‘Enablers find him useful’: Trump’s niece says power could slip from president at any time
Mary Trump, the psychologist and author who has chronicled her family’s inner dynamics, says Donald Trump’s grip on power is less about personal strength and more about the incentives of those around him. In a new interview, she argues that the president’s “enablers” support him so long as he remains useful to their goals—and that influence could erode quickly if his value to them wanes.
Mary Trump’s comments to The Daily Beast arrived as administration allies defended Border Patrol agents involved in the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, 37, during a protest in Minneapolis. Gregory Bovino, a senior Border Patrol official, described Pretti not as a victim but as a “suspect,” while South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem also backed the agency’s actions. The White House has stood by the agents as calls for transparency and accountability have intensified.
Framing the moment within a longer pattern, Mary Trump said her uncle has spent decades modeling a style of leadership that prizes aggression and grievance. She contends that posture has cascaded through his administration and shaped how officials interpret both policy and accountability.
“Donald has normalized the idea that you can be a bully, act like a thug, show open disrespect—and then complain when others push back,” she said. “That trickles down. If you’re doing something in service of Donald Trump’s agenda, the expectation is you’ll be protected.”
Mary Trump connected that ethos to what she views as a broader message of impunity. She pointed to controversies following the killing of Renee Good—claiming Donald Trump dismissed criticism by suggesting she had been disrespectful to law enforcement—and to the aftermath of January 6. In her view, the signal to loyalists is clear: align with the president and you’ll be shielded, whether by pardons or by attempts to limit outside scrutiny. She accused the administration of pushing ideas like “absolute immunity” and of seeking to exclude state and local agencies from investigations—moves she says obscure the truth. These are her characterizations and claims; the administration has consistently defended its positions as lawful and necessary.
Mary Trump is best known for her best-selling book “Too Much and Never Enough,” where she described the personal history and family dynamics she believes shaped Donald Trump’s public persona. In this latest interview, she focuses less on psychology and more on power structures: who wields influence around the president, and why.
From a tech-and-power perspective, her argument maps to a familiar pattern in networked systems. Influence often depends on perceived utility within an ecosystem—much like platforms that thrive on network effects until user incentives change. As long as Trump helps his allies achieve policy wins, media attention, fundraising returns, or ideological goals, their support functions like a reinforcing feedback loop. But such loops can unwind quickly. If the perceived cost of association rises—or if an alternative power center promises higher ROI—support can shift with surprising speed, the way audiences migrate when an app’s value proposition fades.
That volatility is the crux of her warning: utility-based loyalty is durable right up until it isn’t. This is why she believes the president’s power “could slip at any time.” It’s an argument about incentives rather than charisma, about coalition management rather than core strength.
She also draws a line between rhetoric and real-world consequences. When leaders frame dissent as disrespect, or elevate loyalty over institutional guardrails, it changes how agencies interpret the boundary between enforcement and overreach. Critics say that dynamic chills oversight and concentrates authority; defenders say it empowers frontline officials to do their jobs without political second-guessing. The Pretti case—and Bovino’s framing of him as a “suspect”—sits inside that broader dispute over language, legitimacy, and accountability.
Mary Trump’s assessment culminates in an unflattering personal read of the president’s character—less omnipotent strongman than beneficiary of others’ ambition. It’s not a new theme in her work, but it lands differently amid fresh controversy and renewed debate over executive power.
“He’s gotten away with everything not because he’s strong,” she said. “He’s the weakest person I’ve ever known. It’s because his enablers still find him useful.”
Whether that remains true hinges on the same factors that shape every network: incentives, attention, and the calculus of risk versus reward. If those shift, power can, too—suddenly.
