Category: Corruption

Trump Awards $250M Venezuelan Oil Deal to Megadonor’s Company

The Trump administration awarded its first sale of Venezuelan crude oil to Vitol, the world’s largest independent oil trader, in a deal worth approximately $250 million. John Addison, a senior Vitol trader who secured the contract, donated $6 million to Trump-aligned political action committees during the 2024 election cycle, including $5 million to MAGA Inc in October 2024, according to donor records compiled by OpenSecrets.

Addison attended a White House meeting with Trump and oil industry executives days before the agreement was finalized, where he represented Vitol alongside Ben Marshall, the company’s U.S. head—making Vitol the only firm with two senior officials present. During the meeting, Addison told Trump that Vitol would work to secure the best possible price for Venezuelan oil sold by the United States, and Trump responded positively to the suggestion.

Vitol stated that Addison’s political donations were made in a personal capacity and unconnected to the company’s business dealings. The White House dismissed any ethical concerns through spokesperson Taylor Rogers, characterizing media scrutiny as a “tired attempt to distract” and claiming Trump acts in Americans’ best interests by brokering the Venezuelan oil deal following Nicolás Maduro’s arrest.

The administration plans to offload as much as 50 million barrels of Venezuelan crude oil under U.S. control and intends to dominate Venezuela’s oil industry “indefinitely” following Maduro’s capture. Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced that the United States sold Venezuelan crude at prices 30 percent higher than Maduro’s government achieved weeks earlier, when U.S. sanctions forced Venezuela to accept steep discounts.

The oil industry provided substantial campaign funding to Trump during 2024, with executives meeting at his Mar-a-Lago estate where Trump promised to roll back industry regulations in exchange for campaign support. The administration has stated it will require the “majority” of Venezuelan oil under U.S. control to be sold to American buyers.

(Source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hands-first-sale-of-swiped-oil-to-his-megadonors-company/?utm_campaign=owned_social&utm_sf_cserv_ref=37763684202&utm_sf_post_ref=652769681&via=FB_Page&utm_source=facebook_owned_tdb&source=TDB&utm_medium=socialflow&fbclid=IwdGRjcAPXz0lleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe1A44NIGq57DnlgVeDHvbqYAoiPvVSOswEJYZ_2sGfxW7MEd-6788ExLZ-Eg_aem_jmo-uG5R0vyCTrrsQvaYzQ)

Trump Pardons Puerto Rico Ex-Governor Vázquez in Campaign Finance Case

President Donald Trump intends to pardon former Puerto Rico Governor Wanda Vázquez, who pleaded guilty in August 2025 to a campaign finance violation involving acceptance of a promised campaign contribution from a foreign source that was never received. Vázquez was set for sentencing later in January, with federal prosecutors seeking one year in prison, though her attorneys argued the sentence violated a prior guilty plea agreement that had resulted in dismissal of bribery and fraud charges.

A White House official stated that Trump views the case as political prosecution, citing the timing of the investigation's initiation approximately ten days after Vázquez endorsed Trump in 2020. The official, speaking anonymously without authorization to disclose the pardon plan publicly, characterized the prosecution as retaliatory rather than justified. Vázquez is a Republican aligned with Puerto Rico's pro-statehood New Progressive Party.

According to authorities, Vázquez allegedly accepted a bribery offer from Venezuelan banker Julio Martín Herrera Velutini and former FBI agent Mark Rossini between December 2019 and June 2020 while serving as governor. In exchange, she demanded the resignation of Puerto Rico's financial institutions commissioner and appointed a new commissioner of Herrera's choosing, actions authorities documented as occurring after the alleged bribery agreement was made.

Pablo José Hernández, Puerto Rico's congressional representative and member of the opposition Popular Democratic Party, condemned the planned pardon, stating that "impunity protects and fosters corruption" and that the pardon undermines public integrity and faith in justice. Vázquez was the first former Puerto Rico governor to plead guilty to a federal crime and served as the territory's second female governor before losing her party's 2020 primary.

The pardon decision demonstrates Trump's use of executive clemency to benefit political allies, circumventing sentencing for federal prosecutors' recommended penalty. Vázquez's case involved foreign-sourced campaign funding and an abuse of gubernatorial authority to benefit a foreign banker, violations Trump's administration has now chosen to erase through presidential pardon rather than allow judicial process to conclude.

(Source: https://abc7.com/post/trump-pardon-ex-puerto-rico-governor-vzquez-campaign-finance-case-official-says/18417246/)

Trump Halts Federal Funding to States Harboring Sanctuary

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that beginning February 1, he will withhold federal funding from states that contain local governments limiting cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Trump made the declaration during a speech at the Detroit Economic Club, stating that sanctuary jurisdictions “protect criminals at the expense of American citizens” and that the administration would cease payments to “anybody that supports sanctuary cities.” When pressed by reporters on which funding programs would be affected, Trump declined specifics, saying only “You’ll see. It’ll be significant.”

This represents an expansion of Trump’s previous threats, which targeted sanctuary cities directly rather than entire states housing them. The Justice Department published a list identifying roughly three dozen states, cities, and counties as sanctuary jurisdictions—a list dominated by Democratic-controlled areas including California, Connecticut, New York, Boston, and Cook County, Illinois. No strict legal definition of “sanctuary city” exists, though the term generally refers to jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

Courts have blocked Trump’s funding cutoff attempts twice before. In 2017, during his first term, federal judges rejected similar efforts. Last year, a California-based federal judge struck down an executive order directing federal officials to withhold money from sanctuary jurisdictions, despite government arguments that it was premature to halt the plan when no concrete action had been taken. The administration has already begun targeting specific states through other agencies, with the Department of Health and Human Services halting childcare subsidies to five Democratic-led states over unspecified fraud allegations—a decision a court has placed on hold.

The Trump administration is simultaneously executing broader funding freezes across multiple programs. The Justice Department’s sanctuary cities working group lost all members amid Trump pressure, and the Department of Agriculture has threatened to reduce administrative funds for states refusing to provide Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program data. Minnesota faces particularly aggressive action, including a threat to withhold $515 million quarterly—equivalent to one-fourth of federal Medicaid funding—for fourteen programs labeled “high risk” after the state rejected the administration’s corrective action plan.

Border Patrol operations continue under Trump’s aggressive immigration policies, with the administration weaponizing federal agencies to coerce compliance from state and local governments. State officials are mounting legal challenges to these actions, though the cumulative effect of simultaneous funding threats across healthcare, nutrition assistance, and childcare programs creates immediate pressure on Democratic-controlled jurisdictions.

(Source: https://abc7.com/post/trump-threatens-halt-federal-money-next-month-sanctuary-cities-states/18398676/)

Marco Rubio Slides Private Note to Donald Trump During Televised Press Conference. Trump Looks Down and Reads It Aloud

During a White House press conference on January 9, 2026, President Donald Trump read aloud a private handwritten note from Secretary of State Marco Rubio in front of oil and gas executives, exposing Rubio’s internal directive. The note instructed Trump to “go back to Chevron” to discuss company matters, revealing Rubio’s attempt to manage Trump’s attention during the meeting.

Trump announced the note’s existence to the room before reading it verbatim, causing visible discomfort for Rubio, who appeared to regret the public exposure of his written instruction. Vice President JD Vance was visibly amused by the incident, laughing as Rubio smiled uncomfortably. Trump then patted Rubio on the back and thanked him, apparently unaware of the breach of confidentiality or its implications.

This incident is not Trump’s first encounter with Rubio’s written directives. In October 2025, photographers captured another note in which Rubio instructed Trump to “approve” a Truth Social post announcing an Israel-Hamas peace agreement, suggesting Trump did not draft the statement himself. Trump acknowledged the note publicly at that meeting as well, stating he was “very well represented” by Rubio.

The pattern of Trump publicly disclosing private notes from his Secretary of State demonstrates a lack of operational discipline and respect for confidential communication channels. Rubio’s repeated need to issue written instructions suggests the President requires constant guidance on procedural matters and media strategy.

(Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/marco-rubio-slides-private-note-230443426.html)

‘His dementia is acting up’: Internet skewers Trump for bizarre new ‘elections’ claim – Raw Story

During a Fox News interview Thursday night, Trump claimed Venezuela “wouldn’t know how to have an election,” despite the country conducting elections as recently as last year. When asked by Sean Hannity whether Venezuela would hold free and fair elections, Trump pivoted to stating his administration would control Venezuelan oil infrastructure and “make a lot of money” from the operation.

Social media users and political observers immediately flagged the statement as disconnected from reality. Veteran Frank C stated Trump’s remark indicated cognitive decline, while activist Matthew J Shochat pointed out that Venezuela held an election last year and that Trump’s preferred replacement leader was involved in that election’s irregularities. Former foreign correspondent Roland Ley characterized Trump’s position as “US colonization” rather than liberation.

Political analyst WarMonitor summarized Trump’s stated priorities as replacing one dictatorship with another, with Trump personally running the country. Former Navy wife Rebecca Clester directly challenged Trump’s claim, asking what “closet” he had been living in and highlighting that his explicit focus remains extracting Venezuelan oil rather than establishing democratic governance.

The remarks underscore Trump’s stated intention to personally control Venezuelan oil revenues following the U.S. invasion of Venezuela. Trump has publicly outlined plans to sell 30 to 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil at market rates under his personal oversight, while also proposing that U.S. taxpayers reimburse oil companies for Venezuelan infrastructure reconstruction.

Trump’s election claim contradicts documented Venezuelan electoral processes and reflects his administration’s framing of military intervention as resource extraction rather than democratic restoration.

(Source: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-venezuela-2674863947/)

UNFCCC: Trump moves to pull US out of bedrock global climate treaty, becoming first country to do so

President Trump’s administration announced the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a foundational treaty that Congress ratified in 1992 under President George H.W. Bush. If executed, this action would make the United States the first country to exit the agreement, which nearly every nation globally has joined. The UNFCCC established the framework for international climate negotiations, including the 1995 Kyoto Protocol and the 2015 Paris Agreement, and requires participating nations to submit annual climate pollution inventories—a requirement the Trump administration already skipped this year.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the withdrawal by stating the administration will not continue “expending resources, diplomatic capital, and the legitimizing weight of our participation in institutions that are irrelevant to or in conflict with our interests.” The move is part of a broader executive order directing withdrawal from 66 international organizations deemed to no longer serve American interests, including 31 UN entities such as UN Water, UN Oceans, UN Population Fund, and the UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women.

Former Secretary of State and US climate envoy John Kerry condemned the decision as “a gift to China and a get out of jail free card to countries and polluters who want to avoid responsibility.” The withdrawal follows Trump’s second pullout from the Paris Agreement on his first day in office, demonstrating a pattern of rejecting climate commitments. The Trump administration also moved to withdraw from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a Nobel Prize-winning scientific body that publishes global warming assessments, potentially restricting federal scientists’ participation in IPCC reports.

The legality of Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the UNFCCC remains uncertain, as the Senate ratified the treaty in 1992, creating ambiguity over whether presidential authority extends to exiting congressionally approved agreements without legislative consent. Republican majorities in Congress would likely support the withdrawal if required to formally approve it. Withdrawal would exclude the United States from participating in subsequent annual UN climate summits and jeopardize the country’s ability to rejoin the Paris Agreement, which operates under UNFCCC authority.

The withdrawal threatens to destabilize international climate cooperation and may prompt other nations to reconsider their own UNFCCC commitments, undermining global progress on climate action. A US withdrawal would isolate America from allied nations for whom climate action is a priority and signals abandonment of decades-long international environmental partnerships at a critical moment for addressing climate change.

(Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/07/climate/trump-withdrawal-climate-treaty-international-agreements)

Trump Says Venezuela Oil ‘Money Will Be Controlled by Me’

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he would personally control revenues from Venezuelan oil sales following the U.S. invasion of Venezuela on Saturday, which resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. In a Truth Social post, Trump stated he would oversee the sale of 30 to 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil at market price, declaring “that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America.” Trump instructed Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute the plan immediately, with oil to be transported by storage ships to U.S. unloading docks.

Trump explicitly tied the military invasion to resource extraction and corporate profit, stating the day after the operation that the administration’s priority was to “fix up the oil” and “have total access” to Venezuela’s resources. He indicated that oil companies had been alerted to his plans prior to the invasion, saying “They want to go in and they’re going to do a great job for the people of Venezuela and they’re going to represent us.” Trump acknowledged that major oil company investments would be required to rebuild Venezuelan infrastructure, positioning private corporations as the primary beneficiaries of military intervention. Trump has separately indicated that U.S. taxpayers may reimburse oil companies for reconstruction costs.

The announcement directly contradicts Trump’s stated rationale for the invasion—that military action was undertaken to benefit the Venezuelan people—by placing personal control of oil revenues in presidential hands rather than under Venezuelan governance or international oversight. Oil stocks surged immediately following Trump’s declaration that his administration would “run” Venezuela for the foreseeable future, signaling market confidence in corporate access to Venezuelan resources.

The Trump administration has simultaneously expanded U.S. military presence across Latin America and the Caribbean through security agreements, enabling armed operations under the pretext of counternarcotics efforts while simultaneously conducting resource extraction operations.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-says-hes-selling-venezuelas-oil-and-that-the-money-will-be-controlled-by-me/)

Trump wants US taxpayers to reimburse oil firm donors for Venezuela investment

President Donald Trump stated that US taxpayers could reimburse oil companies for reconstructing Venezuelan infrastructure to extract and export oil following the ouster of Nicolás Maduro. Trump declared that “a tremendous amount of money” would be required and suggested his government would compensate energy firms through direct reimbursement or revenue sharing, explicitly linking military intervention to corporate profit.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright is scheduled to meet executives from Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and ExxonMobil at a Goldman Sachs conference in Miami this week to discuss increasing Venezuelan oil production. These meetings represent the administration’s strategy to restore US oil company operations in Venezuela after nearly two decades of government control of the industry, contradicting Trump’s earlier claims that he had already held talks with “all” major US oil companies regarding Maduro’s removal.

Trump acknowledged no prior briefing of oil companies before military action but claimed companies were aware of discussions about intervention. When asked if he personally contacted top executives, Trump stated it was “too soon” to confirm direct conversations, saying “I speak to everybody,” despite Reuters reporting that no representatives from the three major firms had engaged with the White House on Venezuela operations before or after Maduro’s seizure.

Trump’s blockade announcement of Venezuelan oil tankers exposed the operation’s economic objectives beyond stated anti-drug rationales. Venezuela’s crude production has collapsed to approximately 1.1 million barrels daily from 3.5 million in 1999 due to underinvestment and sanctions, and industry analysts warn that reconstruction requires years of work and billions in investment amid political uncertainty and unclear US policy direction.

Stock markets responded immediately to Trump’s Venezuela initiative, with the S&P 500 energy index reaching its highest level since March 2025 on Monday, as ExxonMobil gained 2.2% and Chevron jumped 5.1%. The White House claimed US oil companies were “ready and willing” to make large investments to rebuild Venezuelan oil infrastructure, while the targeted companies declined to comment on their involvement or commitment to Trump’s stated plans.

(Source: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/06/trump-us-taxpayers-oil-firms-venezuela-investment?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=fb_us&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwdGRleAPKh-pleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe_-yezUeRoVFdugcD1nvSw5XtSl1m5n_0dygqy2cYQq8J1z-O6-KB_zPL_K4_aem_UlldULbmcvRIeiE8DDl0jg#Echobox=1767698755)

‘They Stole $18 BILLION Dollars!’ Trump Fetes NYE Bash With Rant About Fraud

During a New Year’s Eve gathering at Mar-a-Lago on December 31, 2025, President Donald Trump delivered an unsubstantiated rant alleging $18 billion in fraud across Democratic-led states, claiming the funds were “stolen” and vowing his administration would “get that money back.” Trump made sweeping accusations against Minnesota, California, Illinois, and New York without presenting evidence, describing the alleged misconduct as “a giant scam” and framing recovery of purported stolen funds as grounds for optimism entering the new year.

Trump’s remarks followed the Department of Health and Human Services’ announcement that it would freeze federal child care funding nationwide pending state verification of legitimate spending, with Minnesota facing a complete halt to child care payments. The administration’s scrutiny of Minnesota was directly prompted by influencer Nick Shirley, whose viral video accused the state of operating empty day-care centers funded by taxpayer dollars, with claims of $110 million in fraudulent expenditures under Governor Tim Walz’s administration.

Deputy HHS Secretary Jim O’Neill explicitly cited Shirley’s video investigation in announcing the funding freeze, stating he had “identified the individuals” referenced in the material and demanding a comprehensive audit from Governor Walz. Shirley’s video, which documented visits to child-care facilities on weekdays where he alleged they were nonoperational, received endorsements from Vice President JD Vance and Elon Musk, amplifying its influence on the administration’s policy response.

Governor Walz responded by accusing Trump of weaponizing the fraud investigation for political purposes, characterizing the freeze as part of a deliberate strategy to defund programs benefiting Minnesota residents. Walz stated his administration had already spent years investigating fraudsters and that Trump was “politicizing the issue” to advance an agenda against Democratic-led states, despite acknowledging that fraud in child-care systems is a legitimate concern.

Trump’s unsubstantiated $18 billion fraud claim and the resulting federal funding freeze demonstrate the administration’s pattern of using executive power to target Democratic states based on viral social media content rather than verified evidence, while simultaneously Trump himself has pardoned individuals convicted of fraud when they maintained access to his circle.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/they-stole-18-billion-trump-treats-mar-a-lago-nye-revelers-to-wild-rant-about-minnesota-fraud/)

Trump Tells Jared Polis and Colorado ‘RINO’ to ‘Rot in Hell’

President Trump attacked Colorado Governor Jared Polis and a Republican district attorney in a December 31st Truth Social post, calling Polis a “scumbag” and the DA “disgusting” while telling both to “rot in Hell.” Trump’s outburst targeted officials responsible for prosecuting former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, who is serving nine years in prison for seven state-level charges related to 2020 election interference, including providing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s associate unauthorized access to county election software.

Trump falsely claimed earlier in December that he had pardoned Peters, stating she was being “relentlessly” targeted for “demanding honest elections.” However, Trump lacks authority to pardon individuals convicted of state-level crimes; Peters’ conviction and imprisonment remain valid regardless of any presidential pardon claim. Trump characterized her prosecution as evidence that Democrats prosecute election-security advocates while ignoring their own alleged mail-in ballot fraud, assertions contradicted by documented fact patterns showing no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Colorado or nationally.

Trump previously weaponized disaster aid to Colorado, denying federal assistance following wildfires and flooding while Governor Polis governed the state. This pattern of targeting Colorado’s Democratic leadership demonstrates Trump’s use of presidential authority to punish political opponents, further illustrating the authoritarian consolidation of power through weaponized governance.

Trump’s attack on a fellow Republican official as a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only) reflects his ongoing purge of party members who do not demonstrate absolute loyalty to him personally. His refusal to accept Peters’ lawful conviction—despite her documented actions undermining election integrity through unauthorized system access—prioritizes Trump’s electoral narrative over institutional accountability and rule of law.

The Truth Social post exemplifies Trump’s pattern of attacking state officials and judicial processes when outcomes conflict with his interests, framing legitimate prosecutions as political persecution while simultaneously attempting to overturn state convictions through false pardon claims that carry no legal weight.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-tells-scumbag-governor-and-disgusting-rino-to-rot-in-hell/)

1 2 3 … 38