Days after $5M donation, Trump administration backs Crypto.com in lawsuit
In a document quietly filed with the Federal Election Commission on Friday night, MAGA Inc., the primary Super PAC supporting President Trump, revealed that it received a $5 million donation from Crypto.com on January 23, 2026. The donation was made in the name of Crypto.com’s parent company, Foris Dax, Inc.1
25 days later, on February 17, the Trump administration’s Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), intervened on Crypto.com’s behalf in high-stakes lawsuit in federal court.
Last year, Crypto.com sued the Nevada Gaming Control Board, arguing that it has the right to offer “prediction markets” on the outcome of sporting events without obtaining a Nevada gaming license. In October 2025, a federal court denied Crypto.com an injunction, and the company is now appealing the decision.
In addition to filing a formal amicus brief in support of Crypto.com’s appeal, CFTC chairman Mike Selig published an op-ed supporting Crypto.com’s position in the Wall Street Journal and posted a video supporting Crypto.com on X.
The timing of CFTC’s intervention raises serious ethical questions.
Selig, during his November 2025 confirmation hearing, was asked whether he believed it was legal for prediction markets to offer contracts on sporting events without complying with state law. Selig testified that the issue is “working its way through the courts, and so I will respect the decisions of those courts.”
He was also asked directly if he considered placing a bet on the outcome of a football game to be “gambling,” which would place it outside the jurisdiction of the CFTC:
Senator SCHIFF. Well, I mean, let me just ask—maybe even break it down more simply. If you and I bet on who wins the Bills game tomorrow, would you consider that gambling?
Mr. SELIG. Senator, on this issue, I would look to the courts, so I would look to what the courts say about that issue.
In a matter of weeks, Selig went from telling Senators under oath that he would defer to the courts on the issue to arguing on behalf of Crypto.com that the courts have erred.
He publicly announced he was considering intervening in the case during a public appearance on January 29 — less than a week after Crypto.com’s $5 million contribution to MAGA Inc. “I’ve directed CFTC staff to reassess the commission’s participation in matters currently pending before the federal district and circuit courts,” Selig said during his first public remarks as CFTC chairman.
On February 5, Selig explicitly stated that he believed it was legal for prediction markets to offer bets on sports, regardless of whether the company complied with state law.
Few companies have spent more money to ingratiate themselves politically with Trump than Crypto.com. Including the $5 million in January, Crypto.com has donated a total of $35 million to MAGA Inc. since 2025. It is the Super PAC’s largest donor, accounting for more than 10% of total funds.
Prior to its support for MAGA Inc, Crypto.com’s only political giving was a $1 million donation to Trump’s second inauguration in 2025.
Crypto.com has also formed an extensive partnership with Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG), Trump’s money-losing media conglomerate that has recently pivoted into cryptocurrency and nuclear fusion. Among other integrations, Crypto.com and TMTG announced in October that Crypto.com would integrate its prediction market with Truth Social, TMTG’s social network. The joint venture will be called Truth Predict. President Trump is TMTG’s largest shareholder.
Crypto.com’s thin legal argument
Crypto.com and other prediction markets — and now the CFTC — argue that creating markets for sporting events is fundamentally different than sports gambling. In practice, however, it looks identical.
The CFTC has jurisdiction over event-related contracts or “swaps” that provide “for any purchase, sale, payment, or delivery… that is dependent on the occurrence, nonoccurrence, or the extent of the occurrence of an event or contingency associated with a potential financial, economic, or commercial consequence.” (Emphasis added.)
The traditional example of this is a contract to buy corn at a certain price in the future. This serves as an economic hedge against price fluctuations that can affect producers of tortilla chips, for example.
There are theoretical arguments that betting on the outcome of a sporting event could serve as an economic hedge. The CFTC, in its brief in support of Crypto.com, tries to make this argument:
Broadly speaking, sporting events are economic enterprises that generate billions of dollars in economic activity and materially affect both regional and national markets… For these reasons, hotels likely adjust pricing models, restaurants expand staffing to accommodate increased demand, vendors increase supply orders, and cities allocate resources to accommodate projected crowds. All of these decisions pose economic risk, which is precisely the type of economic exposure that derivatives markets are designed to mitigate.
Of course, this is not how prediction markets on sporting events are used. No one is wagering on a basketball game to hedge against hotels raising prices. They are used by people who want to gamble on sports, particularly in states where sports gambling is not currently legal. On popular prediction markets like Kalshi, sports betting accounts for over 90% of all trading volume.
Utah Governor Spencer Cox (R) mocked Selig’s position on X. “I don’t remember the CFTC having authority over the ‘derivative market’ of LeBron James rebounds,” Cox wrote. “These prediction markets you are breathlessly defending are gambling—pure and simple.”
The district court noted that, under Crypto.com’s interpretation, if every bet on a sporting event qualified as a “swap” subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC. That would mean it would no longer be permissible for people to place sports bets in casinos. “Had Congress intended such a sea change in the regulatory landscape, it surely would have said so,” the district court wrote.
The designation of the $5 million from Foris Dax as a “NON-CONTRIBUTION” in the image refers to the fact that it is a donation to a Super PAC, which is not subject to FEC contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions.
O for f&ck’s sake, gambling is gambling. The predictions market, swaps, futures trading, the stock market, gaming, etc by any other name, it’s all gambling and it all should be regulated. It is well documented how gambling destroys lives and encourages corruption. Yes, people will always gamble on the future with their hunches, the myth of probabilities and insider knowledge, and the best we can do is to put up the guardrails so they don’t do too much damage.
Article 2, Section 4 of Constitution
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The only Presidents who could take domestic emoluments are those who had businesses before the Constitution was ratified. They were protected by ex post facto clause of Constitution.
Example of why ex post facto clause is important.
You are a jaywalker and have been caught doing this many times. A law gets passed and then you get punished for the past jaywalking. You are now going to get hit with $100,000 fine and 5 years in prison for jaywalking in the past.
George Washington should have gone to prison for taking foreign emoluments without first obtaining permission from Congress.
Almost everything in the Constitution is in it to reduce tyranny, bribery, corruption. People get taught about checks and balances in junior high school. How many get taught that the most important check on tyranny was US Senators chosen by State Legislatures?
USA is a Federal Republic which is supposed to have Republican Form of Government - power of the people. Gerrymandering and poll taxes deny people Republican Form of Government.
Bill of Rights
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript
"Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Members of Congress, Presidents, judges on US Supreme Court, state judges, etc. take oath to Constitution and many have chosen to be enemies of the oath they took.
State legislatures may regulate gambling, banks, investment companies, etc. more than the federal government does.
Amendments 9 and Amendments 10 do not matter much at all now because State Legislatures are not able to choose US Senators who will do what is best for their States. I think US Senators chosen by the people are more likely to be corrupt than US Senators chosen by State legislatures when State legislatures have the power to fire US Senators and pick the replacements.
Amendment 9 and Amendment 10 might matter again if State legislatures again have the power to choose US Senators. The US Supreme Court is an enemy of the Bill of Rights and much of the Constitution.
Beef grown in NH and entirely used in NH is regulated by State legislature. Our founders would have never been okay with US Supreme Court or Congress telling NH legislature how to regulate beef grown in NH and entirely used in NH. Our food banks in NH and other states have a hard time feeding people because US Supreme Court gave Congress a power that is supposed to belong just to State legislatures - regulation of commerce taking place entirely in a State.
Amendment to Constitution - each State gets 3 US Senators - 2 chosen by the people and 1 by State legislature. State Legislatures should be allowed to fire US Senators they choose whenever they want and pick replacement to reduce corruption. State legislatures would again have a say on Declaring War, value of our money, national debt, Military Draft, Tariffs, regulating banks and investment companies.
These US Senators would be working for the State legislatures.
State legislatures would be better able to stop tyranny of Presidents.
State legislatures would again have the power to fire judges on US Supreme Court.
State legislatures would again have a say on choosing judges on US Supreme Court, Secretaries of Federal Departments, Ambassadors.
State legislatures would again have a say on federal laws and federal regulations that impact them.
State legislatures would likely gain again the ability to control commerce that takes place entirely within a State.
State legislatures would likely be able to end the ability of the President to have power to tariff.
State legislatures would likely be able to end the ability of the President to choose members of the Federal Reserve.
If the Amendment is going to be successful, State legislatures need to be able to fire the US Senators they choose whenever they want and pick replacements. I have no problem with US Senators who work for State legislatures constantly being changed. I think that would be a very good thing.
Democratic Party wrecked the Constitution when Woodrow Wilson was President to cause harm to black people.
Woodrow Wilson: This So-Called Progressive was a Dedicated Racist
https://fee.org/articles/woodrow-wilson-progressive-and-dedicated-racist/
I am trying to fix the system of checks and balances the Democratic Party destroyed.
The Democratic Party said the President was above the law - Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton should have gone to prison for perjury not dealing with national security. Do you think US Senators chosen by State legislatures would have allowed Bill Clinton to stay President? I think most would have pushed to fire him.
People committed suicide dealing with Great Depression. Bankers went to prison dealing with Savings and Loans Crisis. Bankers knew the crimes they committed dealing with financial crisis of 2008 might lead to suicides and they did not care. Democrats and Obama chose to allow bankers to get away with depraved indifference first degree murder. I think if US Senators had been chosen by State legislatures many bankers would have gone to prison.
If State legislatures do not again have the power to choose US Senators, we will have many more Fascist Democrats and Fascist Fake Republicans elected President. Never forget the foundation of the Nazi Party of Germany was the Democratic Party of the USA. Our founders did not want slavery expanded. Democrats expanded slavery. Democrats caused the Civil War. Democrats gave us Jim Crow and Techniques of Direct Disenfranchisement. Democrats gave us Woodrow Wilson.
Democrats caused the Great Depression - created the Federal Reserve, took away from State legislatures the power to regulate banks, investment companies and have a say on tariffs.
If State legislatures had not lost the ability to choose US Senators, I doubt the national debt would be over $38 trillion now. National debt was under $1 trillion when Reagan became President and took us over 180 years to get. Democrats controlled US House of Representatives for over 20 years before Reagan became President. Need over $900 to buy what $250 could buy in January 1981.
If people want to know why our Founders wanted US Senators chosen by State legislatures, I recommend they read The Federalist Papers.
Full Text of the Federalist Papers
https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text
If State legislatures do not gain ability to choose US Senators again, I expect we will have economic collapse and violent revolutions.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that fixes Electoral College. Winner of a state gets 2 electoral college votes and winner of Congressional districts gets 1. Current electoral college system and popular vote for President both provide huge benefits for violence at polling places, ballot stuffing, voter suppression. Popular vote for President would decease odds Presidents would care about states low in population like NH.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that says when a Treaty conflicts with Bill of Rights or other parts of Constitution that part of Treaty is not constitutional.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives US House of Representatives Advice and Consent on Treaties.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives State legislatures the power to nullify, federal laws, federal regulations, Treaties.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives the people the power to nullify, federal laws, federal regulations, Treaties.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives State legislatures power to pardon federal crimes.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives States legislatures power to pardon state crimes.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives US Senate power to pardon federal crimes and state crimes.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives US House of Representatives the power to pardon federal crimes and state crimes.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives people the power to pardon federal crimes and state crimes. Innocent people have received death penalty.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives State legislatures the power to fire President, Vice President, Speaker of US House of Representatives, Secretary of State of USA, Judges on US Supreme Court, Secretaries of Federal Departments, Director of FBI, Director of CIA.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives the people the power to fire President, Vice President, Speaker of US House of Representatives, Secretary of State of USA, Judges on US Supreme Court, Secretaries of Federal Departments, Director of FBI, Director of CIA.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives the people the power to fire their US Senators, their Representatives to US House of Representatives, Governors, Mayors, Aldermen, members of School Boards, members of State legislatures. When the people fire US Senator chosen by State legislature, State legislature chooses the replacement. The people pick the replacements for US Senators and others they elected via elections.
Would like Amendment to Constitution that gives State legislatures the power to fire US Senators and Representatives to US House of Representatives the people pick. The people would pick the replacements via elections.
Sincerely,
Ken Stremsky
187 Poplar Street
Manchester, NH 03104
603-647-5898