Self-Dealing and Corruption in the Trump Administration
At Feel Good Action, we believe in the power of social media to drive real world impact. Each week, we highlight an issue and give our subscribers a tangible call to action. If you’ve been looking for a place to get involved – we’re your one stop shop. Join the movement by subscribing today! Nothing is behind a paywall – paid subscriptions directly support Feel Good Action!
Last month, Trump announced a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to issue payments to “victims of political persecution.” In truth, the money is a slush fund for Trump supporters. The announcement faced immediate backlash from Democrats, who said taxpayer money would be “funneled to Trump and his allies, including individuals convicted in connection with the January 6 riot, public figures who spread election misinformation, and the leader of a violent hate group.” The backlash, even from some Republicans, led to the administration dropping the plan entirely last week.
But the fund is just the tip of the iceberg: across the administration, public officials are using their positions for self enrichment. Trust in government matters. No matter which party you vote for, most Americans agree that public officials should work for the public interest – not their own personal or financial interests.
So what is a conflict of interest? A conflict of interest happens when a public official has financial ties, investments, or personal relationships that could influence (or appear to influence) decisions they make in office.
For example:
A former fossil fuel executive regulating the energy industry
A pharmaceutical investor overseeing health policy
A government official awarding contracts to close associates or former business partners
An elected official making decisions that financially benefit companies they own or family businesses tied to them
Historically, administrations of both parties have used ethics agreements, divestment requirements, recusals, and independent watchdogs to reduce conflicts. But watchdog organizations say those guardrails have weakened in recent years. President Trump rescinded a Biden-era ethics pledge that barred political appointees from working on issues connected to former lobbying clients or employers for two years. Shortly after, multiple inspectors general responsible for investigating waste, fraud, and conflicts of interest were dismissed.
One major concern raised by ethics groups is the number of political appointees with deep financial ties to industries they are now responsible for overseeing.
Financial disclosures reviewed by ProPublica found examples of senior officials holding significant investments, corporate relationships, or financial interests connected to sectors affected by government policy decisions. Deputy secretary of defense Steve Feinberg ran Cerberus Capital Management until last year – the same company has been awarded four contracts with the Department of Defense. Tom Schultz, chief of the U.S. Forest Service, is a former executive for the logging industry. Under his leadership, the Forest Service is undergoing the most dramatic reductions in the history of the agency.
Meanwhile, the Trump family has significantly expanded its involvement in crypto ventures while simultaneously pursuing policies aimed at making the United States more welcoming to the crypto industry. The Trump family’s crypto holdings and partnerships have grown rapidly during the administration, including ventures tied to digital currencies, token sales, and international investors. (Speaking of international ties to Trump businesses, Rachel Maddow touches on the tip of the iceberg;)
A November 2025 report alleged that the Trump family built a multi-billion-dollar crypto empire while benefiting from weakened oversight and favorable policy changes. The report specifically raised concerns about self-dealing, foreign financial interests, and blurred lines between public office and private profit.
Then, there’s the insider trading. Prediction markets like Polymarket have gained increasing popularity in recent years. Essentially, people can wager money on real-world outcomes. Some things are innocuous, like betting on whether or not it will rain in New Jersey. Others are more troubling – bets on elections, legislation, and even military conflicts.
Throughout the war in Iran a series of unusually well-timed trades appeared to correctly predict sensitive military developments before they became public knowledge. A 60 Minutes investigation found “nine connected Polymarket accounts have raked in more than $2.4 million betting almost exclusively on U.S. military actions.” Independent analysts reviewing the activity identified accounts with unnaturally high win rates and suspicious timing, prompting concerns that the traders had access to non-public information.
There’s good news, this corruption is fixable. Strong ethical regulations can prevent appointing officials who could present conflict of interest concerns, prevent elected officials from influencing policy that could benefit their own business interests, and prevent insider trading.
As always, that requires electing officials to all levels of government who will stand for using their offices to serve the people, not for profit. You can help do just that in the 2026 midterms;
Help a friend register to vote!
Share this article!
Stay tuned with Feel Good Action!