On February 21, 2026, former President Donald J. Trump used Truth Social to urge Netflix to remove board member Susan Rice — the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and national security adviser — after comments she made about holding companies accountable if Democrats return to power. Rice had told Preet Bharara’s podcast this week that corporations and media who aligned with Trump may face consequences when Democrats regain control. Netflix had not responded to requests for comment at the time of reporting. The post escalates a political flashpoint around the proposed Netflix–Warner Bros. merger and wider culture-war scrutiny of corporate governance.
Key Takeaways
- Donald Trump posted on Truth Social on February 21, 2026, calling on Netflix to fire board member Susan Rice or “pay the consequences.”
- Susan Rice, a former U.S. ambassador to the UN and national security adviser, told Preet Bharara’s podcast that companies could be “held accountable” when Democrats return to power.
- Netflix is pursuing a proposed acquisition of Warner Bros.; the U.S. Department of Justice is reviewing the merger for antitrust concerns.
- Ted Sarandos, Netflix co-CEO, met with Trump in November 2025 and testified before the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee earlier in February 2026.
- Paramount, a competing bidder for Warner Bros. assets, has ties to Trump allies including Larry Ellison and David Ellison; Makan Delrahim, a former DOJ antitrust chief under Trump, is now a Paramount executive.
- A group of senators recently asked David Ellison to preserve documents after he declined to answer questions about Paramount’s dealings with Trump.
Background
Susan Rice served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during President Barack Obama’s first term and as national security adviser in his second. Her role on Netflix’s board places a former senior Obama official in the crosshairs of Republicans and pro-Trump activists who oppose Netflix’s high-profile merger plans. The corporate governance debate has become a proxy for broader partisan fights over content, executive accountability and how companies navigate political pressure.
The proposed Netflix–Warner Bros. transaction has prompted review by the Department of Justice on antitrust grounds, and it has drawn scrutiny from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Ted Sarandos, Netflix co-CEO, faced questions at a Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee hearing earlier in February 2026 about the competitive implications of the deal, while some Republicans also raised culture-war concerns. At the same time, Paramount and other potential buyers have their own political connections, complicating regulatory and public perceptions.
Main Event
Trump’s Truth Social message singled out Rice by name and characterized her as “racist” and “Trump deranged,” urging Netflix to fire her immediately or confront unspecified consequences. The post echoed and amplified criticism from MAGA-aligned commentators who have opposed Netflix’s merger plans and highlighted Rice’s ties to the Obama administration. The statement arrived amid a high-stakes regulatory review and an intensifying public debate over the streaming industry.
Rice’s remarks on Preet Bharara’s podcast framed her comments as a warning to corporate actors: she said companies that “acted in their perceived, very narrow self interest” by accommodating Trump supporters could face accountability when Democrats return to power. She predicted a swing in political winds and said that those companies could be “caught with more than their pants down,” and held to account by incoming officials.
Netflix did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The exchange also overlapped with other developments: Sarandos’ testimony before the Senate subcommittee touched on competitive issues while some senators pressed him on content and cultural concerns. Meanwhile, Paramount’s connections to Trump allies — including investor Larry Ellison and CEO David Ellison — have invited parallel scrutiny as lawmakers probe potential influence and document preservation.
Analysis & Implications
The public call from a former president for a private company to oust a board member is notable for its blending of political pressure and corporate governance. If Netflix were to remove Rice solely in response to political attack, it could set a precedent for heightened executive vulnerability to outside political actors. That prospect raises questions about board independence, shareholder interests and the line between corporate decision-making and partisan influence.
For the Netflix–Warner Bros. transaction specifically, the episode increases regulatory and reputational risk. Antitrust review focuses on market competition, but political controversies can shape the public and congressional atmosphere that regulators operate within. Companies involved in large M&A deals rely not only on legal arguments but also on political capital and public perception; elevated partisan targeting could complicate those dynamics.
Investors and other boards will watch how Netflix responds, because the outcome could influence corporate policies on speech, board selection and crisis management. Activist pressure from political camps on either side — whether demanding firings or defending board members — may push companies to clarify governance safeguards and communication strategies to navigate polarized environments.
Comparison & Data
| Company | Board Controversy | Regulatory Status | Notable Political Ties |
|---|---|---|---|
| Netflix | Board member Susan Rice criticized by former President Trump (Feb 21, 2026) | Proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. under DOJ antitrust review (Feb 2026) | Ted Sarandos met with Trump in Nov 2025; Sarandos testified before Senate antitrust subcommittee Feb 2026 |
| Paramount | Target of questioning over interactions with Trump allies | Competing bidder concerns and congressional inquiries (Feb 2026) | Investor ties to Larry Ellison; David Ellison (CEO) questioned by senators; Makan Delrahim former DOJ antitrust chief now at Paramount |
The table above summarizes the core political and regulatory vectors affecting the streaming merger race. While antitrust law remains the formal criterion for DOJ review, political relationships and public controversies add layers of uncertainty for each bidder.
Reactions & Quotes
“Netflix should fire racist, Trump Deranged Susan Rice, IMMEDIATELY, or pay the consequences.”
Donald J. Trump, Truth Social post, Feb 21, 2026
The post amplified criticism from MAGA commentators and introduced an ultimatum aimed at a corporate board decision. Trump’s message tied a private corporate personnel demand directly to political retribution.
“They are going to be held accountable by those who come in opposition to Trump and win at the ballot box.”
Susan Rice, Preet Bharara podcast, Feb 2026
Rice framed her comments as a forecast of political accountability, not a call for extralegal action. Her language emphasized democratic processes and potential policy or enforcement changes under a future Democratic administration.
Unconfirmed
- Whether Netflix will remove Susan Rice from its board in response to Trump’s demand is unconfirmed and has not been announced by the company.
- The extent to which Trump’s public statement might influence DOJ’s antitrust review is uncertain; regulatory decisions are formally based on competition law and evidence.
- Reports that specific corporate documents have been withheld or destroyed in relation to Paramount dealings remain under inquiry and not fully verified publicly.
Bottom Line
This episode highlights how deeply politicized corporate governance has become in the U.S. Even when formal oversight hinges on law and market analysis, high-profile political interventions can reshape the communications and reputational environment around deals. For Netflix, the immediate choice is whether to respond to a direct call from a former president; either action or inaction will reverberate with shareholders, regulators and the public.
Looking ahead, regulators will continue to focus on competitive effects of any merger, but congressional scrutiny and political pressure will remain important backdrops. Companies navigating large transactions should prepare for intensified external advocacy and reaffirm governance practices that protect decision-making from ad hoc political campaigns.
Sources
- Deadline (news) — original reporting on Trump’s post and Rice’s comments
- NBC News (news) — reporting referenced on Trump’s statements regarding regulatory involvement
- U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee (official) — hearing records for Sarandos’ appearance
- Netflix (company) — corporate governance information and public filings