Trump, corruption, crypto, and the UAE
Commenter “Bauxite” has a question:
Barry Meislin- Nah. If [the Democrats are] smart they’ll impeach [Trump] for this:
Of course that means that they’ll probably impeach him for ICE or something stupid and political.
Anyway, I’m curious to know what the regulars think of Trump’s crypto business.
Here’s my response.
Remember when Trump and his family were debanked, during the time that they were also being attacked through lawfare? The left was trying to destroy their lives, including taking away their wealth.
The Trumps are on record as saying they got into crypto because they realized their money wasn’t safe in the banking system. See this:
“Every major banking institution, the people that, two weeks before we were debanked, we could’ve called and gotten a loan in five seconds. They disappeared. We were left high and dry,” he said.
“Basically, during the first term, certainly after the…let’s call it January 6… all the nonsense, it got significantly worse,” he said …
“We weren’t even early crypto guys, but we figured, if they can debank the Trump Organization, if they can debank us, who can’t they go after? And more importantly, who won’t they go after?” he continued.
Trump Jr. said that instead of going home and “go cry in a corner,” they decided to launch World Liberty Financial, which he described as the future of banking.
Read the whole article. One of the most interesting aspects of it is that, although it was written in the summer of 2025 when the facts of J6 were well known, it repeats these lies, including calling the mob on J6 “deadly”:
Five people, including one police officer, died and several more were injured when the pro-Trump mob breached the Capitol building.
The police officer, Sicknick, didn’t “die when the pro-Trump mob breached the Capitol building.” I’ve written many times about what really happened. Another was killed by the deadly Capitol Police, Of the other three, two died of heart attacks and one of those wasn’t ever at the Capitol but merely at the earlier rally. The third person of those three who died, Rosanne Boyland, was reported variously to have been beaten to death by police, to have been trampled in the crowd, and on autopsy to have died of an overdose. So the article is purposely misleading; what else is new?
As for the article you linked, about the UAE – I’m not at all in favor of that sort of thing. At the very least, it gives the appearance of corruption and certainly might be true corruption. However, I also agree with the writer of this comment at the article:
What [Andrew C. McCarthy, the piece’s author] fails to understand is the potential behind WLF. It very well could become the first crypto bank, which is more and more likely to be the future of currency. I’d also add that when you have lots of money to throw around…you throw it around. Maybe it’s for favor later or just to perhaps get lucky and make more money off the next big thing. There are also a lot of assumptions in this piece. For instance, the not naming of the UAE reps. on the board is supposedly for nefarious reasons – to hide them. OR, in typical Trump style, he wants his name on almost everything and doesn’t want others to get the credit. While I say all this, aren’t most big business and political dealings suspect at best? I feel like this is just how the world works these days…
And also this one:
It’s nice to have a leader who wants us to be proud of our country rather than ashamed of our past. I’m not at all surprised that he’s acting as one of the elite. He’s been one of the elite his entire life. He joins the ranks of Pelosi, Omar, Biden (and pretty much every other politician) in enriching himself through his position.
The UAE is actually one of the best of the Arab countries in terms of reforming the hatred it used to teach, by the way. Also, here’s a not-all-that-bad article in, of all places the Guardian. Excerpt:
Documents seen by the Journal indicate that Tahnoon paid the Trump family and entities affiliated with Steve Witkoff, co-founder of World Liberty and Trump’s envoy to the Middle East, half of the investment up front, with $187m going to Trump entities, and $31m going to Witkoff’s. The payment came from Aryam Investment, a Tahnoon-backed company.
A White House official said the president was “not involved in running his businesses and has turned them over to his children, so these business endeavors do not involve him”.
Claims that the president had breached the constitution’s federal emoluments clause, designed to safeguard against corruption, are “bogus and irrelevant”, the official argued. “Mere appearances of business deals with which he has no involvement plainly cannot violate the Emoluments clause.”
In a statement, the White House counsel, David Warrington, added: “President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner and to suggest so otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious.”
Government ethics experts have long been alarmed over the way that Trump and his family structured his companies before he started his second term. Typically, a president puts his assets into a blind trust overseen by an independent third party. But Trump handed over control to two of his sons, Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump.
While it’s no different from how Trump structured his companies during his first term, Trump spent the years after he left the White House expanding his family business. Now Trump entities are dabbling in social media, streaming platforms, nuclear fusion, financial services and, through World Liberty, crypto. …
The Guardian has not identified evidence of the president explicitly offering the chip exports in exchange for the investment in his family’s crypto venture.
Richard Briffault, a law professor at Columbia, said while there was no direct allegation of a quid pro quo, “the situation of a major investment by a foreign power in a major company that the president has a major stake in, that creates a structural conflict of interest”.
“The concern is that we can never be sure why certain decisions are being made,” Briffault said. When Trump allowed the UAE to import AI chips, “it could have been a shrewd geopolitical move, or it could have been influenced by the fact that the country has a major investment in a Trump family business. We just can’t know for sure.”
Indeed. That’s why I believe the entire Trump family should have avoided even the appearance of corruption.
But it surprises me not at all that they have plunged into it. It’s one of the things I don’t like about Trump; there are others. But they are overshadowed by how much worse the Democrats are for the country (and the world) as a whole.
Me, from the Open Thread: We’re not investing in crypto, ourselves. But I can see why people with a whole lot more money than we have, such as the Trump family, might do so. If it works out, they’ll make a lot of money, and there’s the history of being treated wrongly by banks.
With the frenetic pace of Trump’s activities as president, it’s hard to imagine how he could also be running the family business rather than his elder sons.
Andrew McCarthy is a gasbag Trump hater who loves to hear himself talk and is either deliberately obtuse or outright stupid. I gave up wasting my time on him many years ago, as with the National Review.
Apparently there is no government effort to censor this information bring the scenes as there was with Hunter’s laptop.
Our financial advisor has a very small portion of our portfolio in crypto. Maybe someday I’ll ask him to explain to me what crypto is. But not now, I don’t want him to jinx it. Our portfolio is going gangbusters!
I’m surprised Congress hasn’t made it illegal for politicians to allow foreigners or other interested parties to invest in their own or their relatives’ businesses.
What, did I say something funny?
Some guy named Andrew McCarthy had a lot to say at National Review about Elaine Chao in 2021, in an article titled “The Character Assassination of Elaine Chao.” It seems he had very different ideas about the appearance of impropriety then–at that time he said if they couldn’t prove she’d abused her position to make money and benefit her own businesses and those of her relatives it was “character assassination”. Well, people change.
Typically, a president puts his assets into a blind trust overseen by an independent third party.
This always torques me. Trump’s business is primarily licensing his brand. You can’t put that into a blind trust, that’s a contradiction in terms. The things say “Trump” right on them, that’s why people buy them, and it doesn’t matter who runs the trust, it can’t possibly be blind.
In addition, presidents rarely own their own businesses. A blind trust is appropriate for investments, but all the assets have to be sold and replaced with different ones in order for it to qualify as “blind”. A blind trust would destroy everything Trump spent his life putting together.
Same would apply to Oprah Winfrey or Elon Musk or any business owner famous enough to consider politics.
If the legal container holding a senior politician’s assets cannot really be made “blind” to avoid even the appearance of self dealing, then perhaps part of the goal/intent/sacrifice for public service is to make that business even more transparent than would usually be necessary or wise.
The aim is or should to to allow a business to grow in an “open” way, or coast without losing value and money, while the politico is in office (and perhaps for a 1 to 5 year period afterwards??).
To repeat my earlier statement about conflict of interest or insider trading, the idea of prohibiting members of congress or SES or judiciary to invest in stocks (buy and sell) seems overly constraining and anti-liberty. But part of the sacrifice of public service could and should be to have them announce their intentions to buy or sell stocks/assets a week or two prior to doing so (optional to make public the reason or purpose of the transaction and its timing). This removes the insider trading aspect but let’s them also demonstrate faith in the country’s businesses and as an example of how almost everyone should be investing part of their assets/wealth in such venues. Even public figures have a range of life situations and investment goals that change as they and their children age.
It is another version of America First.
Maybe I can become Secretary of State, hold the final vote to OK selling a strategic mineral to a longtime adversary of the US, and then see my foundation receive a huge monetary donation from the same entity that was just sold our strategic mineral with my blessing; and then just for kicks, my wife gets huge speaking fees from that same, long time adversary.
If Trump looks skyward during a press conference those with TDS suspect he’s non compos mentis.
I no longer care what the crying babies think Trump is or isn’t doing. Cry harder.
Government ethics experts have long been alarmed over the way that Trump and his family structured his companies before he started his second term. Typically, a president puts his assets into a blind trust overseen by an independent third party. But Trump handed over control to two of his sons, Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump.
==
Actually, the Carter family businesses were run by brother Billy from 1963 until his death in 1988. The ‘blind trust’ was supervised by the family lawyer, Charles Kirbo. During the last 90 years, there have been 15 presidents, of whom three (Trump, Carter, and Lyndon Johnson) owned businesses. JFK and his brother escaped scrutiny by having nothing to do with their father’s enterprises. Sargent Shriver ran the family real estate business and Stephen Smith was in charge of their investment accounts.
A critic of Andrew McCarthy’s offered that he had an unbroken history since 2015 of figuring something out about two years after the people he disdains figured it out.
I see lots of attacks on Andy McCarthy, a lot of “whatabout” having to do with the Clintons or the Bidens, and very few attempts to come to terms with what actually appears to be going on, except from neo who admits that she wishes that the Trumps didn’t do this.
I have a few points:
(1) I’m sure some will seize on this to discount everything I write, but it’s true so I’m going to say it anyway. As it related to this issue, the J6 stuff is just noise. I completely agree that de-banking is a crime against the rule of law. I completely agree that the Trumps, and other high-net-worth conservatives, are smart to hold crypto to protect themselves from it. That’s not the issue here. If Trump were simply holding crypto, there would be no problem.
(2) What Trump is alleged to have done is not simply holding assets in crypto. His company issued its own cryptocurrency. If you buy crypto for which there is an already established market, you rely on that market to give value to your purchase. If you issue your own crypto, it is worthless unless you can get other people to buy it. For example, if Trump held Bitcoin, and the UAE bought $2B of Bitcoin, it would raise the value of Bitcoin, but that value would be distributed over all of the issued Bitcoin. In this instance, where Trump issued his own crypto, when the UAE bought $2B of it, that value was split among a much smaller group of people who owned the new Trump crypto, most likely Trump and his close partners. In other words, by issuing a new cryptocurrency, Trump’s company basically created a mechanism by which people could transfer value directly to him. And it looks like they are.
It’s as rotten as the day is long.
(3) If you’re making the argument that, sure Trump may be corrupt but he’s better than the left, then you understand exactly why Democrats spent so many years defending the indefensible behavior of the Clintons, Bidens, Pelosis, et al. If the cost of good governance is spectacular corruption, then forget about MAGA, there is no making America great again.
(4) The key I’ve found for understanding/predicting Trump’s behavior is to look at what his enemies do, and assume that he’s going to try to do the same thing, except bigger. I think that’s what you’re seeing here. If the Bidens and Clintons got away with trolling foreign interests for big cash, Trump sure as heck was going to do it, and do it bigger and better than they did.
The key I’ve found for understanding/predicting Trump’s behavior is to look at what his enemies do, and assume that he’s going to try to do the same thing, except bigger.
==
Statements like this are why no one takes you seriously.
For those curious, crypto is basically using math to create a kind of digital gold. If you want to get some kind of handle on it, the late great Shamus Young wrote one of the best intro articles I’ve ever found on the topic.
https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=41505
Now that should be an entertaining metric…
Like a quick search shows the Clinton Foundation having once received $2 bil.
Per the top of this article, UAE poured in only half a billion into this coin. So by that measure alone Trump is nowhere near the “bigger and better” than the Clintons – he’s only at a quarter of their grift.
Neo said….”It’s one of the things I don’t like about Trump; there are others. But they are overshadowed by how much worse the Democrats are for the country (and the world) as a whole”.
This seems to be an obvious point that many people (especially many women, IMO) seem oblivious to. Ours is binary system; one or the other. There may be 3rd choices, but they’re either camouflage for “one or the other” or a forlorn hope that often helps the other side. This includes staying home, write-ins and 3rd parties as protest “votes”. There are things about Trump that I certainly wish he would do differently, but he’s so much better and ultimately correct than anyone else (including Andy McCarthy) that I’d absolutely vote for him again were it possible.
“The concern is that we can never be sure why certain decisions are being made,” Briffault said. When Trump allowed the UAE to import AI chips, “it could have been a shrewd geopolitical move, or it could have been influenced by the fact that the country has a major investment in a Trump family business. We just can’t know for sure.” – from the story neo linked to
Que hand wringing. The UAE can import the higher end Nvidia chips, just like Saudi Arabia does and they didn’t invest a dime into WLFI.
It’s my understanding that all the Abraham Accord signatories would be eligible to buy the advanced Nvidia chips.
The hand wringing in the story is typical leftist imaging.
“…while there was no direct allegation of a quid pro quo,….” the story says, they’re really, really concerned. There was no allegation of a quid pro quo, because there could be no allegation of a quid pro quo.
President Trump is unique as President go. Will the new qualifications require the president be a pauper? I’m sure the Mamdani socialist wing of their party would like it to be.