As public support for Trump continues to wane, his insider ventures in cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence, and drones appear to be suffering significant declines.
It’s exciting to bet on a perceived winner and enjoy the rewards, but when that individual’s popularity plunges, the prospects for those bets can quickly vanish.
Insight from Glickman and Johnson
The New York Review of Books has published a thought-provoking discussion titled “Runaway Short-Termism,” with a subtitle that asks, “How has the Trump administration deviated from a century of American political economy?” This piece offers valuable context for examining Trump’s insider deals and their broader implications.
This exploration originates from an earlier article by Susannah Glickman titled “The War Over Defense Tech,” focusing on figures like Palantir and Anduril, businesses associated with Peter Thiel, and their perceived threat to the foundations of U.S. industrial policy.
Additionally, Nic Johnson contributes insights related to Trump’s tariff-driven trade wars in his April article. Glickman responds to Johnson’s examination of Trump’s administration taking direct ownership stakes in private companies, highlighting a key individual and the overarching phenomena surrounding Trump insider deals.
These one-off equity arrangements appear distinctive—not merely because Deputy Secretary of Defense Steve Feinberg, formerly of Cerberus Capital Management, has been staffing the Pentagon with personnel from private equity and other business networks, but also due to the fact that the deals themselves are financially structured in ways reminiscent of private equity practices. The concept is to take a stake, then enact governance or reform strategies aiming for short-term profit at the expense of long-term viability.
Rather than reindustrializing specific sectors, these arrangements seem primarily focused on establishing networks of private patronage.
Johnson underscores a critical aspect of these Trump insider deals while identifying another key player:
Trump and his advisors appear frustrated by the limited flexibility granted to the executive by the Constitution. However, their preferred macroeconomic applications of executive power are diminishing the resources inherited from military Keynesianism’s legacy. In the mid-20th century, we established global military bases and solidified the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency—now Trump aims to weaponize this for resource extraction from other nations. Significant examples include recent “prosperity deals” struck with Japan and South Korea, where each nation pledged to invest hundreds of billions in the U.S. The funds from Japan, for instance, will flow through the “Investment Accelerator,” devised by U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick. Essentially, Trump gains the power to direct this fund into specific investments while retaining 90% of the profits.
This certainly seems like an advantageous situation for those involved. Next, let’s delve into the individuals mentioned above and other key players engaged in Trump insider deals.
Crypto Ventures of the Trump Brothers Hit Hard
We begin by examining the Trump insider deals tied closely to home, specifically those involving his sons, Don Jr. and Eric, in the cryptocurrency sector.
The Trump brothers reportedly amassed $5 billion at one point, as discussed in my previous coverage from September. However, recent developments bode poorly for their fortunes.
According to Bloomberg, “Trump Family Assets Are Outpacing Crypto’s Crash.”
As of Tuesday morning, shares of American Bitcoin Corp. had plummeted over 50% within just 25 minutes of trading. Various Trump family-affiliated projects have also faced significant losses, including World Liberty Financial’s WLFI token dropping by 51% and Alt5 Sigma’s shares plunging approximately 75%. The Trump family’s total losses in crypto ventures since October have exceeded $1 billion, severely impacting retail investors who bought in at peak valuations. American Bitcoin became emblematic of the broader crypto market collapse of late 2025 and illustrated the staggering setbacks for several Trump family-promoted digital currency projects. While general crypto markets have declined roughly 25%—notably Bitcoin—Trump-associated projects have plummeted by even steeper margins. What once seemed like a ‘Trump premium’ has shifted into a significant ‘Trump drag,’ eroding the confidence propping up crypto assets and, by extension, diminishing trust in the president himself.
It’s curious how these scenarios unfold, especially considering this president and his family’s tendency to operate in the shadows:
The challenges have extended beyond ordinary market fluctuations. American Bitcoin is currently contending with reports that its mining equipment—sourced from a Chinese manufacturer—has been flagged as a security risk to the U.S. Meanwhile, Alt5 Sigma has lost several executives following the revelation that one of its subsidiaries was under criminal investigation in Rwanda.
Just like the old saying warns: engage with disreputable ventures, and you might bear the consequences. I will also check on the Trump Brothers’ drone venture, Unusual Machines, which I covered in October. Shareholders have recently been informed that the company has reported its first profitable quarter, but will this encourage The Motley Fool to reconsider its “sell” rating? Other market analysts exhibit increased optimism regarding the small drone manufacturer benefitting from Trump insider deals.
Bringing drones back into the conversation, it’s time to revisit previous discussions about Trump insider dealings involving Palmer Luckey, CEO of drone-manufacturer Anduril.
Challenges for Palmer Luckey’s Drones
In the case of Luckey, which is often tied to controversy, a picture indeed conveys multitudes, even if it’s just a headline concerning his company’s products:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) December 3, 2025
Key takeaways from the article include:
In California, a mechanical malfunction damaged the engine of Anduril’s unmanned jet fighter, Fury, during a summer ground test just before a crucial first flight for the Air Force. In August, a test involving its Anvil counter-drone system sparked a 22-acre fire in Oregon. Additionally, challenges arose in summer exercises with unmanned vessels off California’s coast when Anduril’s Lattice software struggled with vessel command and control.
Anduril’s limited battlefield experience—in Ukraine—has also been tarnished by issues, including susceptibility to enemy jamming. Reports from former employees indicate that Ukrainian soldiers faced significant challenges with their Altius loitering drones, experiencing crashes and target failures, leading to their cessation of use as of 2024.
For skeptics of Palmer Luckey, the article emphasizes that phrases like “(Anduril software product) Lattice has fallen far short of servicemembers’ expectations,” “Anduril’s Anvil counter-drone system crashed and caused a 22-acre fire,” and “Anduril is less prepared institutionally” create a vivid critique.
However, Palmer Luckey is relatively minor compared to the Trump administration’s designated “White House AI and crypto czar,” David Sacks, who has also faced negative media scrutiny.
Media Scrutiny of Sacks and the Silicon Valley Response
As a leading American newspaper, The New York Times plays a significant role in shaping the media narrative. Their November 30 article, titled “Silicon Valley’s Man in the White House Is Benefiting Himself and His Friends,” generated substantial responses.
Key points raised about Sacks’ tenure in the White House and the benefits for him and his associates through Trump insider deals include:
Mr. Sacks has provided astonishing White House access to his tech industry peers and advocated for the removal of government barriers impacting A.I. firms, setting the stage for giants like Nvidia to potentially gain up to $200 billion in new sales.
Mr. Sacks has recommended A.I. policies that sometimes contradicted national security advice, raising concerns among some White House colleagues.
With 708 tech investments, including at least 449 ties to A.I. companies that could be directly or indirectly bolstered by his policies, Mr. Sacks seems positioned for personal gains. His public filings categorize 438 of his tech investments as either software or hardware firms, even when they market themselves as A.I. enterprises.
By leveraging his government role, Mr. Sacks has elevated the visibility of his weekly podcast, “All-In,” expanding its audience.
A notable incident highlighting Mr. Sacks’s ethical complexities is the July A.I. summit, initially slated to be linked with his podcast. “All-In” suggested that sponsors pay $1 million for access to a private reception featuring President Trump and A.I. innovators.
Sacks responded on X.com with a tweet titled “INSIDE NYT’S HOAX FACTORY.” Influential figures in Silicon Valley followed with support, indicating a complex reaction to the Times’ assertions. Gizmodo responded with their article titled “Silicon Valley Ghouls Melt Down Over Report on David Sacks Business Conflicts.” Therefore, opinions on this narrative remain divisive.
Additionally, there’s another group of Trump insiders worthy of mention, as they have repeatedly evaded capture in earlier discussions.
Warnings About Feinberg at the Pentagon
Reading Susannah Glickman’s mention of Steve Feinberg as the Trump 2.0 embodiment of privatized government graft sent chills down my spine. It’s a topic I’ve repeatedly strived to cover.
Responsible Statecraft issued a warning in February regarding him:
Billionaire investor and Cerberus Capital Management CEO Stephen Feinberg’s potential rise to the Pentagon’s No. 2 position exemplifies the military-industrial complex’s revolving door. A significant player in military investment via Cerberus—with assets worth about $65 billion—Feinberg’s imminent DoD role presents considerable conflict of interest concerns. Notably, Cerberus has a controversial investment track record within the defense sector; under Feinberg’s ownership, it controlled national security contractor DynCorp, which faced criticism for training U.S.-backed forces in regions like Iraq and Afghanistan. Some Cerberus-affiliated companies have garnered notoriety for overpricing equipment for clients like the U.S. Marine Corps.
Feinberg appears to be fulfilling expectations as indicated by a Forbes headline, “‘The Adult In The Room’: This Billionaire Trump Appointee Actually Knows What He’s Doing.” Such praise may not resonate positively with the average reader.
Key excerpts include:
Steve Feinberg, recently appointed as Deputy Secretary of Defense, invested millions in Privoro—a company collaborating with the military on secure cell phone technology. His myriad defense-related interests offer insights into vital modern warfare topics such as drones, satellites, and artificial intelligence. Feinberg has established connections with ex-government officials, such as former Vice President George H.W. Bush and former acting CIA Director Barack Obama. Positioned to oversee the Pentagon’s operations while serving as the face of the organization, he is deeply knowledgeable about this domain.
The piece also elaborates on Feinberg’s financial background and connections:
Feinberg embarked on his career on Wall Street, intersecting with various sophisticated financiers, ultimately founding Cerberus in 1992. His journey has not been devoid of controversies; he has leveraged a distressed investment model, often referred to as “vulture capitalism.” His approach has raised eyebrows, particularly regarding allegations of conflicts of interest befitting his elevated profile.
In future discussions, we should aim to shine a brighter light on Mr. Feinberg’s activities.
Finally, let’s address another group of insiders who may have evaded scrutiny as we delve into the recent activities of Commerce Secretary, Lutnick, and his family.
The Lutnick Family’s Business Ventures
I have overlooked notable dealings involving Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and his family, and this lapse ends here.
A New York Times report from November 20 has drawn attention to the Lutnick family’s activities in Texas:
Kyle Lutnick, 29, part of the family’s real estate business, visited Amarillo, Texas, to tour a site with Fermi America’s head, Toby Neugebauer, who is developing a data center that will support the next generation of A.I. Lutnick’s firm was instrumental in raising capital for the center, generating millions in fees. One month later, Howard Lutnick was photographed socially engaging with Neugebauer at a White House event celebrating Fermi’s partnership with a South Korean company on the same project.
This sequence raises questions about conflicts of interest—son profiting from a project his father is endorsing in an official capacity. The NYT noted that such incidents have cropped up repeatedly since Trump appointed Howard Lutnick as Commerce Secretary, where he has been accused of leveraging American allies’ investments for industrial projects that benefit his family’s clients.
The NYT contextualizes the Lutnick family’s intersecting commercial interests and the office’s potential conflicts, stating, “never in modern U.S. history has the office intersected so deeply with the financial interests of a commerce secretary’s family.”
Since February, Kyle and his brother Brandon, 27, have been overseeing a network of companies led by their father, including investment firm Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., BGC Group, and Newmark Group, all of which intersect with their father’s government role. The duo maintains controlling stakes in companies that are involved in a wide array of sectors, from cryptocurrencies to data centers.
Concerns about the Lutnick family’s connections have not gone unnoticed; The Real Deal warned against nepotism and the appropriateness of individuals so young leading well-established firms:
Howard Lutnick stirred caution when he appointed his sons to key positions while publicly serving as Secretary of Commerce. Skeptics questioned what influence young adults could wield in a landscape populated by seasoned professionals.
It’s reassuring to realize that “Daddy Lutnick” remains an accessible resource for his sons—nobody wants those young entrepreneurs to mismanage their newfound wealth.
As recent special election results signal that Trump’s GOP may face steep challenges in the upcoming 2026 midterms, compounded by the ongoing contraction of the manufacturing sector, the escalating perception of the Ukraine war as a disaster, and Secretary Hegseth’s attempts to avoid censure, it appears unlikely that Team Trump will find a favorable turnaround any time soon.
This development poses significant challenges for those who have profited from Trump insider deals.
