Trump Is Doing Crypto Corruption With a Billionaire Leader of Fake Country: Report
One of the many ways that Donald Trump's first presidential term was unprecedented is that his brazen self-dealing triggered multiple federal lawsuits alleging violations of the Emoluments Clause, or the provision of the U.S. Constitution that bars federal officials from accepting money and gifts from both foreign and domestic actors. But two of those suits were dismissed after Trump lost the 2020 election, while a third was dismissed by the Supreme Court, overturning lower court rulings that let the case against Trump proceed.
In the opening months of his second term, Trump has been more aggressive than ever about cashing in on his powerful position, particularly in the cryptocurrency space. And new research from the anti-corruption watchdog group Accountable.US, shared exclusively with Rolling Stone, suggests that he is flouting the federal law against receiving emoluments in a new way. Trump isn't only cozying up to foreign governments, including the United Arab Emirates, through deals with his family's burgeoning crypto empire. He is also increasingly entangled with a major investor who claims the title of prime minister for a tiny European nation that doesn't technically exist — yet.
More from Rolling Stone
Supreme Court Hands Trump 'GIANT WIN' in Birthright Citizenship Case
Trump and Hegseth Are Melting Down Over Leaked Iran Strike Intel
Scarlett Johansson, Sheryl Crow, Zayn Malik Urge Congress Not to Cut Food-Assistance Programs
The crypto industry backed Trump in 2024 — becoming the biggest corporate spender of the election cycle — and the president's family has been substantially enriched by their new crypto plays, including collectible meme coins and the crypto exchange World Liberty Financial. Their combined net worth has soared by billions, crypto now accounts for a majority of Trump's personal fortune, and his administration has made every effort to deregulate the digital asset economy. The situation has created obvious opportunities for individuals from within the U.S. and abroad to try to get close to the president by backing the Trumps' digital asset ventures.
Last month, for example, Eric Trump and Zach Witkoff, a co-founder of World Liberty Financial, announced an eyebrow-raising deal. The United Arab Emirates-backed venture firm MGX, they said, would use the World Liberty digital coin USD1 for a $2 billion deal with Binance, the world's largest crypto exchange. The Trumps and Witkoffs — Zach is the son of billionaire Steve Witkoff, the World Liberty co-founder emeritus and White House envoy to the Middle East — stand to reap tens of millions from the transaction. What's more, in 2023, Binance pleaded guilty to an array of financial crimes, including money laundering, paying a fine of $4 billion. A separate Securities and Exchange Commission civil suit against the company was formally dropped in May as the agency abandoned a spate of enforcement actions against crypto firms.
Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Jeff Merkley warned in a letter that the creation of the USD1 token had 'set the stage for a new level of public corruption by creating a fuss-free mechanism for foreign governments to provide [Trump] with kickbacks and bribes.' The lawmakers also noted that the MGX deal 'may provide a template for other foreign governments to curry [Trump's] favor.'
Trump's ties to one crypto magnate in particular may raise similar emoluments concerns, according to Accountable.US. That would be Justin Sun, a Chinese-born crypto billionaire who until recently could not travel to the U.S. for fear of arrest for alleged financial crimes. Sun no longer has any problem attending events on American soil — including events with the president, or the ultra-MAGA Bitcoin 2025 conference in Las Vegas — because after he invested $75 million into $WLFI, the first digital token from World Liberty, the SEC froze its fraud case against him.
Now Sun is an official advisor to (and prolific promoter of) World Liberty, and his own digital asset platform, Tron, which the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes has called a 'preferred choice for crypto money launderers' in Asia. Tron is set to go public in the U.S., with Eric Trump taking a role at the company. Sun has separately spent an estimated $40 million on $TRUMP, the meme coin the president launched two days before taking office, making him the largest investor in the gimmick token; he and approximately 200 other top buyers were invited to an exclusive dinner banquet at Trump's golf club outside Washington, D.C. last month.
That's not all. In October, Sun was elected prime minister of Liberland, a globally unrecognized micronation. Founded in 2015 by the Czech libertarian activist Vít Jedlička on about 2.5 square miles of land in Croatia next to the Danube, it remains mostly forested and has no permanent residents. But a website for the project claims that it has more than 1,000 citizens and has received nearly 800,000 applications for citizenship. The country's theoretical economy and administrative functions are all blockchain-based, with one token used for business transactions and another for voting. There is no gun control, and taxes are voluntary, though only those who contribute them can vote on political candidates and legislative policy. Its motto: 'To Live and Let Live.'
Sun serves as a de facto ambassador from the theoretical country and is campaigning along with Jedlička, the president of Liberland, to legitimize it in the eyes of other nations — the U.S. included. In May, Jedlička shared a video of Sun entering the White House complex with the caption 'Prime minister of @Liberland in White House today!' Speaking about his initial investment in World Liberty ahead of Trump's inauguration, Sun called it 'a very precious opportunity for Liberland in 2025' and mentioned meeting with Steve Witkoff, who has retained a stake in World Liberty even while working for the White House. 'I think if we have a very good stand on U.S. policies we will have a big breakthrough in the diplomatic relationship,' Sun said in a video shared on the Liberland YouTube account. Sun, Jedlička, and Liberland vice president Bogie Wozniak were all VIP guests for Trump's inauguration festivities.
Richard Painter, a lawyer and professor and vice-chair of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, thinks Sun is probably 'living in fantasyland' when it comes to turning Liberland into a real country.
But he says that a 'real, genuine effort to set up a sovereign nation' — which Sun represents as a head of state — could put the emoluments question in play. Such a separatist campaign could encompass Sun claiming 'his own financial regulations in this country,' says Painter, who served as George W. Bush's chief White House ethics lawyer, asserting that 'you can do things in crypto in [Liberland] that you couldn't do in Croatia, because [Sun] can make the rules. This sort of becomes what Bermuda is for tax havens.' Likewise, Sun and his fellow ministers could signal a serious attempt to break away from existing governance by defying the financial regulations of the European Union, to which Croatia belongs.
In this type of scenario, Painter explains, Sun might indeed be seen as a foreign leader, and Trump profiting from his investments would be improper under constitutional law. 'The Emoluments Clause applies to foreign princes and heads of state of foreign governments, but would also apply to those who claim to be foreign governments who claim sovereignty, whether or not the United States recognizes that,' he says. 'We don't formally recognize Taiwan anymore, but if something came in from the government of Taiwan, we'd see it as an emoluments violation.'
Having the Trump administration acknowledge Liberland as a distinct state outside Croatian and EU law would throw this corruption issue into sharper relief — yet Sun and his allies clearly stand to gain from such a diplomatic development. Running their own blockchain-based sovereign country as a cabal of crypto kingpins, they would no doubt make the most of the freedom from regulatory oversight there.
Neither World Liberty Financial nor Sun returned requests for comment about the ethics of the business relationship between Sun, the president, and the crypto ventures controlled by the Trumps.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly did get back to Rolling Stone with a statement. 'The President is working to secure good deals for the American people, not for himself,' she wrote. 'President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public — which is why they overwhelmingly re-elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media.'
Accountable.US Executive Director Tony Carrk disagrees about Trump's priorities. 'In total disregard for the Emoluments Clause and every presidential ethical standard, Trump and Steve Witkoff are using a barely regulated crypto scheme to grab up tens of millions from an accused Chinese crypto fraudster whose riches seemingly helped elevate him to be leader of his own micronation — and now wants recognition from the U.S. government,' Carrk said in a statement shared with Rolling Stone.
'While Sun and many other foreign investors with hidden agendas were invited to buy first-class access to the president, Trump has yet to make time for any one of the millions of Americans about to lose their health coverage and food aid under the 'beautiful' Trump tax giveaway for the rich,' added Carrk. 'Wearing corruption on his sleeve seems to be President Trump's strategy for avoiding congressional scrutiny. But his allies in Congress shouldn't wait around for Trump's many self-enrichment schemes leveraging the power of the White House to leave American working people and our national security worse off.'
Representatives for World Liberty Financial have not been shy about advertising how major investments in the firm can secure a line to the president, who until recently was listed as the company's 'chief crypto advocate' and is the first person featured on its website, as a co-founder emeritus, alongside his sons. He also, of course, effectively dictates U.S. crypto policy. World Liberty has approached a wide range of foreign businesses in looking to establish relationships that raise its profile and, as of March, had sold more than half a billion dollars worth of its tokens. When it comes to the conflicts of interest Trump has embraced in this field, and the scale of these possible emoluments violations, both have absolutely dwarfed the repeated allegations of foreign governments paying Trump through his hotels and restaurants in his first term — the deals that brought the unsuccessful emoluments suits against him in his first term.
Liberland did once get in on the Trump hotel scheme, though. In 2018, a year after a delegation from the tiny region attended the president's first inauguration, its leadership threw an exclusive reception for American lawmakers at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., spending at least $750,000 on accommodations. The Trump Organization sold the hotel in 2022, and today, the first family sees far bigger windfalls from its crypto partners. After more than a century as real estate moguls, the dynasty has found greener pastures.
Best of Rolling Stone
Every Super Bowl Halftime Show, Ranked From Worst to Best
The United States of Weed
Gaming Levels Up
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
30 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Is there More Upside in Vertiv Stock (VRT) After a Stellar Rally?
Vertiv Holdings (VRT) stock has rallied by more than 40% over the past year, as the data center infrastructure company is experiencing solid demand for its products amid the ongoing AI (artificial intelligence) boom. While most analysts are bullish on VRT stock due to AI tailwinds, Wall Street's average price target indicates a possible downside from current levels. Confident Investing Starts Here: Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter Favorable Demand Backdrop for AI Infrastructure Companies Vertiv provides energy-efficient cooling and power solutions that are required to support AI workloads. Interestingly, on Friday, VRT stock rose by 2% after Reuters reported that the Trump administration is preparing a series of executive actions to increase energy supply for AI development in the U.S. Spending on data centers is expected to increase in the coming years, benefiting AI infrastructure companies such as Vertiv Holdings. Bank of America estimates total data center spending to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13% from 2024 to 2028, reaching $532 billion by 2028. In fact, infrastructure-related spending is expected to rise even faster, at a CAGR of 16%. Here's What Bulls and Bears Think About VRT Stock According to TipRanks' Bulls Say, Bears Say Tool, VRT Bulls are optimistic about the company due to robust demand and better visibility, which are driving higher estimates. Many analysts also believe in Vertiv's ability to address customers' requirements amid the growing complexity in AI deployments, with solid market shares in data center thermal and electrical equipment. Meanwhile, Bears are concerned about a slowdown in capital spending by hyperscalers or cloud service providers, volatility in orders, and the impact of tariffs on costs. Is VRT a Good Stock to Buy? Overall, Wall Street has a Strong Buy consensus rating on Vertiv Holdings stock based on 12 Buys and two Hold recommendations. The average VRT stock price target of $116.93 indicates a 7.2% downside risk from current levels.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Justices' nerves fray in Supreme Court's final stretch
The Supreme Court's nine justices often like to tout their camaraderie, hoping to dispel public perceptions that they are locked into warring ideological camps. But the final rulings of the current term — issued from the bench during a tense 90-minute court session Friday — revealed some acrimonious, even acidic, exchanges. Most of the rhetorical clashes pitted the court's conservative and liberal wings against each other in politically polarized cases. But not all of the spats fell squarely along ideological lines. On the whole, they paint a picture of nine people who are deeply divided over the law and the role of the courts — and who also may just not like each other very much. The most acerbic feud Friday came in the biggest ruling of the year: the justices' 6-3 decision granting the Trump administration's bid to rein in the power of individual district court judges to block federal government policies nationwide. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court's entire conservative supermajority, responded sharply to a pair of dissents, one written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the other written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. But Barrett reserved her most pointed barbs for Jackson. Barrett, a Trump appointee and the second-most-junior justice, accused Jackson, a Biden appointee and the court's most junior member, of mounting 'a startling line of attack' not 'tethered … to any doctrine whatsoever.' According to Barrett, Jackson was promoting 'a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush,' and she was skipping over legal issues she considers 'boring.' 'We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,' wrote Barrett. 'We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.' Well, maybe not 'only' that. While insisting she wouldn't 'dwell' on Jackson's arguments, Barrett wound up devoting nearly 900 words to them, capping the passage off with another zinger suggesting hypocrisy on Jackson's part. 'Justice Jackson would do well to heed her own admonition: 'Everyone, from the President on down, is bound by law,'' Barrett wrote. 'That goes for judges too.' For her part, Jackson accused Barrett and the other conservatives of an obsession with 'impotent English tribunals' and of blessing a 'zone of lawlessness.' 'What the majority has done is allow the Executive to nullify the statutory and constitutional rights of the uncounseled, the underresourced, and the unwary, by prohibiting the lower courts from ordering the Executive to follow the law across the board,' Jackson declared. Although 42 percent of the court's opinions this term were unanimous, this week's decisions continued the pattern of liberals often finding themselves on the losing end of 6-3 rulings in the hardest-fought and most impactful cases. So, perhaps it's no surprise that the liberal justices are the ones to often paint the court's decisions in grave, even apocalyptic, terms. The court's 6-3 decision that public-school parents must be allowed to pull their children out of lessons involving LGBTQ-themed books produced a fiery dissent from Sotomayor. She predicted a 'nightmare' for school as parents choose to pull their kids out of lessons they disapprove of on topics ranging from evolution to the role of women in society to vaccines. The ensuing 'chaos' and self-censorship by schools threatens to end American public education as we know it, she said. 'Today's ruling threatens the very essence of public education,' Sotomayor wrote. 'The reverberations of the Court's error will be felt, I fear, for generations.' While the liberal justices more often found themselves on the losing side than the conservatives, some members of the court's right flank also found occasion to voice grave concerns about select rulings. Consider a decision issued Friday involving an FCC fund that supports broadband access in rural areas. It's not exactly a hot culture-war issue. And a mixed coalition of three conservatives and three liberals joined together to uphold the fund. But Justice Neil Gorsuch, animated by the case's implications for the balance of power between Congress and federal agencies, filed a lengthy dissent that accused the majority of embarking on a judicial 'misadventure' and deploying 'ludicrously hypothetical' reasoning. The majority, he wrote, 'defies the Constitution's command' that power be divided among the branches. A day earlier, Gorsuch had exchanged sharp words with Jackson — but this time, he was in the majority. Jackson, in an opinion joined by the court's other two liberals, suggested the conservative majority's decision allowing South Carolina to exclude Planned Parenthood from the Medicaid program there amounted to a continuation of the long campaign by racists and segregationists in the South to resist federal civil rights laws enacted in the wake of the Civil War. 'A century and a half later, the project of stymying one of the country's great civil rights laws continues,' Jackson wrote. Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, dismissed the inflammatory claim out of hand, calling it 'extravagant.' Jackson has also used stark language in dissents from rulings on the court's emergency docket. In April, she predicted 'devastation' from the Trump administration suspension of education grants and called the court's decision to allow the cuts to proceed 'in equal parts unprincipled and unfortunate.' One of the major surprises Friday was the court's decision to pass up issuing any opinion in the term's big redistricting case. It involved the Louisiana legislature's creation of a second majority-Black congressional district after courts ordered the legislature to do so to comply with the Voting Rights Act. Although the justices heard the case in March, they ordered that the case be reargued, likely this fall. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing alone, scolded his colleagues for copping out despite a full round of legal briefing and 80 minutes of oral arguments on the issue. 'The Court today punts without explanation,' Thomas complained. The way to resolve the Louisiana case 'should be straightforward,' the court's longest-serving justice said. Then he stepped up his rhetoric another notch, declaring that the court had not only failed to explain its action but that it defied any logic whatsoever. 'The Court … inexplicably schedules these cases for reargument,' Thomas griped. The consternation displayed by the justices this week came as one of their former colleagues, retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, issued an impassioned warning that 'hostile, fractious discourse' was tearing at the fabric of American democracy. To be sure, there are no outward signs the acrimony at the high court has reached the levels it did in 2022, following POLITICO's publication of a draft of the court's not-yet-released opinion overturning the federal constitutional right to an abortion. Thomas, a George H.W. Bush appointee, said then that trust at the court was 'gone forever.' And after that bombshell ruling was officially published, Justice Elena Kagan accused the court of making political decisions. The Obama appointee said only 'time will tell' if the justices could again find 'common ground.' While the justices' disagreement in the major cases often seemed stark this week, there were occasional efforts to bridge the divide. Playing a role he often adopts, Justice Brett Kavanaugh seemed eager to downplay the practical significance of the court's ruling barring nationwide injunctions in most instances. Kavanaugh said the district court injunctions at issue are rarely 'the last word' in high-profile fights over executive power. Those battles ultimately end up at the Supreme Court, he argued, so whether a district court's injunction is enforced nationwide or not matters less than what the justices decide on the slew of emergency applications landing on their so-called shadow docket. 'When a stay or injunction application arrives here, this Court should not and cannot hide in the tall grass,' wrote Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee. During speaking appearances last month, Chief Justice John Roberts insisted the justices aren't at each other's throats, despite the tone of some of the opinions that come out as the court winds down its work for the term. 'I'm sure people listening to the news or reading our decisions, particularly decisions that come out in May and June, maybe think, 'Boy, those people really must hate each other. They must be at hammer and tong the whole time,'' the chief justice told an audience in Buffalo. However, Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee, also said the court's summer recess is a welcome respite not only from work, but from colleagues. 'That break is critical to maintaining a level of balance,' he said. Roberts, who traditionally teaches a legal course overseas during the summer and lounges at his vacation home in Maine, has one more official gig before he heads out. He's scheduled to speak Saturday morning to a judicial conference in North Carolina, where he'll have a chance to offer his latest thoughts on whether his colleagues are grating on each other or getting along.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
House Democrats not convinced Iran nuclear capabilities wiped
The Big Story A House briefing from Trump administration officials on last weekend's strikes against Iranian nuclear sites has done little to mollify the concerns of Democrats, who say they were presented little evidence that the attacks will prevent Tehran from producing nuclear weapons. © Greg Nash Skeptical Democrats had gone into the briefing with two pressing questions: Did Iran pose an imminent threat to Americans, thereby justifying President Trump's move to launch the strikes without congressional approval? And did the attacks 'obliterate' Iran's capacity to make nuclear weapons, as Trump has claimed? Leaving the closed-door gathering, Democrats said they got satisfactory answers to neither question. 'I would say that that particular briefing left me with more concerns and a true lack of clarity on how we are defining the mission and the success of it,' said Rep. Katherine Clark (Mass.), the Democratic whip. Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), a former nuclear physicist, said the U.S. strikes likely knocked out Iran's centrifuges and other infrastructure required to enrich uranium in the future. But there's no evidence, he said, that the attacks destroyed Iran's existing stockpiles of enriched uranium. If those are intact, he warned, Iran could still produce weapons with the strength of a Hiroshima bomb in 'a very small breakout time.' 'The goal of this mission, from the start, was to secure or destroy that material,' he said. 'That's where they're hiding the ball. And that's what we have to keep our eyes on.' Friday's House briefing came six days after Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites in an effort to dismantle Tehran's ability to produce nuclear weapons. The briefing was conducted by top administration officials — including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — who had also briefed Senate lawmakers a day earlier. Trump has repeatedly said the mission was an unqualified success, 'obliterating' Iran's nuclear capacity and setting the program back by years. And the president's GOP allies in the Capitol echoed that message after the briefing. 'It is clear, everyone can see by the videos, that these massive ordinance penetrating bombs did the job,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said. 'I think their key facilities have been disabled, and I think Iran is now a long time away from doing what they might have done before this very successful operation.' A preliminary report from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) reached different conclusions, finding that the strikes set back Iran's nuclear program by months, rather than years. More recent statements from the CIA and Trump's head of national intelligence have disputed the DIA report, creating mixed messages from the administration about the success of the mission. Read the full report at Welcome to The Hill's Defense & National Security newsletter, I'm Ellen Mitchell — your guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here. Essential Reads How policy will affect defense and national security now and inthe future: Iran's foreign minister: Israel had to run to 'daddy' Iran 'showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO Choice but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened out by our missiles,' wrote Seyeb Abbas Araghchi, Iran's Foreign Minister, on X. This comes amid a back and forth between Iran and the U.S. after the supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei spoke for the first time since the U.S. strikes. 'My congratulations on our dear Iran's victory over the US regime,' … Senate blocks Iran war powers resolution The Senate blocked an effort Friday to prevent President Trump from taking future military action against Iran without authorization from Congress, less than a week after he directed strikes aimed at the country's nuclear capabilities. Senators voted 47-53 largely along party lines against the war powers resolution. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was the lone GOP lawmaker to vote with Democrats. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), … Schiff: 'Too many unknowns' to claim 'victory' in stopping Iran nuclear weapons Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Friday it's 'premature' for anyone to be claiming that Iran will not try to continue its nuclear program. 'The Iranian regime had not made a decision to build a bomb, was not pursuing the mechanism of a bomb, even though it was enriching uranium,' he said in Friday comments on ABC News Live. Over the past week, there has been heavy debate over whether the U.S. strikes in Iran on June 21 … McConnell: Trump has 'some pretty rabid isolationists over at' DOD Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) took a swipe at President Trump's national security team in a rare interview as part of a recent pattern of public comments urging the president to consider military intervention in Iran and elsewhere more favorably. 'He's got some pretty rabid isolationists over at [the Department of Defense] — you could argue the vice president is in that group,' the former Senate Republican leader told Politico. … On Our Radar Upcoming things we're watching on our beat: In Other News Branch out with a different read from The Hill: Senators diverge sharply on damage done by Iran strikes after classified briefing WASHINGTON (AP) — Senators emerged from a classified briefing Thursday with sharply diverging assessments of President Donald Trump's bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites, with Republicans calling the mission a clear success and Democrats expressing deep skepticism. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, … On Tap Monday Events in and around the defense world: What We're Reading News we've flagged from other outlets: Trending Today Two key stories on The Hill right now: GOP leader sets Saturday vote on Trump 'big, beautiful bill' despite Republican pushback Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told Senate Republicans to expect to see the legislative text of the budget reconciliation package on Friday … Read more Trump approval underwater, voters say US is on wrong track: Poll President Trump's approval rating is underwater and a majority of voters believe the country is on the wrong track, according to a poll released Friday. … Read more Opinions in The Hill Op-eds related to defense & national security submitted to The Hill: Check out The Hill's Defense page for the latest coverage. You're all caught up. See you next time! Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here
