Trump - Documented Corruption, Legal Violations & Self-Dealing Since January 2025

Let's review...

As of 5/13/2026. Guess what? As of today there's much more, and more killings..

TRUMP, TRUMP FAMILY & TRUMP ADMINISTRATION corruption.

---

CRYPTO & FINANCIAL SELF-DEALING

— $TRUMP memecoin launched days before inauguration, enriching Trump directly from anyone buying access

— Melania Trump launched her own memecoin the day before inauguration

— World Liberty Financial crypto empire: up to $11.6B in holdings, $800M+ income in first half of 2025

— Justin Sun SEC fraud case paused after he invested $75M in Trump crypto ventures

— $TRUMP dinner: White House access auctioned to top 220 memecoin investors

— Chinese-linked company bought $300M in $TRUMP coin days before Trump offered to delay TikTok ban

— Binance DOJ enforcement unit disbanded as Binance/Trump business talks accelerated

— SEC enforcement against crypto companies halted after those companies invested in Trump ventures

— Saudi royals, Russian oligarchs, and Chinese Communist Party members among $TRUMP coin purchasers

— Trump signed stablecoin legislation that directly benefits his own stablecoin business

FOREIGN EMOLUMENTS

— Qatar gifted a $400M luxury 747 to Trump; legal experts confirmed likely Foreign Emoluments Clause violation; plane headed to his presidential library; U.S. taxpayers cover retrofit costs

— Senate formally introduced resolution declaring Qatar plane an illegal emolument

— Foreign nationals purchasing $TRUMP coin cited as ongoing Emoluments Clause violation by constitutional scholars

— Trump conducting trade and foreign policy negotiations with nations that have invested in his crypto ventures

TRUMP FAMILY BUSINESSES PROFITING FROM THE PRESIDENCY

— Trump Organization not divested upon taking office, in defiance of all modern presidential precedent

— Trump Mobile T1 phone scam: Don Jr. and Eric Trump collected $59M in deposits from ~590,000 supporters for a gold "Made in USA" phone that has never been delivered; refunds denied; "Made in USA" claims quietly scrubbed; FTC investigation requested

— Don Jr. and Eric Trump took stakes in a construction/mining firm days after it secured $1.6B in U.S. government backing for a Kazakhstan project

— Trump sons' company Powerus awarded U.S. Air Force contract for interceptor drones

— Trump-branded golf resort pitched to investors lobbying to lift U.S. sanctions on Syria

— Private companies paid millions to fund construction of a new White House ballroom

— White House ballroom contractor secretly awarded a no-bid nearby contract, inflating costs from $3.3M to $17M

— New Trump-aligned D.C. private club co-founded by Don Jr., $500K initiation fee, marketed as access to cabinet members and West Wing officials

PAY-TO-PLAY / DONOR REWARDS

— Nursing home executive pardoned for tax crimes after his mother attended a $1M-per-person fundraiser for Trump

— Company gave $5M to a Trump super PAC, met with Trump, and then had a Medicare rule delayed that would have cut their payments

— DHS awarded a $250,000 contract to a firm led by former Trump campaign officials after requiring partisan loyalty in the bidding process

— Major corporations including Disney, Meta, Paramount, and X paid settlements in Trump-filed lawsuits, proceeds flowing to his presidential library

— Law firms coerced into pledging nearly $1B in free legal services; experts say this may violate federal anti-bribery law

— Ambassadorships awarded to Don Jr.'s former business partner (Greece) and Jared Kushner's father (France)

DOJ WEAPONIZATION & OVERSIGHT DISMANTLING

— DOJ Public Integrity Section gutted from 40 prosecutors to 2; open cases dropped from 200 to 20

— Eric Adams corruption case used as leverage: DOJ sought temporary dismissal to extract immigration cooperation; federal judge called it "smacks of a bargain"

— Multiple Republican DOJ prosecutors resigned rather than carry out politically motivated orders

— Jan. 6 blanket clemency for all defendants including those convicted of seditious conspiracy and assaulting law enforcement

— DOJ ordered to drop all pending Jan. 6 indictments

— DOJ probe into border czar Tom Holman closed after he was caught on tape taking a $50,000 bribe

— DOJ used as weapon against political opponents while dropping cases against Trump allies

INSPECTOR GENERAL & ETHICS WATCHDOG PURGE

— 18 Inspectors General fired

— Head of the Office of Special Counsel (whistleblower protection) fired

— Head of the Office of Government Ethics fired

— USAID Inspector General fired days after publishing a report critical of the administration's dismantling of the agency

— FEC chairwoman Ellen Weintraub unlawfully removed

— NLRB chair fired; board effectively shut down

PARDONS USED TO SHIELD ALLIES FROM CORRUPTION ACCOUNTABILITY

— Rod Blagojevich: convicted of selling a U.S. Senate seat, pardoned

— Michele Fiore: convicted of stealing $70K in police memorial donations for personal use, pardoned weeks before sentencing

— Jason Galanis: defrauded the Oglala Sioux Nation of $60M, sentence quietly commuted

— Devon Archer: convicted in the same $60M Oglala Sioux fraud, pardoned

— Glen Casada: Tennessee House Speaker convicted on 14 federal corruption counts, pardoned

— Cade Cothren: Casada's chief of staff, convicted alongside him, pardoned

— 15+ total corruption-related pardons, majority going to Republicans and Trump supporters

PETE HEGSETH / SIGNALGATE

— Pentagon IG concluded Hegseth shared classified, "secret"-level Yemen strike plans on Signal

— Hegseth found to have violated military regulations using personal phone for official business

— Hegseth refused to be interviewed by Pentagon investigators

— Second Signal leak: Hegseth shared operational details in a separate chat including his wife and brother

— Hegseth's broker sought investment in a BlackRock defense fund tied to Lockheed and Northrop weeks before the U.S.-Israel attack on Iran

ELON MUSK / DOGE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

— Musk wielded major governmental authority without Senate confirmation, violating the Appointments Clause (active lawsuit)

— Every federal agency investigating Musk's companies targeted by DOGE for dismantling

— NLRB complaint against SpaceX killed after Trump fired the NLRB chair

— OFCCP Tesla workplace discrimination audit killed

— DOL investigations into Tesla and SpaceX labor violations neutralized

— Neuralink animal welfare investigation effectively ended

— CFPB dismantled by Trump one week after it finalized a rule affecting Musk's planned Visa payments partnership on X

— SEC sued X/Musk for misleading shareholders about Twitter stock purchases; ordered to pay up to $150M

— Musk evaded deposition subpoenas for three months across 14 service attempts

— Trump DOJ argued in court that Musk should be shielded from legal accountability

ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATION CONFLICTS

— Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick publicly urged Americans to buy Tesla stock (a Musk company)

— A firm run by Commerce Secretary Lutnick's son made trades tied to court rulings on Trump's own tariffs

— FAA Administrator held millions in airline stock for seven months past his divestment deadline while overseeing the airline industry

— Trump bypassed Congress to push $23B in weapons sales to UAE, Kuwait, and Jordan by declaring a false Iran war emergency

— Trump turned the White House into a Tesla showroom, displaying and promoting Musk's vehicles on the South Lawn

Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!

Compiled with aid of  Claude AI 

---

JZ Murdock is a retired Senior Technical Writer/IT administrator, and an active award-winning author/ filmmaker, documentarian, and writer based in Bremerton, Washington. 

He publishes commentary on the state of things at murdockinations.com and on his creative works over at Substack. He also posts on Slasher.com on the horror genre.

If this work means something to you, you can support it at Ko-fi. Tips are always welcome and go directly toward keeping independent documentary work possible.

Secrets, Silence, and Self-Preservation: Trump’s Real Reason for Visiting Ghislaine Maxwell

If one were to speculate about Donald Trump’s darkest potential reasons for sending his Deputy Attorney General (and former personal lawyer) to meet with Ghislaine Maxwell in July 2025, here are several possibilities—none proven, but widely discussed and debated:

---

🔥 1. Silencing or Managing a Liability

If Maxwell possesses incriminating information about Trump’s past involvement with Jeffrey Epstein—including flight logs, parties, or encounters—Trump may wish to:

• Pressure her into withholding that information

• Negotiate silence through implied or future pardons

• Steer the DOJ inquiry to protect himself and allies

Why now? Public scrutiny of Trump’s past ties to Epstein has recently intensified again, with leaked documents and unsealed photos. This could be preemptive damage control.

---

🧩 2. Weaponizing Maxwell’s Testimony

Trump may see Maxwell’s cooperation as a political weapon:

• Push her to name only Democratic or anti-Trump figures tied to Epstein

• Use those names to stir his base, claim vindication, and accuse the “deep state” of coverups

• Fuel conspiracy narratives against enemies like the Clintons or Obama-linked officials

He could try to control the narrative: "It wasn’t me. It was THEM."

---

🧨 3. Pardon-for-Protection Scheme

Though denied officially, there’s ongoing speculation that Trump could offer a covert or eventual pardon in exchange for:

• Silence about his own role

• Testimony that redirects attention or criminal blame elsewhere

• Leverage against political opponents if she provides “dirt” on them

---

🦠 4. Threat Mitigation in Advance of His Legal Exposure

If Trump fears Maxwell could be used by future prosecutors (especially under a different administration), he might be:

• Preemptively neutralizing her as a witness

• Using DOJ connections to monitor what she knows or plans to share

• Ensuring her “proffer” doesn’t spiral into criminal exposure for him

---

🩸 5. Blackmail Insurance or Data Suppression

In an especially dark scenario, this could involve:

• Attempting to gain access to private records, videos, or logs Maxwell still holds

• Coordinating retrieval, suppression, or destruction of evidence

• Ensuring she doesn’t leak anything damning to international investigators or media

---

🕯️ 6. Legacy Control & Ego Management

Trump may want to control his legacy, ensuring history doesn’t link him definitively to Epstein’s crimes. He’s deeply invested in appearing “innocent” and “falsely persecuted.”

"If Maxwell flips and names Trump, the historical record changes overnight."

---

⚠️ Important Notes:

• None of this is confirmed, and much remains speculative or inferred.

• Trump has previously lied about how close he was to Epstein and falsely claimed he cut ties “long ago.”

• Ghislaine Maxwell’s own motives are complex—she may seek revenge, self-preservation, or a deal.

---

If even some of these darker motives are true, this may not just be about justice—but about power, control, and survival.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Would Pres. George Washington Shake Donald Trump's Hand?

I wondered, what an AI might think of Donald Trunp and how Pres. George Washington might view what we're going through, now that Trump has been re-elected with all the baggage and issues he brings along with him.

George Washington

And no, I'm not going to talk about Pres. Washington shaking Donald Trump's hand. Make up your own mind at the bottom of this article. I find it either interesting or entertaining to see what ChatGPT thinks of things. So...

What would Pres. George Washington think of POTUS47 Donald Trump just re-elected with all the baggage he brings along with him?

"In God We Trust" is Christian Nationalism unacceptable

ChatGPT said:

If George Washington were to look at Donald Trump’s actions, particularly through the lens of his own principles, he would likely find many aspects troubling. Washington was deeply committed to ideals of integrity, humility, and respect for democratic principles, seeing them as critical to the success of the new American republic.

Washington valued truthfulness and saw public service as a selfless duty, not as a means for personal aggrandizement. His farewell address famously warned of potential threats to democracy, such as the dangers of political factions (or parties) and foreign interference in national affairs. He would likely see Trump’s approach, particularly with its intense partisanship and divisive rhetoric, as undermining national unity and stability. His reported praise of adversarial leaders like Vladimir Putin over U.S. intelligence would especially have jarred Washington, who emphasized loyalty to the nation and independence from foreign influence.

Washington was known for refusing excessive power, famously stepping down after two terms to reinforce a precedent of limited executive authority. Trump’s approach, marked by assertions of strong executive power and a disregard for certain institutional norms, could likely strike Washington as authoritarian. Trump’s public statements, including his prolific use of falsehoods as documented by fact-checkers, would likely trouble Washington, who held honesty in high regard and believed a leader should embody moral virtue to inspire and uphold the nation's values.

In sum, Washington would likely have found Trump’s conduct in office at odds with the ideals he fought to instill in America’s early government—principles intended to foster a fair, humble, and principled democratic system.

"The Paradox of Tolerance"

Right-wing authoritarian leaders celebrated Trump's win. That SHOULD give everyone pause, not celebration here. Ben Franklin would be throwing a FIT:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

America is like the Ferrari of world democracies—powerful and complex, but under someone like Trump, whose lack of focus or understanding, impulsiveness, and emotional decisions could derail long-term success, it risks being ruined when it could thrive with the right leadership.

I then asked:
What action would Washington have taken if Trump were say, the 2nd/3rd President?

ChatGPT said:

If Trump had been the second president, following directly in George Washington's footsteps, it’s likely that Washington would have taken firm and immediate action to protect the young republic from any perceived threats to its stability, integrity, and foundational principles.

1. Public Denouncement and Cautionary Warnings: Washington would almost certainly have publicly condemned any actions that he believed threatened the republic, just as he did in his farewell address, where he warned of factionalism, foreign alliances, and the corruption of democratic principles. He might have delivered a formal address or written an open letter urging the nation to reject any authoritarian tendencies or disregard for truth and the law.

2. Private Advice and Guidance: Washington valued diplomacy and caution, so he might initially have tried to privately advise Trump, as he did with some political contemporaries. Given Washington’s belief in a moral and principled presidency, he would likely have counseled Trump on the importance of humility, unity, and honesty. If Trump ignored this advice, Washington’s approach could quickly become more direct and public.

3. Support for Institutional Checks and Balances: Washington had immense respect for the Constitution and the separation of powers. He might have advocated strongly for Congress and the judiciary to exercise their powers fully to check Trump’s actions if he perceived them as dangerous or autocratic. Washington believed in the rule of law and the importance of each branch of government acting independently to safeguard the nation. This could include encouraging Congress to investigate any misconduct, hold Trump accountable for any abuses of power, or even consider impeachment if serious violations occurred.

4. Active Role in Political Organization: Though he personally disliked political parties, if Washington saw Trump’s actions as fundamentally threatening, he may have even reluctantly endorsed the organization of a political movement or faction aimed at protecting the Constitution and the values he held dear. While distasteful to him, this step could be seen as necessary to ensure the survival of the nation’s democratic institutions.

5. Appeal to the Public’s Sense of Duty: Washington deeply trusted the wisdom and patriotism of the American people, often urging them to prioritize national interests over personal loyalties. He would likely make a powerful public appeal to Americans, urging them to remain vigilant and uphold the principles of honesty, unity, and democracy in the face of any leadership that threatened these values.

In essence, Washington would likely feel morally obligated to do everything in his power to protect the integrity of the office he once held, using his reputation and influence to rally Americans and their leaders against any attempts to undermine the republic.

I asked:
If Trump continued his presidency into an autocracy and refused to ever step down what might Washington have done?

ChatGPT said:

If Trump had continued his presidency in defiance of democratic norms, even refusing to step down or attempting to establish an autocratic rule, George Washington would almost certainly have viewed this as a severe betrayal of everything he and the founders worked to create. Given Washington’s commitment to safeguarding the republic against any semblance of tyranny, he would likely have taken decisive action.

1. Mobilizing the Armed Forces: As a former general, Washington understood the importance of military loyalty to the Constitution rather than any one leader. If Trump attempted to use military power to retain control, Washington might have rallied patriotic military leaders to uphold the Constitution and refuse unlawful orders. Washington’s personal influence and legacy would likely inspire high-ranking officers and soldiers to resist any autocratic power grab.

2. Supporting Congressional Action and Impeachment: Washington respected the balance of powers established by the Constitution, which included Congress's authority to impeach and remove a president. He would likely encourage Congress to act swiftly and decisively, including impeachment and, if necessary, removal by force. Washington’s support of such actions would add moral weight and legitimacy, galvanizing lawmakers to act against Trump’s autocratic intentions.

3. Encouraging State Action and Unity: Washington believed in a union of states, and if Trump were attempting to maintain power unlawfully, Washington might appeal to governors and state leaders to uphold the Constitution. He could urge states to resist any unlawful federal directives, leveraging their local authority to ensure that the rule of law, rather than one man’s will, governed the land. In this scenario, Washington would likely champion states as protectors of democracy against autocratic overreach.

4. Calling Upon the American People: Washington trusted the American people’s sense of civic duty and moral judgment. He would likely call upon citizens to peacefully but firmly resist any attempts at autocracy, uniting them under the values of liberty, justice, and self-governance. He could encourage widespread, nonviolent protests and civil disobedience as a demonstration of the public’s rejection of tyranny.

5. Forming a Coalition of Former Leaders and Founding Figures: Washington might also rally fellow founding figures, like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, to speak out collectively. This united front of respected leaders, all advocating for the preservation of democracy, would be a powerful message that Trump’s actions were an attack on the entire legacy of the American Revolution and the rights it guaranteed.

6. Open Rejection and Civil Disobedience if Necessary: Should all else fail, Washington could lead a national movement of civil disobedience, mobilizing Americans and institutions to reject Trump’s legitimacy as president. This might include legal petitions, organized resistance to Trump’s directives, or supporting initiatives to paralyze his administration until a lawful transfer of power was achieved.

In short, Washington would likely do everything in his power to rally Americans against autocracy. He would consider Trump’s refusal to step down as an existential threat to the republic and a complete abandonment of American ideals. Washington's actions would be motivated by a steadfast commitment to preserve the democratic system he helped create, even if it required unprecedented measures to remove an autocratic leader.

I asked:
What if Congress and SCOTUS then, were as they are now, supporting Trump?

ChatGPT said:

If Congress and the Supreme Court were to fully support Trump’s continued presidency, even as he attempted to establish an autocratic rule, George Washington would likely consider this an even greater crisis, as it would mean the essential safeguards of checks and balances had broken down.

Here’s how Washington might have responded in such a scenario:

1. Appealing Directly to the People and State Leaders: With federal institutions compromised, Washington would likely emphasize the importance of state governments and the American people in upholding democratic values. He might appeal directly to governors and state leaders to maintain the principles of democracy, urging them to resist any unlawful federal overreach.

2. Leveraging the Military’s Constitutional Loyalty: Washington was clear that the military should serve the nation, not any single individual. If a president were attempting to hold onto power unlawfully, Washington would likely remind military leaders of their oath to the Constitution rather than to the president. He might encourage military leaders to act independently and refuse any orders that contradicted the law.

3. Rallying Former Leaders and Influential Figures: Given his respect for unity and the nation’s founding principles, Washington would likely convene other prominent leaders, even retired figures, to condemn the erosion of democracy. This coalition could exert significant influence over public opinion and reinforce a collective commitment to the rule of law.

4. Promoting National Civil Resistance: Washington might endorse widespread civil resistance, encouraging citizens to demonstrate peacefully but resolutely for the preservation of democracy. He would likely view civil action as a critical means to defend democratic values without resorting to violence, uniting the populace against autocracy.

5. Documenting and Defending Democratic Ideals: Washington would likely take steps to ensure that, if an autocratic regime took hold, the ideals of democracy would survive to inspire future generations. He might work to preserve democratic principles through written appeals and public statements, hoping to rekindle the ideals of liberty and self-governance in future resistance efforts.

Washington’s commitment to the integrity of the young republic was paramount, and he would view an unchecked autocracy as a dire threat. In such a scenario, he would likely use his reputation, influence, and moral authority to rally every 


available resource, from state leaders to citizens, in defense of the democracy he helped create.

I asked:
Would this lead to a coup?

ChatGPT said:

In this hypothetical scenario, George Washington’s actions, combined with widespread public resistance and the support of state governments or the military, could indeed lead to what might resemble a counter-coup or an uprising aimed at restoring constitutional order. However, Washington would likely avoid advocating any outright "coup" in the sense of a violent overthrow, as he was fundamentally committed to lawful governance and wary of armed rebellion after leading the country through the Revolutionary War.

Still, certain actions could escalate in a way that could resemble a power struggle to restore democracy:

1. Military Refusal to Follow Autocratic Orders: If the military leaders were to side with Washington, this refusal to follow autocratic orders might effectively isolate the autocratic leader, creating conditions where a peaceful or forceful resignation could occur. Washington would likely emphasize constitutional duty rather than encouraging military aggression, hoping that simply withholding military support would pressure the leader to step down.

2. Widespread Civil Disobedience: Washington might encourage a form of peaceful "coup" through massive, coordinated civil disobedience, effectively shutting down the government’s ability to function under autocratic rule. If enough of the population and state governments refused to recognize the authority of a self-appointed autocrat, the resulting paralysis could eventually force a resignation or restoration of democratic processes without armed conflict.

3. State-Level Resistance and Nullification: Washington would likely urge state governments to act independently to protect their citizens' rights, essentially forming a coalition of states that function as a counter-government until constitutional order could be restored. This type of state-led resistance, backed by Washington’s influence, could prompt a crisis that ends in the removal of the autocratic leader, either through resignation or a return to elections.

4. Ultimate Use of Force if Necessary: Though Washington would prioritize peaceful means, he might eventually endorse the use of limited force if no other option remained to restore constitutional governance. This would likely be a last resort, pursued only if all other methods had failed and the only way to protect democracy was through direct intervention.

In essence, Washington’s leadership could catalyze a broad-based, peaceful resistance that might resemble a coup in terms of its outcome—a change in leadership—but his guiding principle would be to restore constitutional governance, not to impose power by force. The emphasis on civic duty and lawful governance would make this an effort to preserve the republic, aiming to avoid the chaos and long-term instability that violent coups typically bring.

Well. There it is. It's not a time of giving up. But of bringing together. Of fighting for what we are and should be, against all that is brought to bear against us in attempting to make us into what we aren't and shouldn't be.

I wish us all well.

By the way...

What Trump did the other day in mimicking fellatio with his mic on stage at a rally was not original for a questionable national leader.

 

Another autocrat in the Philippines, Pres. Rodrigo Duterte made headlines for such an incident in 2018.

During August of that year in an incident in Tuguegarao, fmr Pres Duterte had placed the microphone between his legs mimicking the act of oral sex. This behavior was widely criticized for its vulgarity & inappropriate nature, especially coming from a sitting head of state.

The act was widely criticized for its inappropriate & disrespectful nature, esp. given Duterte's position as a head of state. It was seen as part of his often controversial & outspoken/vulgar style, which frequently included offensive jokes & remarks, particularly about women.

Duterte, known for his irreverent, blunt, & at times misogynistic behavior, often faced backlash for his comments and actions, though he remained a popular figure among certain segments of the Philippine population. His actions during this event drew condemnation both domestically & internationally for their crudeness & lack of decorum.

In 2021, Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the Rome Statute, which is the founding treaty of the ICC, in an effort to shield himself from an investigation into his administration's human rights abuses.

Lot's more to come from Trump, however. No matter how disgusting we think it is. Because it's all about him now.