prompted by inordinate avarice. This is precisely why Nigerians rank him as the outstanding man of his time in three areas: in lies, in sycophancy, and in “nzuzu” (foolishness).