Mar. 30, 2026, 4:35 PM EDT

This is an adapted excerpt from the March 29 episode of “Velshi.”

An investigation into a scandal within Donald Trump’s administration, which has largely flown under the radar, now appears ready to break open into a Watergate-level crisis for the president.

While it’s tempting to recall Watergate as being triggered by a break-in, it actually had its roots in an antitrust scandal — and in a thread that two lawmakers refused to stop pulling on.

In the early 1970s, the Nixon administration stood accused of interfering in a Justice Department case against International Telephone and Telegraphor ITT, which was a conglomerate that controlled telecom, hotels, defense contracts and plenty of other things.

The allegation at the center of the scandal was that the Justice Department went easy on ITT’s antitrust case in exchange for corporate funding of the 1972 Republican National Convention.

A Texas Democrat named Wright Patman, then chair of the House Banking Committee, tried to investigate. But he was blocked by members of his own party, who called it too risky to do in an election year.

So Patman passed the information to Democratic Sen. Sam Ervin of North Carolina, and an investigation followed. Piece by piece, the scandal came into focus.

The ITT antitrust case may seem obscure today, but it revealed the administration’s willingness to bend rules for political and corporate gain, setting the stage for the Watergate break-in, which is the part of the scandal most Americans remember.

As investigators began digging into these financial and political connections, Richard Nixon’s campaign grew increasingly paranoid about leaks and opposition research. That fear and suspicion led to the infamous break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex, and it triggered the historic investigations that forced a sitting president to resign just two years later.

That history matters today, especially considering what The Wall Street Journal has uncovered inside the current Justice Department — which may be the Trump administration’s first antitrust domino to fall.

In an investigation that involved interviews with more than three dozen Justice Department employees, lobbyists, lawyers and others familiar with the antitrust division, the Journal describes a scandal that “casts a shadow over the Justice Department’s integrity” and “has alarmed even some Trump loyalists in the department.”

The man at the center of it is Mike Davis. After the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, Davis became one of Trump’s most aggressive public defenders, making thousands of media appearances and positioning himself as a top outside legal ally, since he was not officially part of the president’s team.

Trump rewarded that loyalty publiclycalling Davis “tough as hell” on the campaign trail and saying he was someone he wanted in a “very high capacity.”

After the election, Davis helped recommend key figures to lead antitrust enforcement inside the administration, including Gail Slater, whom Trump nominated as assistant attorney general to run the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.

Then, by his own account, Davis turned around and bragged to the same officials he had helped install that corporate clients were “beating his door down” because of his amazing White House access, according to the Journal.

Davis helped pick the referees, then showed up to play the game.

Under Trump, lobbyists who once thrived behind the scenes now openly tout their connections and wins.

Former Federal Trade Commission Chairman William Kovacic, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, told the Journal that Davis is “the face of this movement.” In previous administrations, Kovacic noted, “You would never want to be seen holding the knife.”

Last year, lawyers from the Justice Department’s antitrust division tried to block a $14 billion merger of Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networksarguing that it would reduce competition in a critical tech sector. They pushed for the merged company to sell off key assets so it would be less concentrated and market-dominating.

That’s how antitrust enforcement is supposed to work.

But according to a sworn deposition from Justice Department official Roger Alford, during this process, Davis, who was hired by Hewlett Packard, interfered and told Slater, whom he helped install in the administration, “If you don’t approve this settlement, I will destroy you. I will destroy your job at the DOJ.”

While Davis denies that conversation, and told the Journal it was “utter bulls–––,” Slater was shaken enough to report the call immediately, according to Alford.

When the Justice Department’s career lawyers tried to block the Hewlett Packard-Juniper merger to protect competition, the companies’ lawyers didn’t negotiate on the merits, as would normally happen.

Instead, they went over the heads of agency staff, allegedly appealing directly to Trump-appointed leadership and using back-channel outreach to senior department officials, according to the Journal.

According to people familiar with the matter, even as Slater instructed the company that “no more lobbyists” should be involved in the process, a directive meant to stop outside influence, Davis was allegedly already meeting privately with top officials behind the scenes — bypassing the very people responsible for enforcing the law, the Journal reports.

A Justice Department official denied that the antitrust division was cut out of talks. A spokesman for Hewlett Packard told the Journal that the company appealed to senior leadership at the department because they believed antitrust officials were not giving proper consideration to national-security issues.

Then came one of the most extraordinary moments in this whole story. People familiar with the matter told the Journal that a senior DOJ official walked into Slater’s office and placed a settlement term sheet on her desk — written by Hewlett Packard’s own lawyers.

When Slater asked her superior what would happen if she refused to sign, he reportedly told her he would fire her deputies. The next day, the deal was announced.

Weeks later, her deputies were terminated, and months after that, Slater, the person Davis himself helped install and then allegedly threatened, was out of the department.

Davis pushed for her removal and celebrated it publicly in more than a dozen posts on X. In his own deposition, he acknowledged recommending her firing to “anyone who would listen.”

As for the deputies’ firings, Davis told the Journal he pushed for their termination because they made “bogus” allegations of corruption against him, not because of the merger deal.

Notably, the case is far from over; several state attorneys general refused to join the settlement and are continuing the fight.

After Watergate, Congress passed something called the Tunney Act to prevent exactly this kind of corruption, requiring parties to disclose meetings, contacts and communications. But investigators say key meetings with lobbyists were never disclosed, back-channel contacts were left off official records, and text messages involving Davis were never produced.

In a separate merger, involving real estate giant Compassantitrust enforcers called for a deeper investigation, then the company hired Davis to help push the acquisition.

According to the Journal’s reporting, Compass wanted to avoid a “second request,” a routine part of antitrust enforcement in which an agency asks for more information to decide whether to block or approve a deal. Slater wanted one, but she was overruled and the deal went through, right in the middle of a national housing crisis.

Then came the case you may know, even if you didn’t know this backstory: Live Nation Entertainment and its ticketing arm, Ticketmaster. The company has been accused of using its dominance over concerts, venues and ticketing to crush competition and drive up prices.

The government argued that Live Nation controls roughly half the concert promotion market, and court filings describe internal company conversations about how “stupid” their customers were and how they were “robbing them blind.”

The antitrust staff at the DOJ were actively litigating this case in federal court when suddenly a settlement appeared, negotiated above their heads.

Antitrust regulators were completely shut out of the process — not once, not twice, but throughout, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal and Matt Stollerresearch director at the American Economic Liberties Project and one of the country’s sharpest outside analysts of antitrust and monopoly power.

People familiar with the conversations told the Journal that Trump was personally calling aides, asking why the case hadn’t been settled. The Journal reported that Trump heard about the case from Ari Emanuel, Hollywood superagent and former Live Nation board member, who reportedly urged the president to resolve it.

According to the Journal, on March 5, Trump hosted a controversial White House meeting with Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Slater’s acting replacement. The same day, the settlement was signed and the company avoided a breakup.

Critics called the outcome an effective “corporate pardon” of a powerful monopoly.

A Justice Department spokesperson told the Journal that there was nothing unusual about the behavior of agency leadership.

The federal judge’s reaction was not subtle. The DOJ’s own lead trial attorney told the court: “I only saw the term sheet when you did.” The nation’s top antitrust enforcers stood in federal court and told a judge they were kept completely in the dark about a settlement in a case they were actively prosecuting.

The judge called it “unacceptable” and said it showed “absolute disrespect for the court, for the jury, for this entire process.”

Guess who Live Nation has on retainer? Davis.

According to the Journal’s reporting, Davis earns fees across his client portfolio that can reach $300,000 a month, representing companies with billions on the line. In his own words, he told the outlet, “I know the people. I know the pressure points. I know how to win.”

Watergate didn’t begin with a break-in. It began with an antitrust thread and two lawmakers who refused to let it go. Once they pulled it, everything else followed.

When it comes to antitrust scandals inside the Trump administration, what we know so far comes from sworn depositions, court filings and investigative reporting by The Wall Street Journal, along with the ongoing analytical work of Stoller, who has been among the most precise outside observers of what’s happening inside the current DOJ.

But the bigger question is what hasn’t come out yet.

Allison Detzel contributed.