Democrats are crying foul over suspicious trades and bets around notable actions by President Trump, including social media posts that changed the contour of the Iran war and financial markets.
Market trades on oil futures reached more than half a billion dollars shortly before Mr. Trump announced a pause in strikes against Iranian power plants.
“Who was it? Trump? A family member? A White House staffer?” Sen. Christopher Murphy, Connecticut Democrat, said on X. “This is corruption. Mind-blowing corruption.”
The eyebrow-raising trades follow lucrative moves on websites such as Polymarket. An anonymous bettor walked away with $400,000 after placing bets on when President Nicolas Maduro would leave power in Venezuela. The final wager was placed right before the U.S. raid to capture the strongman.
A similar pattern unfolded before the strikes on Iran. A trader under the name “Magamyman” made nearly $600,000 by placing bets on the timing of the strikes at the end of February.
Further, some traders took bullish positions before Mr. Trump pulled back on his “Liberation Day” tariffs last spring.
Democrats said the trades were troubling, especially against a backdrop of dwindling personnel in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section and the Trump family’s involvement in cryptocurrency markets. Some lawmakers are proposing legislation to tighten the rules on trading and increasingly popular betting platforms.
The White House responded that it expects all officials to follow government ethics rules, which prohibit gambling while on duty and using inside information for personal gain. It also took exception to accusations of chicanery within the administration.
“All federal employees are subject to government ethics guidelines that prohibit the use of nonpublic information for financial benefit. However, any implication that administration officials are engaged in such activity without evidence is baseless and irresponsible reporting,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said.
White House counsel David Warrington said Mr. Trump is not involved in business deals “that would implicate his constitutional responsibilities.”
“President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner, and to suggest otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious,” he said.
The mysterious bets around Iran developments sparked chatter because of the sheer volume of trades on the oil markets about 15 minutes before Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social on Monday about delaying attacks on Iran’s power plants because of progress in negotiations.
“The United States of America, and the country of Iran, have had, over the last two days, very good and productive conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East,” Mr. Trump wrote in all-caps for emphasis.
Minutes earlier, the Dow Jones and S&P 500 futures markets had bursts of activity for West Texas Intermediate and Brent crude oil.
Market watchers and some lawmakers found it odd, given the volume of trades in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Traders had no clear way to predict the development.
“Just 5 min before Trump made an announcement about halting strikes on Iran, nearly $2B was invested in oil and stock futures. Someone made a fortune,” Sen. Andy Kim, New Jersey Democrat, said on social media. “We need immediate investigations into these trades. If they used insider information, they need to be held accountable.”
Whether traders had inside information or whether they just made savvy moves remains a bit of a Washington whodunnit.
Some economists say the event was unlikely to be random, given the sudden nature of the trades rather than a gradual trend.
“It’s not really ambiguous,” Nobel Prize-winning economist and columnist Paul Krugman told NPR on Thursday.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, when asked whether it planned an inquiry into the trades, said it maintains communication “with our exchanges, who serve as our first line of defense.”
“The CFTC also conducts its own surveillance, including through technology platforms, seasoned staff, and these constant conversations with exchanges over trades that raise red flags,” the agency said.
Some Democrats want to tighten the rules through legislation to head off more suspicious trades.
Mr. Murphy introduced the Banning Event Trading on Sensitive Operations and Federal Functions, or BETS OFF, Act to prohibit betting on government actions, including war or events in which insiders know the result ahead of time.
“For example, the bill would ban prediction markets on when Ayatollah Khamenei would be ‘out’ as Supreme Leader, regardless of whether this is understood to be betting on war or death, because the question regards a government action,” the senator’s office said in a fact sheet on the bill. “It would also ban wagering on the Super Bowl halftime show or the Academy Awards because insiders know the outcome in advance.”
Congressional concern about the potential for insider trading reflects growing concern over legalized gambling and prediction markets, which function like a combination of stock markets and betting platforms and have flourished in recent years.
Sen. Adam B. Schiff, California Democrat, and Sen. John R. Curtis, Utah Republican, introduced a bill this week to ban prediction markets from offering sports betting contracts and to beef up state control over the platforms.
“Too many young people in Utah are getting exposed to addictive sports betting and casino-style gaming contracts that belong under state control, not under federal regulators,” Mr. Curtis said. “Our bipartisan legislation clarifies regulatory jurisdiction, ensuring that states can maintain their authority over sports betting and casino gaming.”
• Tom Howell Jr. can be reached at thowell@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.