Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and a plethora of other tech billionaires — collectively worth over half a trillion dollars — all stood in exclusive seats at Trump’s inauguration. A gathering of this magnitude would have been unthinkable in 2016. Back then, Musk called Trump’s nomination “an embarrassment,” while Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta (then Facebook) criticized the president due to his stance on immigration policy. Today, these tech moguls and their companies have each donated $1 million towards Trump’s inaugural fund, along with millions more in campaign donations.
This reversal isn’t just about avoiding conflict and being opportunistic — it’s grifting. Grifting, the art of using power and influence for self-enrichment, has become a defining characteristic of the new Trump presidency.
During the campaigning season, Trump signaled plans to implement a big deregulatory push if elected. By donating millions of dollars, these tech executives aim to secure deregulation, antitrust immunity, and lax oversight in exchange for their financial backing. Trump’s promise to cut “job-killing” regulation already enables his most powerful patrons to reap in massive rewards. When rules and regulations bend to wealth, ethics becomes a transactional formality.
Trump’s re-election was celebrated by the cryptocurrency community, as his administration promised a safer world for cryptocurrencies and even possible government support. This was a complete turn-around from previous statements Trump had made publicly about the legitimacy of the medium. Like many people, Trump criticized cryptocurrency for being a currency based on nothing and used for illicit transactions. Crypto regulation began during the Biden administration, signalling a positive outlook on consumer safety. This presidential cycle however, Trump positioned himself as a pro-crypto candidate for the people, after millions of dollars were donated to Trump’s campaigns by cryptocurrency leaders.
Jimmy Carter had to relinquish his reins on his peanut farms into a blind trust before he was inaugurated in 1977 as a precaution against conflict of interests or any other ethical concerns. Before Trump was inaugurated on the other hand, he launched a meme-coin, $TRUMP — an action even the crypto community cringed at — and promoted it to over 100 million viewers on Twitter. A meme-coin is a cryptocurrency that serves no real purpose: basically becoming a funnel for buyers of the coin into the pockets of the creators. In this case, Trump and his team hold 80% of the coin’s value. In a time when crypto scams from popular celebrities are on the rise, Trump’s meme-coin seems to be a blatant cash grab disguised as a method of showing your support.
If it’s difficult to imagine someone at such a high level of power would perform a crypto scam. However, Javier Milei, president of Argentina and close ally to Trump, recently found himself in similar crypto waters. After promoting cryptocurrency $LIBRA, the price surged until a wallet was traced to have liquidated over $100 million in the cryptocurrency. The price plummeted and thousands of investors were left in the negative. This was one of the largest crypto scams in the world, made by the man in the highest office in Argentina. Milei now faces impeachment and criminal cases in Argentinian courts, raising questions over the legality of Trump’s presidential meme-coin.
Social ethics are shaped more by example than by rules, and the example being set by this administration is deeply troubling.
Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Meta, propelled his company into becoming a big competitor in the AI field by investing hundreds of millions of dollars into training. Recently, Meta has come under fire after employees allegedly pirated over 80 terabytes of copyrighted books and scholarly articles illegally to train their AI learning model — a practice employees reportedly hid using personal devices to shield the company from liability.
Many AI companies are facing similar scrutiny or legal cases due to how they acquire texts used to train their AI learning models — typically without the approval of publishers or authors. This sets a harrowing precedent for the world of publishing and creation. When leaders treat laws as suggestions, corporations follow suit. Zuckerberg’s approach mirrors Trump’s meme-coin: both prioritize profit over principle.
Trump’s recent executive order to create a U.S. sovereign wealth fund becomes an extension of the absurdity seen throughout the grifting by private companies. Modeled after funds in resource-rich nations like Saudi Arabia and Norway, this initiative would allow the government to invest in publicly traded stocks, real estate and other assets.
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, established in 1996, has grown to a staggering $1.7 trillion by investing in global markets. However, Norway’s fund operates in a context of fiscal responsibility and surplus. The United States, on the other hand, is running a massive deficit. Creating a sovereign wealth fund in this context is less about economic growth and more about funneling taxpayer money into the pockets of Trump’s allies. An American sovereign wealth fund risks becoming a slush fund for insider deals. Companies friendly with the administration could be tacked onto the funds investment list, and see their valuations skyrocket, creating a dangerous cycle of corruption and nepotism .
This theme of corruption continues when looking at the recent actions of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). DOGE is an advisory commission led by Elon Musk, the richest man in the world. Musk’s companies have raked in over $13 billion in government contracts in the past five years, and his new position may allow him immense power to shape contracts, regulations and budgets to fill his pockets and disadvantage competitors.
Interpublic Group, an advertising agency, recently announced a $13 billion deal to merge with another agency a month after Trump’s election. Reports alleged that lawyers from X (formerly Twitter), the social media platform owned by Musk, signalled that if Interpublic doesn’t increase advertising spending on their platform the deal could be “torpedoed, or at least slowed down.” Given Musk’s powerful role in the administration, this is a worrying sign to the control the world’s most powerful man has over what goes on in the free market.
This blatant conflict of interest is emblematic of the administration’s broader disregard toward common ethics and professionalism. Trump recently kicked out the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, David Huitema — if that isn’t telling of his administration’s relationship with ethics, not much else is.
America faces a crisis — one of institutional decay — the world’s richest men are lining up to kiss Trump’s ring, from tech billionaires to crypto-bros, all for one end goal: profit off of the disestablishment of democratic norms. Social ethics will wither away as our leaders treat their power as a money printer, and every stolen book, mass meme-coin liquidation, national security threat and shady usage of taxpayer dollars normalizes that.
This isn’t about whether or not Trump’s allies will grow richer — they will — this is about what will remain of America when public service becomes private gain.
