SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington
Dems Introduce Bill to 'Stop Apparent Bribery Involving Trump Ballroom Donations'
"Billionaire companies are bankrolling Trump’s ballroom and it stinks of bribery," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Nov 18, 2025
Amid concerns over President Donald Trump's White House ballroom, a pair of Democratic US lawmakers on Tuesday introduced legislation "to root out apparent bribery and corruption" involving the $300 million project.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) introduced the Stop Ballroom Bribery Act, described by Warren's office as "the first piece of legislation addressing the ballroom that would impose donation restrictions."
“Billionaires and giant corporations with business in front of this administration are lining up to dump millions into Trump’s new ballroom—and Trump is showing them where to sign on the dotted line," Warren said in a statement. "Americans shouldn’t have to wonder whether President Trump is building a ballroom to facilitate a pay-to-play scheme for political favors. My new bill will put an end to what looks like bribery in plain sight."
Billionaire companies are bankrolling Trump’s ballroom and it stinks of bribery.That’s why @robertgarcia.house.gov and I introduced a bill to crack down on this potential corruption.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) November 18, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Garcia said: "Donald Trump is raising hundreds of millions of dollars to build himself a White House ballroom at a time when millions of American families can barely make ends meet. It's outrageous that the White House won’t reveal who’s bankrolling Trump’s pet project, and that the people’s house could be funded by shady figures, corrupt money, and bad actors."
"This bill will ban contributions from anyone with a conflict of interest, prevent bribery, and ensure we can hold any administration accountable for blatant corruption," he added.
Noting that many of the "wealthy individuals, corporations, and organizations" funding the ballroom "need something from the Trump administration," Warren's office flagged "serious concerns of quid-pro-quo arrangements and possible bribery."
"Ethics experts have argued that the apparent pay-to-play relationship between Trump and business leaders oversteps the norms of presidential behavior and could erode Americans’ trust in government," the senator's office added.
As Warren's office noted:
Key ballroom donors currently have business interests in front of the Trump administration. For example, Google, which recently donated $22 million to settle President Trump’s censorship lawsuit against YouTube, will benefit if Trump’s [Department of Justice] decides not to appeal a recent judicial ruling in a relevant antitrust case. Meanwhile, Union Pacific Railroad is seeking federal approval of a lucrative merger and Palantir is working to get more federal contracts.
The White House has refused to be fully transparent, publishing only a noncomprehensive donor list missing multiple key donors and offering donors anonymity. Donations for projects like the ballroom are often channeled through the National Park Service and philanthropic partners; nonprofits with formal ties to property used by the president and [Vice President JD Vance] raise unique conflict-of-interest risks when fundraising from individuals and corporations with interests in front of the federal government.
The Stop Ballroom Bribery Act would:
- Impose pre-donation restrictions, including banning contributions from entities and individuals that present a conflict of interest, make it clear that donations cannot be conditioned on receipt of benefits from the federal government, require congressional approval for foreign donations, and proscribe the president and other senior officials and their families from taking donations;
- Impose post-donation restrictions, including banning the display of donors’ names and logos, enact a two-year cooling-off period before a donor to a covered project can lobby the federal government, and prohibit conversion of leftover donated funds to anyone’s personal use or to benefit the president and other senior officials and their families;
- Require transparency, including the disclosure of any meetings with senior federal officials or their relatives within a year of the donation, and mandate National Park Service publication of all donations to covered projects and ban anonymous donations; and
- Enable enforcement, judicial review, and the pursuit of civil and criminal penalties for violators.
"President Trump's decision to unilaterally destroy the East Wing of the White House to build a ballroom financed by wealthy individuals and corporations not only ignores our country's laws but raises serious ethical concerns—namely, whether individuals and corporations funded this project in the hopes of buying access and influence," said Debra Perlin, vice president for policy at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which supports the legislation.
Virginia Canter, chief counsel and director for ethics and anticorruption at Democracy Defenders Action—another backer of the bill—said that "over the past year, President Trump has raised millions of dollars for vanity projects at the White House—like paving over the Rose Garden and demolishing the beloved East Wing."
"These funds have come from private donors without meaningful transparency or accountability,” Canter added. “The highest office in the land should never be for sale, nor should it ever appear to be."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Pay for Access': Critics Level Corruption Charges at Trump Over White House Ballroom Dinner
Trump's "betrayal of Americans is brazen" said a DNC spokesperson.
Oct 16, 2025
President Donald Trump on Wednesday evening held an event at the White House to thank some of America's richest corporations for financing his planned $250 million ballroom—an event that garnered the latest accusations of corruption against a president who has also raked in billions of dollars in profits in the cryptocurrency market since he took office.
As reported by The Washington Post, Trump "treated donors from Silicon Valley, Wall Street and the defense sector to a candlelit dinner in the East Room on Wednesday as a thank-you, praising them for quickly heeding his call for support and noting some offered as much as $25 million."
Trump also told the guests in attendance that they would likely be inviting to the ballroom's grand opening.
According to a report from The Wall Street Journal, several of the most powerful corporations in the US sent representatives to attend the dinner, including Apple, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Palantir. Others expected to attend were Stephen Schwarzman, founder of investment firm Blackstone, as well as prominent cryptocurrency investors Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss.
The White House dinner drew immediate criticism from the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which labeled it a "cash-for-access" event that took place as Americans across the country are struggling to afford basic necessities such as groceries and healthcare, and as the Republican Party has refused to negotiate with Democrats on extending healthcare subsidies in exchange for ending the government shutdown.
"This administration’s slogan should be ‘Let them eat cake,'" said Rosemary Boeglin, communications director for the DNC. "Trump is busy wining and dining with his rich friends and wealthy donors while failing to make a deal to end the government shutdown. Instead of trading cash for access, Trump and his Republican loyalists in Congress should be getting back to work to reopen the government and avoid a healthcare crisis."
Boeglin added that Trump's "betrayal of Americans is brazen," and noted that he could find money to bail out his political ally in Argentina but not enough to fund enhanced tax credits that help Americans pay for health insurance.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a video on Wednesday night that also bashed Trump for hosting an entire dinner at the White House to thank big corporate donors for funding his vanity project.
" Donald Trump has found the time to wine and dine billionaires," she said. "Oh, and apparently to carve his corporate donors' names permanently into the walls in the White House. You cannot make this up! As usual, billionaire corporations are lining up to dump money into Trump's ballroom, possibly in exchange for some favors."
I didn't know draining the swamp meant Donald Trump building a $200 million ballroom for billionaires to bend the knee for special favors. pic.twitter.com/dqKb0glyl6
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) October 16, 2025
Richard Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota and vice-chairman for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told The New York Times that the White House event honoring wealthy donors "shows what the ballroom is really all about: pay to play."
"This is payment for access," he added. "Not just to the grounds of the White House but access to the president of the United States."
Many of the attendees at the dinner were from industries that are pushing for loose regulations of artificial intelligence and other technology and companies—such as Amazon, Lockheed Martin, and Palantir—that have contracts with the federal government.
Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in government ethics, told the Post that the ballroom raised serious ethical concerns because "it may or not be money in his pocket, but it’s absolutely to benefit Trump personally because it’s important to him."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Say Trump 'Should Be Impeached' If He Fires US Attorney for Not Charging NY AG
"This would be another red line crossed," said one legal expert.
Sep 19, 2025
Multiple legal experts are expressing alarm at a new report that US President Donald Trump is planning to fire a federal prosecutor for failing to bring criminal charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James.
ABC News reported on Thursday night that Trump planned to fire Erik Siebert, the US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, because he could not find sufficient evidence to conclude that James had committed mortgage fraud when she bought a home in the state in 2023.
Siebert was appointed by Trump as US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia just four months ago, and ABC News' source said that "the administration now plans to install a US attorney who would more aggressively investigate James."
James successfully sued Trump for serial financial fraud committed by the Trump Organization back in 2023, and ultimately won a $354 million verdict against him and his business.
Trump has reportedly been pressing the Department of Justice to file charges against James in an apparent retribution campaign, and many legal experts said that going so far as to fire the US attorney investigating her would be a dangerous new step.
Joyce Vance, a former federal prosecutor and current professor at the University of Alabama School of Law, outlined why Trump firing Siebert would be damaging to the rule of law.
"This would be another red line crossed: Career prosecutors aren’t political people," she wrote on X. "They’re trained to look at the facts and the law and determine whether admissible evidence is sufficient to prove a crime. But Trump wants revenge prosecutions, whether there is evidence or not."
Anthony Foley, former head of public affairs at the US Department of Justice under President Barack Obama, marveled that Trump would fire the man whom he'd appointed simply because he came up empty trying to prosecute a political foe.
"When even the people you appoint say there’s no there there," he wrote. "Good prosecutors are trained to follow the facts... to go where the facts tell them to go. Good prosecutors don’t start investigations with a pre-determined outcome in mind."
Richard Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota and vice-chairman for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, also expressed alarm and compared Trump's reported plan to "the way prosecutors are used in dictatorships—to pursue political enemies."
Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth, wrote on Bluesky that Trump "should be impeached and removed from office for this alone" if he goes through with firing Siebert.
Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY), a former federal prosecutor, pointed the finger at his Republican colleagues whom he accused of providing cover for the president.
"You," he wrote on X, "are complicit in Trump’s actions."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular