Mary Trump Media

Is the current U.S. military escalation with Iran a strategy for leverage — or a step toward war?

10 hours ago | [YT] | 1,196

Mary Trump Media

When the Supreme Court of the United States strikes down a president’s signature economic policy — and the president immediately finds a new legal pathway around it — what does that tell us about the balance of power?

11 hours ago | [YT] | 1,239

Mary Trump Media

How do you feel about Mary Trump Live moving to an earlier time? Would 4 pm ET work? Leave us a blue heart if 4pm works. Thanks!

1 day ago | [YT] | 1,153

Mary Trump Media

What should the new and more accurate name fr the DOJ be?

1 day ago | [YT] | 909

Mary Trump Media

According to Anne Applebaum, a journalist for The Atlantic, Marco Rubio’s performance at the Munich Security Conference was less belligerent than JD Vance’s, a reminder that even mild-mannered Nazis are still Nazis. Lack of volume and belligerence notwithstanding, Rubio’s speech on February 14 should be deeply alarming to anybody who cares about the post–World War II Western liberal democratic order.

It’s been a long time coming, but with Vance’s hostile, anti-European remarks at the same event last year, Donald’s deranged anti-NATO speech at Davos last month, and Rubio’s White Christian Nationalist rhetoric three days ago, we have come, as a headline in The Nation put it, to “the end of the US-led order.” The United States, as has become increasingly clear, is no longer a country any of our allies can or should trust, and much of Rubio’s rhetoric underscores why.

The most obvious reason, of course, is the tens of millions of Americans who chose to put back into power those most interested in upending the post–World War II order and weakening NATO; those determined to undermine our alliances and our allies to the make common cause with the dictators and autocrats those alliances were formed to protect us from; those who neither understand nor believe in statecraft and diplomacy; who believe that might makes right; who are hellbent on reversing all of the progress we and our allies together have made in the last 80 years; and, those who seek to dismantle what has been, up until now, perhaps the greatest alliance in human history.

But there is also Rubio’s rhetoric:

To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else, not just to power their economies but to use as leverage against our own.

The problem, according to Rubio, is relying on the conclusive findings of the scientific community that climate change is real and it is caused by human activity to shape policy. Those of us who acknowledge the climate crisis and believe the international community should join to do everything we can to stop, or at least slow, the negative effects of climate change, are, according to Rubio and his handlers, members of a dangerous cult. It is we, not the oil and gas corporations, that are impoverishing our people.

Rubio’s remarks came two days after the Environmental Protection Agency repealed the 2009 scientific determination known as the Endangerment Finding that served as the backbone of emissions standards for vehicles, industrial pollution limits, and enforcement actions aimed at reducing the gases driving climate instability. The Trump regime’s EPA, in other words, will no longer do anything to protect our environment, and it will do nothing to stop, or even impede, the worsening climate crisis because it has arbitrarily concluded that such a crisis does not exist.

Then Rubio moved onto immigration:

In a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.

We are part of one civilization, Western civilization. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization for which we have fallen heir.

It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. . . . They testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels. They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future, but only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance.

Despite being the son of Cuban immigrants, there is a strain of white supremacy throughout Rubio’s speech. Each of his exemplars of Western culture is a white man from Western Europe. Their inspiration, he tells us, is Christianity (although I imagine almost all the artists he names would beg to differ). Our shared heritage, he tells us, is the heritage of white Christianity.

During his speech, as Applebaum points out, Rubio

did not mention the war [in Ukraine] or imply that America would help Europe win it. He did not express the belief that Russia can be defeated. He did not refer to the democratic values and the shared belief in freedom that once motivated the NATO alliance, and that still motivate its European members.

He did not mention any of these things because his overlords do not care about any of them. They are interested in shifting the balance of power and establishing a new hegemony under which our allies become subservient to a new world order that rejects the values that have bound the west for almost eight decades.

Shortly after his speech, Rubio flew to Budapest, where he assured authoritarian leader of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, that Donald is “deeply committed to his success.” Yes, Donald—a wannabe dictator himself—is deeply committed to the success of a man who rigs elections in his favor, stacks the judiciary, and almost destroyed an independent press.

Just six short years ago, though, Rubio wrote a letter to Donald in which he denounced the “democratic erosion” Orbán was spear-heading in Hungary. What could possibly have happened in those six short years to turn Rubio into a cheerleader for the kind of autocratic overreach he now champions?

Although temperamentally very different from JD Vance, who is loud and violent and obviously bloodthirsty, Marco Rubio is just as much of a fascist. Even weak men can embrace the most vicious ideologies if it feeds their pathetic, grasping need for proximity to power, no matter the cost.

How far we have we fallen. Indeed.

1 day ago | [YT] | 1,477

Mary Trump Media

At what point does assertive executive action become a fundamental shift in how American democracy functions?

1 day ago | [YT] | 1,795

Mary Trump Media

Ramadan Kareem to all who celebrate! As we enter this important time for the second largest religion in the world, I wanted to check in with everyone. Especially for those living in the US in its current state, are you more worried about religious freedoms now than ever before?

2 days ago | [YT] | 2,155

Mary Trump Media

The question about whether Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators were monsters has been asked and answered. Of course they’re monsters. But one question has not been—are there other monsters out there who are also his co-conspirators? Are we to believe that Ghislaine Maxwell truly is the only one? And if there are others, what does accountability look like?

The Justice Department’s newly released files—3 million documents out of an alleged 6 million, with a possibility there are many more than that—are causing upheaval throughout the worlds of politics, business, and academia. In countries outside the United States, governments are opening investigations, demanding in some cases that officials step down not only if they were actively involved with Jeffrey Epstein socially or financially, separate and apart from his crimes, after his 2008 conviction for raping a teenager, but even if they associated with somebody who associated with Jeffrey Epstein. That’s how seriously other countries are taking this horrific scandal. None of that is happening in the United States of America.

In fact, the Republican Party is falling all over itself to continue to cover for the one person in all of this who has been acting guiltier than anybody else involved since the release of the files became an issue. That would be Donald, of course. I’m not saying he is guilty; I have no insider knowledge into it. But there is no disputing that everything he’s done to suppress the Epstein files has been the actions of a guilty man.

We also know that, up until last Thursday, we were told Donald was mentioned in the Epstein files 38,000 times. Representative Jamie Raskin, (D-MD) informed us, however, that after that tranche of 3 million documents was released, Donald’s name came up over a million times.

We are currently in a situation in which the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche, are actively engaged in a cover-up so vast it could implicate not just Donald, but over ten people he’s appointed to positions in his regime. These officials include those who continued to communicate with Epstein after he was convicted in 2008 of raping a seventeen-year-old girl:

Mehmet Oz, Administrator Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

Stephen Feinberg, Deputy Defense Secretary

John Phelan, Secretary of the Navy

Kevin Warsh, Fed nominee

Elon Musk, Former Head of DOGE

Steve Bannon, Former White House Chief Strategist

Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Commerce who visited Epstein’s private island with his wife and children in 2012.

(Besides Donald, Lutnick is thus far, the most senior administration implicated. Members of Congress are calling for his resignation. But Donald considers him a friend, so Lutnick will neither resign nor be fired. Donald likes to surround himself people as corrupt and tainted as he is, after all.)


Also, Alex Acosta, Donald’s Secretary of Labor during his first administration, brokered the deal that allowed Epstein to continue to rape and sex traffic teenage girls and young women when he was with the DOJ.

Whether this is an exhaustive list remains to be seen, but given how much material the DOJ is withholding, that seems unlikely.

Todd Blanche is actively refusing, on the one hand, to identify the predators—those who might be co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein’s; and, on the other, to protect the victims. He and Bondi have no interest in doing either one of those things. They do, however, continue to pursue Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Here’s a question: Is appearing in the Epstein files proof of wrongdoing? Or let’s put it another way: Is it enough to appear in the Epstein files to be tainted by them?

Hillary is mentioned only in passing and claims never to have met Epstein. While Bill’s mentions are more substantive, he has denied all misconduct. If it can be proven that he’s done anything criminal in conjunction with Epstein, that’s a different conversation. What we know is that one of the ways in which Jeffrey Epstein became so connected to the rich and powerful is that he used his money, in the form of donations to institutions of higher learning and foundations, like the Clinton Foundation, to buy influence and respectability. Epstein, in other words, put himself in a position to be courted in order to get donations, which further enhanced his credibility among the monied classes.

If somebody is in the files having contact with Epstein before his 2006 indictment for business reasons, that should be the end of the conversation unless and until something else comes to light.

But right now, the DOJ has direct knowledge of people whose connections with Epstein, while not necessarily criminal, are disqualifying. Because the DOJ is a wholly owned entity of Donald Trump in service to doing his bidding, though, our hands are tied, at least for the time being.

Hopefully, we will have an opportunity in the not-too-distant future to rectify the situation. When we get to that point, here’s a quick rule of thumb: Anybody who continued to socialize with, or befriend, Epstein after his 2008 conviction involving a girl—knowing what he did and what he continued to get away with—should lose everything. They should lose their fortune; they should lose their reputation; they should be shunned.

Then, of course, if they are found to be criminally liable, regardless of political party or ideology or standing in the world, there must be indictments and trials. If such people are found guilty—lock them up and throw away the key.

Skip the Carousel

1 2

3 days ago | [YT] | 1,625

Mary Trump Media

While the rest of us mourn, the White House celebrated Presidents’ Day, another useless national holiday second only to Columbus Day, by posting a picture of Donald trying to look tough (he ended up looking like my grandmother, though she never wore quite as much makeup), with the caption:

I was the hunted. Now I’m the hunter.

Let’s leave aside the fact that by being “the hunted,” Donald is referring to his having been legitimately investigated, indicted, and convicted for crimes he actually committed; and by referring to himself as “the hunter” he is acknowledging that, because he is an aggrieved child not satisfied with having gotten away with all of those crimes, he is currently misusing the power of the presidency and the agencies he controls to go after those who investigated and prosecuted his crimes. This is the message of a thug, a wannabe mafia boss. That is what it now sounds like to be “presidential.” And it’s another reason to consider what it is we’re supposed to be celebrating today. I’ve often wondered why we have President’s Day at all because we’ve had more terrible presidents than good ones, and we’ve had more mediocre ones than either of those.

The holiday was originally in honor of George Washington and fell on his birthday until it became a Monday holiday. Eventually, the holiday expanded to include Abraham Lincoln and other presidents in general. Washington’s actions as a general during the Revolution, his presidency, and his decision not to seek a third term to avoid the appearance that the presidency was a lifetime appointment were worth celebrating. The man himself, however, was an enslaver.

By the same token, it would be fitting to celebrate the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, his stewardship during the Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation, and his laying the groundwork for the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. Lincoln’s views of Black people were in some cases abhorrent, but if he had survived, his work would have completely changed the course of this nation’s history. His successor, Andrew Johnson, however, actively sought to restore the South at the expense of newly freed Black Americans, including the devastating dismantling of the Freedmen’s Bureau.

Should we celebrate him—or Andrew Jackson or James Buchanan or the worst presidents in modern history like Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush or Donald? We should be more circumspect about the kind of national holidays we celebrate and the kinds of presidents we choose to honor. Celebrating all presidents, even implicitly, is just another way to normalize the worst of them including the one person who has done more damage to the office of the presidency than any other.

We’re often told that even if we don’t respect the person of the president, we must respect the office of the presidency. I don’t think that applies anymore because the person currently inhabiting that office has spent over five years defiling it. What, anymore, is there to respect? If the people in this country want to set aside a day to celebrate presidents, we should be more careful about choosing those who are worth it. And if we came up with a list, it’s not that Donald would be the last name on it—he wouldn’t be on it at all.

3 days ago | [YT] | 5,099

Mary Trump Media

Do you support Olympic athletes using their platforms to call out our corrupt government?

4 days ago | [YT] | 8,831