Trump-backed crypto firm is planning stablecoin audit, new app
Folkman also hinted that WLF's governance token, known as WLFI, could soon become tradable in an interview at the Permissionless conference on Wednesday, organised by crypto media company Blockworks in Brooklyn, New York.
WLFI, which was launched two months before the US presidential election in November by Trump and his business partners, has yielded hundreds of millions of US dollars in revenue for the Republican president's family business.
The business, along with other forays into crypto, has drawn a barrage of criticism from Democratic lawmakers, as well as government ethics watchdogs. Critics say it creates conflicts of interest as it is happening at the same time as the president is pulling back enforcement and easing regulations on the industry.
The Trump Organization said in January that the president's investments, assets and business interests would be held in a trust managed by his children.
The White House and the Trump Organization did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
Sign Up
Sign Up
World Liberty has raised the money by selling so-called governance tokens, which give holders the right to vote on changes to the project's underlying code and to signal their opinion on its direction and plans. They cannot be traded.
During the interview on Wednesday, when Blockworks co-founder Jason Yanowitz asked whether the token would become tradable, Folkman said: 'I don't want to give away too much, but if you pay attention over the next couple of weeks, I think everyone ... is going to be very, very happy.'
Folkman said that WLF would also be launching an app that would make crypto seamless for everyday investors to use.
He said the company's stablecoin recently just got its first attestation report from an accounting firm and that it would be posted on its website 'within the next few days'.
'We are going to have very transparent auditing from a financial level,' he said. REUTERS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
US softens criticism of some Trump partner countries in scaled-back human rights report
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox The US State Department has scaled back a key US government report on human rights worldwide. WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's administration has scaled back a key US government report on human rights worldwide, dramatically softening criticism of some countries that have been strong partners of the Republican President, such as El Salvador and Israel, which rights groups say have extensive records of abuses. Instead, the US State Department in its widely anticipated 2024 Human Rights Report sounded an alarm about the erosion of freedom of speech in Europe and ramped up criticism of Brazil and South Africa, countries Washington has clashed with over a host of issues. Any criticism of governments over their treatment of LGBTQI rights, which appeared in Biden administration editions of the report, appeared to have been largely omitted. Washington referred to Russia's invasion of Ukraine mainly as the 'Russia-Ukraine war'. The report's section on Israel was much shorter than the previous year's edition and contained no mention of the severe humanitarian crisis or death toll in Gaza. Some 61,000 people have died, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, as a result of Israel's military operations in response to an attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas in October 2023. The report was delayed for months as Mr Trump appointees altered an earlier State Department draft dramatically to bring it in line with 'America First' values, according to government officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. The report introduced new categories such as 'Life', 'Liberty' and 'Security of the Person'. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Business Singapore banks face headwinds in rest of 2025, but DBS is pulling ahead: Analysts Asia Southern Taiwan shuts down ahead of Typhoon Podul's arrival, hundreds of flights cancelled Singapore Sengkang-Punggol LRT line back to full service: SBS Transit Asia From Van Cleef to Vacheron, luxury gifts at centre of probe into South Korea's former first lady World AI eroded doctors' ability to spot cancer within months in Lancet study Singapore Yishun man admits to making etomidate-laced pods for vaporisers; first Kpod case conviction Sport New Hui Fen becomes first Singaporean bowler to win PWBA Tour Player of the Year Singapore SG60: Many hands behind Singapore's success story 'There were no credible reports of significant human rights abuses,' the 2024 report said about El Salvador, in sharp contrast with the 2023 report that talked about 'significant human rights issues' and listed them as credible reports of unlawful or arbitrary killings, torture and harsh and life-threatening prison conditions. Washington's bilateral ties with El Salvador have strengthened since Mr Trump took office, as the administration has deported people to El Salvador with help from President Nayib Bukele, whose country is receiving US$6 million (S$7.7 million) from the US to house the migrants in a high-security mega-prison. Critics said the report was politically driven. 'The report demonstrates what happens when political agendas take priority over the facts,' said Mr Josh Paul, a former State Department official and director of non-governmental organisation A New Policy. 'The outcome is a much-abbreviated product that is more reflective of a Soviet propaganda release than of a democratic system.' State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said the report was restructured to improve readability and that it was no longer an expansive list of 'politically biased demands and assertions'. Ms Bruce declined to respond to specific questions about countries and did not say why a list of rights abuses in El Salvador was removed. Differing assessments The Trump administration has moved away from the traditional US promotion of democracy and human rights, seeing it as interference in another country's affairs, even as it criticised countries selectively, consistent with its broader policy towards a particular country. One example is Europe, where Mr Trump officials repeatedly weighed in on European politics to denounce what they see as suppression of right-wing leaders, including in Romania, Germany and France, and accused European authorities of censoring views such as criticism of immigration. For decades, the State Department's congressionally mandated human rights report has been used as a blueprint of reference for global rights advocacy. The 2024 report was prepared following a major revamp of the department, which included the firing of hundreds of people, many from the agency's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour, which takes the lead in writing the report. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in April wrote an opinion piece that said the bureau had become a platform for 'left-wing activists', saying the Trump administration would reorient the bureau to focus on 'Western values'. In Brazil, where the Trump administration has clashed with the government, the State Department found the human rights situation declined, after the 2023 report found no significant changes. The 2024 report took aim at the courts, stating that they took action undermining freedom of speech and disproportionately suppressing the speech of supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro, among others. Bolsonaro is on trial before the Supreme Court on charges that he conspired with allies to violently overturn his 2022 electoral loss to leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Mr Trump has referred to the case as a 'witch hunt' and called it grounds for a 50 per cent tariff on Brazilian goods. In South Africa, whose government the Trump administration has accused of racial discrimination towards Afrikaners, the current report said the human rights situation significantly worsened. It stated that 'South Africa took a substantially worrying step towards land expropriation of Afrikaners and further abuses against racial minorities in the country'. In the previous report, the State Department found no significant changes in the human rights situation in South Africa. Mr Trump, earlier in 2025, issued an executive order that called for the US to resettle Afrikaners, describing them as victims of 'violence against racially disfavoured landowners', allegations that echoed far-right claims but which have been contested by South Africa's government. South Africa dismissed the report's findings and said it was flawed, inaccurate and disappointing. 'It is ironic that a report from a nation that has exited the UN Human Rights Council and therefore no longer sees itself accountable in a multilateral peer review system would seek to produce one-sided fact-free reports without any due process or engagement,' the South African government said. REUTERS
AsiaOne
7 hours ago
- AsiaOne
California says Trump sent military to 'silence' LA protests, World News
The US government's unprecedented use of National Guard troops in Los Angeles to protect officers carrying out President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown was illegal and should be ended, a lawyer for the state of California told a federal judge on Tuesday (Aug 12). The lawyer said evidence presented from the landmark trial that began on Monday showed that soldiers had violated a 19th century law that bars the military from civilian law enforcement. "The government wanted a show of military force so great that any opposition to their agenda was silenced," said the lawyer, Meghan Strong of the California Attorney General's Office. Justice Department attorney Eric Hamilton countered that there was "substantial violence" in Los Angeles meriting military intervention and that the troops were only there to protect federal agents and property. Trump ordered 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles in June in response to days of unrest and protests sparked by mass immigration raids. California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, opposed the move and sued, alleging it violated prohibitions on the use of the military in law enforcement. US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will determine whether the government violated the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). Breyer will also hear arguments on Wednesday on Newsom's legal right to bring the case. The judge has not said when he will rule. The trial comes as Trump said he was taking the extraordinary step of deploying the National Guard to fight crime in Washington and suggested he might take similar actions in other American cities. In the California trial, the administration sought to prove that the military was only used to protect federal personnel or federal property, which the administration said are permissible exceptions to the PCA. California, meanwhile, sought to convince Breyer that troops crossed the line by setting up roadblocks, diverting traffic and making arrests, which Strong described as prohibited policing actions. Government witnesses testified that although those actions are generally prohibited, there are exceptions when federal agents or property are in danger. Breyer appeared sceptical at times of the government's assertion that Trump had sole discretion to decide when troops were needed. The president said in June the protests amounted to a rebellion against federal authority. "Is it a 'rebellion' because the president says it is a 'rebellion'?" Breyer asked Hamilton during the government's closing argument. Many of the troops have been withdrawn from Los Angeles, but California Attorney General Rob Bonta said on Monday that 300 National Guard members are still going on immigration raids and restricting civilian movements in the state. The trial before Breyer will have limited impact on Trump's plan to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to Washington. [[nid:721243]]
Straits Times
8 hours ago
- Straits Times
California says Trump sent military to ‘silence' LA protests
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox This comes as Mr Trump said he was taking the extraordinary step of deploying the National Guard to fight crime in Washington. LOS ANGELES - The US government's unprecedented use of National Guard troops in Los Angeles to protect officers carrying out President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown was illegal and should be ended, a lawyer for the state of California told a federal judge on Aug 12. The lawyer said evidence presented from the landmark trial that began on Aug 11 showed that soldiers had violated a 19th century law that bars the military from civilian law enforcement. 'The government wanted a show of military force so great that any opposition to their agenda was silenced,' said the lawyer, Ms Meghan Strong of the California Attorney General's Office. Justice Department attorney Eric Hamilton countered that there was 'substantial violence' in Los Angeles meriting military intervention and that the troops were only there to protect federal agents and property. Mr Trump ordered 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles in June in response to days of unrest and protests sparked by mass immigration raids. California's Democratic governor, Mr Gavin Newsom, opposed the move and sued, alleging it violated prohibitions on the use of the military in law enforcement. US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will determine whether the government violated the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Sengkang-Punggol LRT line back to full service: SBS Transit World US trade team will meet Chinese officials in two or three months, Bessent says Singapore From survivable to liveable: The making of a green city Asia DPM Gan kicks off India visit in Mumbai as Singapore firms ink investment agreements Multimedia World Photography Day: Celebrating the art of image-making World Ukraine, sidelined in Trump-Putin summit, fights Russian grab for more territory Opinion Singpass use in dating apps raises difficult questions Singapore SG60: Many hands behind Singapore's success story Judge Breyer will also hear arguments on Aug 13 on Mr Newsom's legal right to bring the case. The judge has not said when he will rule. The trial comes as Mr Trump said he was taking the extraordinary step of deploying the National Guard to fight crime in Washington and suggested he might take similar actions in other American cities. In the California trial, the administration sought to prove that the military was only used to protect federal personnel or federal property, which the administration said are permissible exceptions to the PCA. California, meanwhile, sought to convince Judge Breyer that troops crossed the line by setting up roadblocks, diverting traffic and making arrests, which Ms Strong described as prohibited policing actions. Government witnesses testified that although those actions are generally prohibited, there are exceptions when federal agents or property are in danger. Judge Breyer appeared sceptical at times of the government's assertion that Mr Trump had sole discretion to decide when troops were needed. The president said in June the protests amounted to a rebellion against federal authority. 'Is it a 'rebellion' because the president says it is a 'rebellion'?' Judge Breyer asked Mr Hamilton during the government's closing argument. Many of the troops have been withdrawn from Los Angeles, but California Attorney General Rob Bonta said on Aug 11 that 300 National Guard members are still going on immigration raids and restricting civilian movements in the state. The trial before Judge Breyer will have limited impact on Mr Trump's plan to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to Washington. REUTERS
