The volatile world of cryptocurrency has been rocked again, this time by the meteoric rise—and equally dramatic fall—of two so-called “meme coins” launched by former U.S. President Donald Trump and his wife, Melania. These digital commemorative coins, marketed as tributes to their political legacy, have proven to be little more than a flash in the pan, leaving a trail of financial casualties in their wake. The numbers tell a grim story: as of Tuesday, Melania Coin has nosedived by 70%, while Trump Coin has halved in value since Sunday.

These tokens, whose worth hinges entirely on speculative demand, are emblematic of the speculative mania that often grips the crypto world. Veteran investors are familiar with this playbook—initial euphoria quickly followed by a sharp correction. However, for many, the allure of the Trump brand was enough to override caution. The harsh reality has set in: the real winners are those pocketing the transaction fees. Reports suggest Donald and Melania Trump have potentially reaped eight-figure sums from the frenzy, while latecomers to the party are left nursing steep losses.

The situation has not gone unnoticed by financial experts and lawmakers. Economist Carsten Brzeski has raised concerns about the ethical implications of such ventures, suggesting that while U.S. law may permit this, the moral optics are far murkier. Brzeski and others argue that it may even warrant scrutiny for potential market manipulation. The “Handelsblatt” has labeled the coins’ release a “breaking of taboos,” further fueling debate about whether the Trumps’ actions have crossed a line.

Criticism from within the cryptocurrency community has been particularly scathing. Influencer Ran Neuner accused the Trumps of draining liquidity from the broader market, branding the project a calculated fraud against unsuspecting investors. European leaders have also sounded alarms about the broader geopolitical risks. Alexandra Geese, a German Green Party MEP, highlighted the $15 billion valuation the Trump coins once carried, warning that such concentrated wealth could be weaponized by foreign powers like Russia and China, potentially destabilizing American democracy and even European security.

Adding insult to injury, those hoping to recover their losses face slim odds. Legal recourse is limited, as the coins’ official website explicitly disclaims any intent as an investment, framing them instead as “expressions of support.” For those swept up in the initial hype, this fine print serves as a painful reminder of the high-stakes nature of crypto speculation.

The rapid rise and fall of the Trump and Melania coins underline the risks of investing in an unregulated and volatile market, where savvy insiders often profit at the expense of the masses. Whether this episode will lead to greater scrutiny of similar ventures remains to be seen, but for now, the biggest question remains: who else is lining their pockets?