The Sordid Story of Trump, the Trump"Witkoff Family Business, and the UAE

Even if crypto makes your head hurt, you're going to be hearing a lot about this in the months to come.

The article excerpt accuses President Donald Trump and associate Steve Witkoff of using their cryptocurrency venture, World Liberty Financial (WLF), launched in autumn 2024, as a front for foreign influence peddling and political payoffs.

Key Allegations
It claims WLF attracted massive UAE investments"starting with $500 million pre-inauguration and totaling at least $2.5 billion"tied to favors like pardoning Chinese-born felon Changpeng Zhao (ex-Binance CEO), granting UAE access to U.S. AI chips despite prior restrictions over China links, elevating UAE geopolitically, including them in the Stargate AI project, and preserving TikTok's U.S. operations. The piece portrays crypto's opacity as ideal for disguising such transactions, with Trump sons ostensibly running it to maintain "plausible deniability."

Comparison to Biden
The author, from **National Review**, contrasts this with extensive GOP probes into Biden family dealings (alleged $27 million from foreign influence, including China), which spurred an impeachment inquiry but yielded no Trump equivalent despite larger sums. It cites a recent **Wall Street Journal** report revealing UAE's Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed al Nahyan as a silent partner providing seed funds and expertise.

Promised Follow-Up
The post promises future installments demystifying crypto/stablecoins, recapping WLF's setup, Zhao's pardon rationale, UAE's Big Tech ambitions under Trump, and a timeline amid Democratic impeachment murmurs as midterms loom. It frames the scandal as dwarfing Biden controversies in scale.

I thought this was all just faux outrage supposedly coming from the right, but really being fomented by those with vested monetary interest in TV ratings. Guess I was wrong, clearly many on the right truly were and are offended by this half-time show. I still don't understand why. And this offense is political in nature? JFC you people are --- cin' suckers, eh? HAHAHAHA!!!

#46 | Posted by Danforth

Bitcoin's supply cap doesn't make it worthless when the last coin is mined. Its value will still be whatever buyers and sellers agree on at that time, just like today. Miners are expected to be paid mainly through transaction fees instead of new coins, so the network can keep running even after new issuance stops.

#33 | Posted by snoofy

That is absolutely brilliant. Thank you for posting this info.

/thread

#41

That's an oversimplification:

"Crypto is a Ponzi scheme."

What is your definition of a Ponzi scheme?

Because you're not applying the actual defintion appropriately:

"Bitcoi7n is now and always has been a Ponzi scheme. Those at the top of the pyramid get rich; th4ose at the bo5ttom end up with nothing of value."

Ghislaine Maxwell to Take the Fifth Monday in Congress

Just like Trump would. Both of them are pedos.

It's an intelligence test. If you bought it, you failed.
#38 | Posted by LegallyYourDead

So if you bought it below $10,000 and sold at $60,000, you failed?

#7 | Posted by LampLighter

You're curious? HAHAHA!! Nothing to be curious about. He's a troll, full stop. The more you know.

It's only matter of time before the right agrees with me that Trump's a left-wing mole who set out to destroy everything Republicans claimed to believe in.
#26 | Posted by sentinel

Lindsay Graham said as much in 2015. Now look at him.

#4 | Posted by humtake

You are one heartless cu n t, dirt rotten cultist!

They can never debate me, I always win. That's why they go to insults.
#495 | Posted by boaz

So narcissistic disorder is one of your innate traits? NO empathy, narcissistic...tell me BOAZ, did you ever bother to read The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness? Or are you still choosing ignorance? LOL

That was a song that Justin Timberlake wrote about Ukraine.
#490 | Posted by sentinel

Justin Timberlake is a piece of sh i t. Why would you bring him up?

#485 | Posted by boaz

HOLY BUTT LOVING CHRIST! I've never seen BOAZ so triggered before!! HAHAHA!!!

#479 | Posted by boaz

And that's why there is now a dead ICU nurse from the VA? He was shot in the back of the neck and you can't even offer HIM the benefit of the doubt. You fall in line with the cult: "He was a domestic terrorist!!!"

GD, zero empathy for your kind, eh?

He had NO reason to be there other than to stir up trouble.
#418 | Posted by boaz

Articulate the crime. You won't because you can't. Neither could the POS ICE agent who shoved the woman to the ground.

#413 | Posted by BellRinger

What was the reasonable suspicion to approach the woman and push her to the ground? You're acting as though ICE has complete impunity to do anything they want. A nurse is going to help someone who falls or is pushed to the ground, which BTW falls under which guiding policy of law enforcement exactly? Read your post once again, slowly. You're claiming there was a probability that a nurse helping a woman up off the ground after being shoved is a criminal offense.

He could have been trying to get the attention of another agent. As for the two claps you are engaging in an act of reading minds.
#352 | Posted by BellRinger

Like he was a dog? HAHAHAHA!!! That's the best you could come up with after avoiding an alternative over numerous posts?!?! HAHAHAHAHA!!! When was the last time you clapped at someone to get their attention. Be specific and you better be fnkcin' honest.

That's what is relevant to this discussion.
#39 | Posted by BellRinger

What's relevant is that you have nothing to offer but a legal opinion that was considered applicable by a Trump toadie. And you're going to hang your hat on that as though it's significant?

HAHAHA!!! JFC JEFF, why do you even bother? Are you that big of a political hack?

#22 | Posted by BellRinger

"He was appointed by Garland as Special Prosecutor." " Essentially accurate (usually styled "Special Counsel" rather than "Special Prosecutor").

"The issue was [that] Special Prosecutor is a creation of Congress." " Oversimplified; the real issue is whether existing statutes Congress passed are sufficient to authorize this kind of appointment, not whether Congress must pass a new, case-specific law.

"Congress didn't create a special prosecutor to prosecute the alleged crimes he was assigned." " Misleading; Congress generally doesn't create case-specific prosecutors, and DOJ says its existing statutory authority covers Smith's role.

"Garland wanted his cake and wanted to eat it too ... " " Purely argumentative; not a factual or legal finding.

"Once he was deemed illegitimate ... " " Not accurate as of now; only one district judge has accepted that argument, and the ruling is on appeal.

"Garland could have assigned his two cases to a number of qualified prosecutors within 5 minutes ... The disruption would have been a mere blip ... " " Partly plausible in concept (he could reassign), but it downplays real legal and practical complications that could follow from an invalid-appointment ruling.

So the paragraph captures one side's critique in strong, rhetorical terms, but it does not accurately reflect the current state of the law or the actual posture of the challenges to Smith's appointment. It is opinion wrapped around some disputed legal premises, rather than a neutral, legally settled description.

Are you lying, or just refusing to address reality?
#157 | Posted by Danforth

What do you think would be the MO for a cultist?

Fmr Pres Biden's record of arresting the "worst of the worst" is better than Pres Trump's?
#155 | Posted by LampLighter

Yes, but don't expect cultists like JEFF to acknowledge such a salient fact.

How else do you suppose the administration that you're carrying water for will deplete the population of the country of 100,000,000 people that they're so excited about?
Own it, bell boi.
Swallow it, bell boi.
#149 | Posted by A_Friend

Holy ----, that's real?!