Trump’s Digital Empire: The New Face of Corruption in a Second Term

Watan-The New York Times published an editorial laying out a detailed account of the entrenched culture of corruption surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration.

It reported that the top bidder at a formal White House dinner last month—reserved for buyers of Trump’s digital currency—was businessman Justin Sun, who invested over $40 million in Trump’s cryptocurrency. Sun had personal motivations: he had already invested $75 million in another Trump-affiliated crypto project. Shortly after Trump’s administration took office in January, the SEC dropped a fraud case against him. The message, the paper argued, was clear: enriching Trump buys favorable treatment from the government.

The editorial highlights cryptocurrency as a striking example of systemic corruption in Trump’s second term. Trump and his family reportedly receive direct profits from sales and investments in these digital coins. Even if investors lose money as prices drop, the Trump family continues to earn commissions.

Forbes estimates that Trump made nearly $1 billion from cryptocurrencies in just nine months—one-sixth of his net worth. This marks a drastic shift from his earlier stance, when he denounced crypto as a potential disaster, comparing it to drug trafficking. Since becoming a central player in the market, Trump has halted DOJ crypto probes, pardoned crypto executives who pled guilty to crimes, and scrapped IRS enforcement rules targeting crypto tax dodgers.

While there’s no direct evidence that Trump accepted bribes or made explicit policy deals for money, the paper notes he has cultivated a “culture of corruption.” Trump and his family have invented ways to profit, and policies conveniently shift in favor of those who help them gain financially. Often, there’s little attempt to hide it. As historian Matthew Dallek stated, “Trump is the most openly corrupt national politician in modern U.S. history.”

This culture, the paper says, is part of a broader effort to undermine U.S. democracy and transform the federal government into a personal tool. His actions erode public trust in institutions that were once seen as global models of rule-of-law and financial integrity.

Trump’s first term already saw repeated ethical violations—hosting official events at his hotels and cutting foreign deals through his family business. These now appear to have been a rehearsal for the bolder profiteering of a second term.

The editorial urges a pause to assess the vast web of self-enrichment that began just four months into his second term. Trump and his family have struck billion-dollar deals with actors in the Middle East, launched an exclusive Georgetown club requiring $500,000 membership fees, and benefited from business-friendly deals abroad—such as a $1.5 billion golf resort in Vietnam and a Trump Tower in Belgrade aided by forged Serbian documents.

High-profile donors receive policy rewards. After conservative activist Elizabeth Fargo attended a million-dollar MAGA fundraiser, Trump pardoned her son, convicted in a tax crime. Other examples include multimillion-dollar settlements from CBS/Paramount and ABC/Disney allegedly to avoid administrative retaliation, and a $40 million Amazon deal for a documentary about Melania Trump—much higher than industry norms.

Trump’s 2017 inauguration committee raised $239 million—mostly from corporations and elite donors—but spent only a fraction on the event. There are few legal restrictions on where the rest of that money went. One major donor, “Pilgrim’s Pride,” is reportedly benefiting from favorable government policies.

Foreign donors—legally barred from contributing to U.S. campaigns—have found alternate paths. The UAE is investing $2 billion in Trump’s crypto venture, while a Chinese-linked tech firm has committed $300 million in coin purchases.

The paper questions what can be done. Congressional Republicans, once vocal about minor Democratic infractions, have been largely silent. Democrats, such as Senator Chris Murphy, have raised the alarm, but need to do more to highlight Trump’s exploitation of federal power.

Legal options also appear limited. Trump’s DOJ and federal agencies refuse to investigate him or his allies. A recent Supreme Court decision makes it nearly impossible to hold a president criminally accountable for actions even tangentially tied to official duties. Trump has also shown he’ll use pardons to shield loyalists from consequences.

Ultimately, the Times concludes, it’s up to voters to hold politicians accountable. Ignoring Trump’s conduct risks normalizing corruption. If Americans dismiss it as “just Trump being Trump,” it may open the floodgates for others to follow suit—accelerating the nation’s slide into lawless plutocracy.