# Post x_251752835904045056

- Post ID: `x_251752835904045056`
- Platform: X (Twitter)
- Posted: 2012-09-28T18:38:48.000Z (UTC)
- Deleted: no
- Repost: no
- Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056
- Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056/analysis
- Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/x_251752835904045056.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording)

## Post text

> Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family. Obamas cost us $1.4B in expenses--including entertainment http://t.co/G2Nvr2ZH Living large on us.

## Engagement

- Likes: 102
- Reposts: 871
- Replies: 0
- Views: unknown
- Metrics collected: 2026-01-31T23:43:13.265Z (UTC)

# Analysis

_Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-03-22T08:33:54.289Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._

## Psychological Analysis: Obama Spending Comparison Post (2012-09-28)

This post compares British royal family expenditures ($57.8M) with claimed Obama family costs ($1.4B), framing the Obamas as extravagant at taxpayers' expense. The phrase "Living large on us" adds populist resentment framing.

### Authorship
Posted at 2:38 PM ET (Trump likely in NYC). Business hours, links to article, structured comparison — consistent with aide-assisted posting, though the editorializing "Living large on us" has Trump's voice.

### Psychological Context
This post fits within Trump's sustained Obama fixation during the 2012 pre-election period. The comparison is designed to delegitimize Obama by implying he spends more lavishly than literal royalty — an implicit argument that Obama acts like a king rather than a public servant. This connects to Trump's birther-era delegitimization campaign.

### Fact Verification

| Claim | Verdict | Evidence |
|-------|---------|----------|
| "Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family" | **Half True** | The Sovereign Grant figure was roughly in this range but excluded security costs, which are the largest royal expense |
| "Obamas cost us $1.4B in expenses" | **Mostly False** | Figure from Robert Keith Gray's book, widely debunked. Conflated routine presidential operational costs (security, Air Force One, White House staff) with personal expenses. These costs apply to any president. |

Overall Veracity: 35%

## Authorship Analysis

**Uncertain** (score: 40%)

### Indicators

- Business hours posting (2:38 PM ET)
- Article link sharing pattern
- But editorializing tag 'Living large on us' sounds personal
- Structured comparison suggests some preparation

## Psychological Profile

### State

**Grandiose State**

**Trigger:** Preemptive Attack — Comparison (Obama/2012 election)

Sentiment: -0.50

### Clinical

**Malignant Narcissism:**
- Narcissistic: 40%
- Antisocial: 30%
- Paranoid: 10%
- Sadism: 10%

**Defense Mechanisms:**
- projection (immature)
- splitting (immature)

**Cognitive Complexity:**
- Complexity: 30%

**Parasocial Techniques:**
- taxpayer in-group creation via 'us'
- populist grievance framing

## Fact Checks (2)

_The model's verdicts from 2026-03-22._

> Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family

**HALF TRUE**

The Sovereign Grant figure was roughly in this range but excluded security costs, which are the largest royal expense

Sources: Royal Household annual accounts

> Obamas cost us $1.4B in expenses

**MOSTLY FALSE**

Figure from Robert Keith Gray's book, widely debunked. Conflated routine presidential operational costs (security, Air Force One, White House staff) with personal expenses. These costs apply to any president.

Sources: Snopes; FactCheck.org; Washington Post fact checker

Overall Veracity: 35%

## Tags

- obama_devaluation (80%)
- populist_framing (70%)
- misleading_statistics (80%)
- projection (60%)

## That day

_From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._

**A Quiet Day of Brand Maintenance and Obama Criticism in Pre-Election Mode**

A routine day of brand promotion and political commentary with no flashes of anger or drama. Trump cycled through product plugs, motivational quotes from his book, and steady anti-Obama jabs about the economy. The only notable quirk was two posts repeated verbatim hours apart, likely a staff scheduling glitch. Overall mood was calm and transactional -- a businessman tending his public image five weeks before the 2012 election.

Full digest for 2012-09-28: https://trump.fm/date/2012-09-28/analysis

## Citation

- APA: Trump, D. J. (2012, September 28). Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family. Obamas... [Social media post]. X (Twitter). trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056
- MLA: Trump, Donald J. "Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family. Obamas cost us..." X (Twitter), 28 Sep. 2012. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026.
- Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "Brits spent $57.8M on the royal family. Obamas cost us...," X (Twitter), September 28, 2012, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056.

## For agents

- Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt
- API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json
- MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth)
- This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/x_251752835904045056
- Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/x_251752835904045056
- All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/x_251752835904045056
- Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2012-09-28
- The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/x_251752835904045056.md?analysis=false

_Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._