The Dictatorship
Trump’s meme coin represents a dangerous confluence of power
American presidents throughout history have broken with precedent before, but for a president-elect to launch a crypto “meme coin” days before his inauguration is really out there on the bleeding edge of the untested. As Donald Trump returns to the White House following his 2024 electoral victory, his association with a meme coin launch represents an unprecedented convergence of presidential influence and speculative finance. Even Andrew Jacksonwho had a notorious appetite for gambling and financial risk, never displayed such brazenness as to promote an investment product on the eve of assuming office.
These are purely speculative instruments, unapologetically existing for no reason other than to enrich their creators.
While the value of established cryptocurrencies remains a subject of considerable debate among economists and technologistsother cryptocurrencies often peddle a narrative justification centered on utility. Proponents of bitcoin, for instance, suggest its potential as a digital analog to gold, or as a payment network; ethereum adherents point to so-called smart contracts. Whether such proposed applications ultimately prove viable remains highly questionable, and many critics argue that these narratives are fundamentally incoherent.
Meme coinsin contrast, dispense with the pretense of utility or narrative: These are purely speculative instrumentsunapologetically existing for no reason other than to enrich their creators.
The mechanics of meme coins are remarkably straightforward: Initial purchasers acquire tokens at a nominal cost. Publicity intensifies, often fueled by social media amplification and a fear of being left behind, and prices spike. Early investors can then sell their holdings to later buyers at a profit. This dynamic, however, is inherently unsustainable, and the inevitable result is that subsequent investors are left holding largely valueless digital tokens that are untethered from any asset or income. It’s a mathematical certainty that a majority of participants will incur financial losses — the only question is the precise distribution of those losses. The value of these tokens rests solely on their ability to induce successive purchasers to pay an inflated price, a characteristic that invites comparison to pyramid schemes without the overt promise of guaranteed returns.
The launch of the Trumps’ tokens just before the inauguration represents a troubling development in the realm of money in politics. It’s shocking to have the presidential office even tangentially connected to such a nakedly speculative financial undertaking at such a sensitive political moment. This timing seems to suggest that supporting the candidate and engaging in a risky financial gamble are somehow connected, a notion that raises significant ethical concerns about the influence of personal financial interests on political decision-making and could potentially lead to conflicts of interest.
The dangers surrounding meme coins arise not so much because they exist in a regulatory vacuum, but because some crypto businesses operate with a cynical disregard for the laws we already have. Traditional financial markets have rules that forbid predatory offerings and market manipulation and that require disclosures, but many crypto operations openly flout these regulations, knowing that regulators are often too underresourced to enforce them. The result is a perfect storm for market manipulation, with concentrated ownership and coordinated buying campaigns conducted openly on social media platforms.
This pattern of market behavior is eerily reminiscent of the “robber baron” era of the late 19th century. Before the advent of securities laws, powerful figures amassed fortunes through schemes that often left ordinary investors in financial ruin. That era, characterized by limited regulatory oversight, allowed many predatory schemes and abuses that ultimately led to the modern securities regulations that govern traditional finance today.
What’s particularly fraught about the present circumstance is the combination of a historically familiar pattern with the speed and reach of digital technology, and now the direct association with a presidential transition. Potential buyers may not understand that they’re not investing in anything real — they’re merely buying tokens in a digital game of hot potato, where the only way to win is to pass their holdings to someone else at a higher price before the music stops.
The overall rise of crypto reflects a deeper nihilism in American culture — a collective rejection of fundamental value and the premise of markets.
The overall rise of crypto reflects a deeper nihilism in American culture — a collective rejection of fundamental value and the premise of markets. In this worldview, if investing is a rigged game, why not embrace the absurdity? Such a cynical perspective approaches markets as a mere casino where the only things that matter are momentum and hype. That this mindset has become intertwined with the presidency, with tokens backed by nothing but vanity and political loyalty, reveals a profound loss of faith in institutions and the very concept of value itself.
For the public, the message should be unequivocal: Meme coins, irrespective of their branding or timing, are not legitimate investments. They are speculative gambles, more like lottery tickets than financial assets. When draped in political symbolism and launched at times of heightened public attention, they become an especially dangerous proposition: a chimera of political devotion and financial recklessness that is fraught with moral hazard and does not serve the public interest.
The launch of a personal meme coin by a president represents a dangerous confluence of political power and speculative finance that would be bad on its own. More fundamentally — and more troubling — it represents a betrayal of the duty of the office. Using the highest office of the land to promote a financial product designed to transfer wealth from the public to a private individual undermines the institutional integrity of the presidency itself.
The Trump meme coin may be just the latest chapter in this ongoing story, but it signals a troubling new direction in the use of political influence for financial gain.
Stephen Diehl
Stephen Diehl is a software engineer who often write about software, technology, and the future.
Rep. Mike Collins won Georgia’s Republican Senate primary runoff Tuesday, defeating former University of Tennessee football coach Derek Dooley.
Now, he will have the far larger task of knocking off Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff in one of the most competitive Senate race this election cycle.
The runoff was triggered after Collins and Dooley each failed to win a majority in the May 19 primary, forcing a second round in a contest that Republicans view as one of their best opportunities to flip a Democratic-held Senate seat in 2026. President Donald Trump endorsed Collins over the weekend, boosting his chances in the runoff.
Collins, a congressman representing Georgia’s 10th District, finished first in the primary. The trucking company owner and staunch ally of Trump built his campaign around support for the president’s agenda, border security, immigration enforcement and conservative cultural issues. Collins sought to portray himself as a proven conservative fighter with experience in Washington and strong ties to the Republican base.
Dooley, meanwhile, leaned on his name recognition as a former college football coach and member of one of Georgia’s most prominent political families. His father, Vince Dooley, was the legendary University of Georgia football coach and athletic director. Although Dooley has never held elected office, he has campaigned as a political outsider capable of attracting independent and swing voters in a general election.
Collins argued that Republicans need a candidate with a proven conservative record and close ties to Trump. Dooley has countered that his outsider status and broader appeal would make him a stronger challenger in November.
But some Republicans are worried about Collins, including his hardline stance on abortion rights and an Office of Congressional Conduct probe into his office’spotential misuse of resources that the Republican lawmaker has referred to as a “nothing burger.”
His social media tonewhich includes severely downplayingthe U.S. Capitol attack where some pro-Trump rioters injured members of law enforcement, gives credence to the president’s view of him as a “a true Friend, Fighter, and WARRIOR,” as Trump wrote in his post endorsing Collins.
But those sentiments also spotligh a few of the vulnerabilities for a statewide candidate coming from a reliably red congressional district.
Collins will now face Ossoff, who is seeking a second term after winning a pair of runoff elections in 2021 that helped Democrats gain control of the Senate. Since taking office, Ossoff has built a national fundraising network. His re-election campaign has emphasized lowering costs for families, protecting access to healthcare, supporting economic development and promoting government accountability.
In a statement published shortly after Collins’ win, Ossoff called the congressman a “notorious bigot” who was under federal investigation.
“Donald Trump’s handpicked candidate Mike Collins is a notorious bigot, antisemite, and extremist currently under federal investigation for the illegal misuse of tax dollars,” Ossoff said. “Collins, who is only a congressman because his daddy was a congressman, voted to double health insurance premiums for more than a million Georgians, for the Iran War, and for the Trump tariffs.”
The House Ethics Committee is investigating allegations that Collins used government funds to benefit an aide.
Georgia remains a key battleground state heading into the midterm elections. Once considered a reliably Republican stronghold, the state has become increasingly competitive over the past decade.
Republicans see Georgia as one of their strongest pickup opportunities in a midterm cycle where control of the Senate could once again hinge on a handful of closely contested races. Democrats, meanwhile, are expected to invest heavily to protect Ossoff’s seat, viewing him as a key part of the party’s future.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
Senate Republicans are still waiting for details of the preliminary U.S.-Iran agreement. But they’re already making one thing clear: Congress should have a vote on any final deal.
President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf signed a memorandum of understanding on Monday, formally giving the two countries 60 days to negotiate an agreement.
While there’s a healthy dose of skepticism about the deal and whether it will actually materialize, Republicans want a say on the eventual agreement.
“If there is a final deal, and I hope there is, it should come to the Senate for approval,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told reporters on Tuesday.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said if the final agreement is a treaty — and it “sounds like a treaty,” he said — then it “certainly seems like” the deal should be subject to a vote by Congress.
And Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, echoed his colleagues.
For now, it appears Trump agrees with Senate Republicans.
During a bilateral meeting at the Group of Seven (G7) summit in France on Tuesday, Trump suggested he would be open to sending the eventual deal to Congress. “I wouldn’t mind,” he said.
“I never thought about sending. Never even thought about it,” Trump added. “But I will — I will send it to Congress. I like the idea.”
Trump’s comments quickly made their way to Washington, where Republican senators like Lindsey Graham and Roger Marshall repeatedly pointed out that Trump said he would give Congress a vote.
“I hope he does,” Marshall said.
Despite the GOP desire for a vote, it’s far from clear Congress will ever hold one. For starters, the talks could fall apart before a final agreement is reached. And if the deal ultimately resembles elements of the Obama-era accord that Republicans long opposed, GOP leaders may be reluctant to force lawmakers into a politically fraught vote — particularly if Democrats line up against it.
The dynamic highlights a familiar tension on Capitol Hill.
For years — decades, even — lawmakers have talked about replacing the sweeping 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force with a more targeted authorization. The law has been used to justify dozens of military operations in more than 22 countries. But when it comes time to take ownership of a new war authorization, many in Congress seem content to defer to the president and the nearly 25-year-old law.
To be sure, there were some GOP voices on Tuesday who suggested a vote on Trump’s emerging Iran deal isn’t needed.
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., argued that a law signed amid the debate over the Obama-era deal never explicitly required a vote — just congressional review.
“You might decide your opinion is we should vote on it, but there is no requirement that we do,” Schmitt said.
And some other Republican senators kept their cards close to their vest, insisting they need more information on the deal before asserting that a vote is necessary.
“Everybody’s got to see what it is first,” Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said. “None of us have seen it.”
Pressed on whether he wants a vote, regardless of the terms of the deal, the Oklahoma Republican offered a congressional truth: “It depends on what the deal is.”
Part of the insistence on a vote, Republicans say, is because the Iran nuclear deal brokered under President Barack Obama — formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA — wasn’t affirmed by Congress. That allowed Trump to singlehandedly dismantle it during his first administration.
This time, lawmakers say they want a deal to outlast the Trump presidency.
Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, said Congress should “absolutely” vote on the final agreement, if negotiators reach one.
“That was one of the problems with President Obama’s deal,” Curtis said.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he thought it “makes more sense” to have Congress give any agreement its stamp of approval, pointing to Obama’s now defunct deal.
“Obama made a mistake when he didn’t do the work to have it rise to a level of a treaty, and I believe that we should here, otherwise it’s only good for two and a half years,” Tillis said.
“Why don’t we do the hard work of making sure that it has staying power?” he added.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle — particularly Republicans — would be happy to approve an Iran peace agreement that advances U.S. interests. Republicans are inclined to support Trump, and few lawmakers seem eager to prolong the Iran “excursion,” as the president has put it.
But approving a deal that’s less-than-stellar for the United States isn’t such a popular prospect. And congressional leaders might hesitate to put the agreement up for a vote out of fear that lawmakers may shoot it down.
A failed vote would put Trump and the United States in a difficult position.
Just having to vote on the deal could put lawmakers in a tough political spot of their own — and right before the midterm elections.
If the final agreement ends up resembling the Obama-era JCPOA, Republicans could be forced to either support a deal they’ve long criticized or risk drawing Trump’s ire. Neither choice is ideal.
Meanwhile, if Democrats vote against a final deal, they could face accusations that they don’t want the war to end. Some Republicans see political value in forcing Democrats to take a position.
“When there’s a deal, of course, put the Democrats on record,” Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, told MS NOW.
But if the final deal is one Republicans don’t love, don’t expect the agreement to come before Congress.
Already on Monday, several Republicans expressed nervousness about the early contours of a deal, as described in press reports about a yet-to-be released memorandum of understanding. And on Tuesday, the top Senate Republican — John Thune of South Dakota — said he had still not been briefed on the contents of the memorandum.
A handful of Republicans revealed to reporters that they had been in touch with senior U.S. officials to get some of their questions answered.
Moreno, for instance, said he was given some details about the agreement on Monday from Vice President JD Vance and White House peace envoy — and Trump son-in-law — Jared Kushner.
Asked about the delay in revealing the preliminary memorandum, Moreno insisted the Trump administration was just being “methodical,” in part so as not to upend the internal politics in Iran.
“It’s not going to kill everybody to just take a breath and wait until Friday,” Moreno said.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW.
Healthcare executive Rick Jackson clinched the Republican gubernatorial nomination on Tuesday, pulling off a win over Lt. Gov. Burt Jones and securing a spot in the November election against Democratic nominee Keisha Lance Bottoms.
The pair advanced from the Republican primary after neither candidate secured the majority needed to avoid a runoff on May 19.
The contest came as Republicans seek to hold the governor’s mansion in a state that has become one of the country’s premier political battlegrounds. Gov. Brian Kemp is term-limited and cannot seek re-election, creating the first open governor’s race in Georgia since 2018. Kemp threw his weight behind Jones over the weekend.
Jackson, a businessman who entered politics as an outsider candidatesought to position himself as an alternative to career politicians. His campaign focused heavily on economic issues, government spending and opposition to what he describes as establishment politics.
Jackson has argued that Republicans need a nominee who can energize voters frustrated with the political system. He has also attempted to appeal to conservatives who want a candidate outside Georgia’s existing political leadership structure.
The runoff highlights divisions within the Georgia Republican Party over the direction of the state’s conservative movement after Kemp’s tenure. While both candidates embraced many of the same conservative policy positions, they have differed over experience, electability and the future of Republican leadership in the Peach State.
The race also attracted attention because of Georgia’s importance ahead of the midterms. Democrats have made significant gains in the state over the past decade, winning presidential and Senate races while turning Georgia into a key battleground. Republicans, however, have continued to perform strongly in statewide races, including Kemp’s decisive re-election victory in 2022.
Bottoms, who served as Atlanta’s mayor from 2018 to 2022 and later worked in the Biden administration, secured the Democratic nomination and is preparing for a competitive general election campaign. Democrats view the open-seat contest as an opportunity to regain control of the governor’s office for the first time in more than two decades.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
- Senate Republicans want assurances from Todd Blanche. So far it’s working.
- Senate thwarts move to limit Iran war as Trump pushes peace deal
- Senate, House reach deal on housing bill, Senate to start votes Tuesday
- OMB nominee touts plan to give Trump appointees power to kill grants
- Mike Collins wins Georgia GOP Senate primary runoff to face Ossoff
- GOP senators say they want a vote on an Iran deal — for now
- Senate threatens to freeze Hegseth’s travel in bid for boat strike videos, Iran school strike probe
- Rick Jackson wins Georgia GOP governor runoff, will face Bottoms in November
- Mike Collins wins Georgia GOP Senate primary runoff to face Ossoff
- Judge disciplined over courthouse sex recuses herself in Georgia election case
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship9 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words