What do you think?
Rate this book
Mary Trump's Trump: Deranged and vicious, but more than family, constitutional -psychopathology the culprit, and here's how
Many people, including groups of psychiatrists, and psychologists have given their opinions about why Mr. Trump behaves the way he does. In Mary Trump's book, Too Much and never Enough, she quotes many family members of Mr. Trump and her own observations of him and concludes that his ""family" - primarily his father, made him the character he is, by a faulty upbringing that encouraged excessive pursuit of money and money only, a prejudiced and disrespectful attitude towards others, a tendency to be dishonest and ruthless among many other defects in his character. In this book, Mary Trump's Trump, Gieseril the author who wrote the book " Donald Trump, Lucky Sperm Club and the IT Factor" in 2016, conducts a clinical-constitutional analysis of episodes involving and utterances and behavior by Mr. Trump and other's in the family, described in the book to point out that his psychopathology is more a product of constitutional - biological factors that control the mind and behavior gone awry, and in this sense he is a tragic figure and pathetic victim, and as a result, what he is, is what he is and one cannot expect much change from the way he is, and being aware of this fact help us look at the psychopathology of leaders like him and anyone else aspiring to be in charge of our destinies through the lens of constitutional psychopathology, when abnormalities are evident, so we won't be fooled that such people can "pivot" to normalcy when they want to, as their character structure, insomnia, compulsions, volatility are all predetermined by faulty constitutional factors over which they or others have very little control, if any. The author analyses examples from Trump's and his ancestors' lives and utterances to show , why this indeed is a fact.
44 pages, Kindle Edition
Published August 29, 2020
343 people are currently reading
38 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
January 20, 2025
Some Insight
As a person with an MA in counseling, I completely agree with Gieseril’s assessment of trump’s mental state. I agree that he shouldn’t have ever been President and now he’s going to be again. (Shutter)
However, the book is not very well written. Thank goodness it’s short. His use of “constitutional” rather than “biological” would be very confusing to many people. I have read both of Mary’s books and also Fred III’s book.
Donald is mentally dysfunctional and unstable.
As a person with an MA in counseling, I completely agree with Gieseril’s assessment of trump’s mental state. I agree that he shouldn’t have ever been President and now he’s going to be again. (Shutter)
However, the book is not very well written. Thank goodness it’s short. His use of “constitutional” rather than “biological” would be very confusing to many people. I have read both of Mary’s books and also Fred III’s book.
Donald is mentally dysfunctional and unstable.
April 14, 2023
Should have hired a proofreader.
This author lost all credibility with all the typos and nailed it using the word `extend' when it should have been 'extent'.
This author lost all credibility with all the typos and nailed it using the word `extend' when it should have been 'extent'.
September 24, 2024
Spell & Grammar Check take little time!
I have to give a star in order to leave a review; if it were at all possible, I wouldn't leave one at all. I barely made it through this 'book' due to the incredibly poor grammar & spelling, so if you can handle that, the writing is professional for a MH evaluation based on someone else's book. Having spent my career in this field albeit in an administrative capacity, I typed many evaluations, yet nowhere have I ever seen the phrase 'constitutional-psychopathology' used in the terms as this author uses the phrase. Obviously, it's used to describe an organic and inherited set of pathological behaviors, so why not just say that? Using the term 'constitutional' serves only to confuse readers unfamiliar with medical jargon, mental health terminology, in particular. Learn the proper use of commas and sentence structure as well as the difference between a sentence and fragment, please. Run-on sentences are another frequent feature. Lastly, taking someone else's book and dissecting it for your own benefit? This is poor form and in very bad taste, regardless of how it's done. Don't waste your time on this. BTW, I'm not a Trump fan, but even he doesn't deserve dime-store MH treatment.
I have to give a star in order to leave a review; if it were at all possible, I wouldn't leave one at all. I barely made it through this 'book' due to the incredibly poor grammar & spelling, so if you can handle that, the writing is professional for a MH evaluation based on someone else's book. Having spent my career in this field albeit in an administrative capacity, I typed many evaluations, yet nowhere have I ever seen the phrase 'constitutional-psychopathology' used in the terms as this author uses the phrase. Obviously, it's used to describe an organic and inherited set of pathological behaviors, so why not just say that? Using the term 'constitutional' serves only to confuse readers unfamiliar with medical jargon, mental health terminology, in particular. Learn the proper use of commas and sentence structure as well as the difference between a sentence and fragment, please. Run-on sentences are another frequent feature. Lastly, taking someone else's book and dissecting it for your own benefit? This is poor form and in very bad taste, regardless of how it's done. Don't waste your time on this. BTW, I'm not a Trump fan, but even he doesn't deserve dime-store MH treatment.
January 15, 2022
More than scary.
Reading this book confirmed my worst fears. I don't expect any supporters to read this and even if they did they wouldn't believe. This is a very thorough and thoughtful analysis of the nightmare we have lived through and why. I was scared and worried about the direction our country was headed in before I read this book, now I am terrified.
Reading this book confirmed my worst fears. I don't expect any supporters to read this and even if they did they wouldn't believe. This is a very thorough and thoughtful analysis of the nightmare we have lived through and why. I was scared and worried about the direction our country was headed in before I read this book, now I am terrified.
April 1, 2023
I gave this book three stars as I think that the analysis is spot on. However it is poorly written, poorly edited, and a chore to read, even at 43 pages. It gets one star for the writing.
January 15, 2023
I began this little treatise after reading Dr. Mary Trump's book, "Too Much and Never Enough" about her famous and infamous relation. I enjoy her writing. She's got a style that is at once professional and understandable, and follows with fairly impressive history of the bad guy. And I respect her professional credentials. I don't know of this author. While the author attempts to bravely apply the basic art of comprehension and communication for the many easily observed behaviors of trump ( I didn't make a mistake: I will not lend credibility to his name by adding the appropriate capital spelling) I found it to be bland, boring, a little bit vague, which I suspect is deliberate, and quite honestly, based on some really outdated and debunked "schools" of thought, especially the work of William H. Sherman, who devoted his studies to assigning development and behavior as per the human somatotypes, or physical structures and traits, like body types we might call thin, normal, fat, etc. Faddish even in their heyday, they were nevertheless debunked by the 1980's, and today they are pretty much dismissed as nonsense.
Therefore, why bother to read some odd material really questioned by the sciences themselves as an overall bunch of hooey?
Mostly because I saw the Mary Trump reference and didn't bother to read much beyond that until I saw the title on Amazon. A few quick checks and it's pretty clear to see that this little essay is a waste of time.
There's too much "known, proven, and established" as understanding of the complex human mind, but of course there will always be things we just don't know or might know but poorly comprehend.
This material just cannot present a compelling case for the somatotypes that are allegedly issues like body mass and composition; these theories might have been popular and in vogue in 1945 but by the mid 1970's, they were considered foolish and musing in nature. Not substantive.
The body reads like a coloring book in Greek. Unless you are fluent in Greek, you're going to paint poor old Sophocles head green, Plato will have a blue torso, and don't even think Hippocrates will fare any better because we know more about him.
It's pedantic, poorly researched, and foolish.
I lasted about 11 minutes.
Actually I'm rather pleased to note that the author is not someone whose work I have ever read; I had to live through those horrible years of his candidacy, his accession to the throne, his subsequent disastrous and ultimate dismissal by overwhelming numbers. I am relieved he is out of office and honestly just wish he could find that flat place on the earth where he could fall off and be gone forever! I don't exaggerate that, I really wish it were so. But, not. Which brings me to the fantasy of whoever doped up this term of Constitutional Pathopsychology. You simply won't find that diagnosis in the current DSM. It reads well, but what is it?
I honestly found so many definitions I found it even more confusing to check what is might be rather than what it is. A fluffy little term of nothingness. Please don't waste your time.
I don't recommend this blurb of confusing and outdated archetypal nonsense. This basic theory of "Constitutional Pathopsychology" was nonsense in its own time, lasting only a few years or so, from 1948 to 1970 before being thoroughly discarded for more scientific and practical information as systems developed to cope with the post war years of new-found medical practice and genetic mapping, with understanding more about how we develop and how our bodies perform. In short it is 43 pages, minus the introduction of pure muck about trump. Things we have already had shoved down our throats by supporters and things we wish we'd never heard, read, or seen in person by himelf, the bloated Sultan of Shamelessness. It's as though many paragraphs were lifted whole or in part from other authors, without quite grasping and clutching that dreadful "P" word-plagiarism. Let me just say I make no accusations but I merely point out that I have read the same words and phrases repeatedly, from many sources. Are we all writing the same pamphlets? The same histories? The same toss-after-reading-nonsense? Quite possibly we are. This feels like yet another not-well-known writer lusting after a paycheck has drafted up something a low priced editor might buy. Seems like large amounts of clever "cut and paste skills.
Otherwise, I can read much the same in the Enquirer.
So, I quit. I can only take so much of the big baby in his diaper floating over London and other cities. I don't want to continue to sully my brain with additional nonsense.
I am picking up my international rouge de colours and going back to a good mystery.
Therefore, why bother to read some odd material really questioned by the sciences themselves as an overall bunch of hooey?
Mostly because I saw the Mary Trump reference and didn't bother to read much beyond that until I saw the title on Amazon. A few quick checks and it's pretty clear to see that this little essay is a waste of time.
There's too much "known, proven, and established" as understanding of the complex human mind, but of course there will always be things we just don't know or might know but poorly comprehend.
This material just cannot present a compelling case for the somatotypes that are allegedly issues like body mass and composition; these theories might have been popular and in vogue in 1945 but by the mid 1970's, they were considered foolish and musing in nature. Not substantive.
The body reads like a coloring book in Greek. Unless you are fluent in Greek, you're going to paint poor old Sophocles head green, Plato will have a blue torso, and don't even think Hippocrates will fare any better because we know more about him.
It's pedantic, poorly researched, and foolish.
I lasted about 11 minutes.
Actually I'm rather pleased to note that the author is not someone whose work I have ever read; I had to live through those horrible years of his candidacy, his accession to the throne, his subsequent disastrous and ultimate dismissal by overwhelming numbers. I am relieved he is out of office and honestly just wish he could find that flat place on the earth where he could fall off and be gone forever! I don't exaggerate that, I really wish it were so. But, not. Which brings me to the fantasy of whoever doped up this term of Constitutional Pathopsychology. You simply won't find that diagnosis in the current DSM. It reads well, but what is it?
I honestly found so many definitions I found it even more confusing to check what is might be rather than what it is. A fluffy little term of nothingness. Please don't waste your time.
I don't recommend this blurb of confusing and outdated archetypal nonsense. This basic theory of "Constitutional Pathopsychology" was nonsense in its own time, lasting only a few years or so, from 1948 to 1970 before being thoroughly discarded for more scientific and practical information as systems developed to cope with the post war years of new-found medical practice and genetic mapping, with understanding more about how we develop and how our bodies perform. In short it is 43 pages, minus the introduction of pure muck about trump. Things we have already had shoved down our throats by supporters and things we wish we'd never heard, read, or seen in person by himelf, the bloated Sultan of Shamelessness. It's as though many paragraphs were lifted whole or in part from other authors, without quite grasping and clutching that dreadful "P" word-plagiarism. Let me just say I make no accusations but I merely point out that I have read the same words and phrases repeatedly, from many sources. Are we all writing the same pamphlets? The same histories? The same toss-after-reading-nonsense? Quite possibly we are. This feels like yet another not-well-known writer lusting after a paycheck has drafted up something a low priced editor might buy. Seems like large amounts of clever "cut and paste skills.
Otherwise, I can read much the same in the Enquirer.
So, I quit. I can only take so much of the big baby in his diaper floating over London and other cities. I don't want to continue to sully my brain with additional nonsense.
I am picking up my international rouge de colours and going back to a good mystery.
October 15, 2022
Incite Regarding a Complicated Man
I had already read much of what was written here, but put in context, it is more than frightening. Worse, this was published prior to Trump's spectacular election loss and the subsequent riot he orchestrated. With the past events as guideposts, we should be advised that this broken man is capable of anything. For the good of our country, we must insure that he never again is able to gain such enormous power. One side note, I had to train myself to substitute physiological for the author's constitutional, or my mind tried to work in how this pertained to one of the amendments.
I had already read much of what was written here, but put in context, it is more than frightening. Worse, this was published prior to Trump's spectacular election loss and the subsequent riot he orchestrated. With the past events as guideposts, we should be advised that this broken man is capable of anything. For the good of our country, we must insure that he never again is able to gain such enormous power. One side note, I had to train myself to substitute physiological for the author's constitutional, or my mind tried to work in how this pertained to one of the amendments.
June 16, 2023
very interesting analysis of Donald Trump’s psychopathology.
I found the authors knowledge of psychiatry to be extensive. His assessment of Mr.Trump’s personality disorders appear to represent a thorough understanding of the inherited disorders many suffer from. I agree that we are born with these brain disorders.6
I found the authors knowledge of psychiatry to be extensive. His assessment of Mr.Trump’s personality disorders appear to represent a thorough understanding of the inherited disorders many suffer from. I agree that we are born with these brain disorders.6
August 4, 2021
Excellent analysis of the former President
I know other people who show similar traits. They do not have Trump’s money rather they come from poverty but they act in the same manner and as this analysis describes they have since childhood. Her conclusions are spot on.
I know other people who show similar traits. They do not have Trump’s money rather they come from poverty but they act in the same manner and as this analysis describes they have since childhood. Her conclusions are spot on.
January 27, 2022
Governed by OCD.....a sorry tale indeed.......
Donald Trump's mental capacity and personal limitations well and truly presented by a knowledgeable author.....well written and pertinent to our times......
Donald Trump's mental capacity and personal limitations well and truly presented by a knowledgeable author.....well written and pertinent to our times......
February 27, 2022
She is very detailed and reveals a lot about why 45 is the way he is. That being said if someone is introspective enough they can change a horrible, terrible legacy. He chose not to.
December 12, 2023
Mary Trump states the truth about her family and evil Donald.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews