Sign in with Google
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with Apple
Donald Trump's recent comments on tariffs and his social media statements have thrown the American political and financial spheres into turmoil. Suspected of market manipulation and insider trading, the former president is facing intense criticism. This case brings politics, economics, and ethics into a complex collision.
On April 9, 2025, Donald Trump posted a message on his social network Truth Social, that sent shockwaves : “GREAT TIME TO BUY!”. Just a few hours later, he announced a temporary 90 day suspension of the tariffs he had imposed on most countries, except China. This unexpected decision triggered an historic surge in financial markets, putting an end to the period of high volatility caused by the trade war he had initiated himself.
For his critics, the timing raises serious questions. Several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Adam Schiff, have pointed to a possible case of market manipulation. Some investors may have benefited from this information before it became public, making substantial profits. Shares of Trump Media & Technology Group, a company linked to Donald Trump, rose by 21.67% that day. These elements have fueled suspicions of insider trading, an offense involving the use of confidential information for financial gain.
In response to these suspicions, the Democratic opposition quickly called for a thorough investigation. Senator Schiff appealed to the Office of Government Ethics to determine whether Donald Trump or his inner circle had taken advantage of the situation. “Who knew what the president was going to do ?” he asked, denouncing a possible case of “insider trading within the administration.” Representative Steven Horsford also criticized the situation during a hearing, accusing Trump of engaging in large-scale market manipulation.
According to Democrats, the former president’s messages, particularly those signed “DJT”, may have served as a signal to his allies or supporters to buy stocks at low prices ahead of the tariff reversal announcement. The case is all the more troubling given that U.S. financial regulatory bodies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had their resources reduced under Trump’s administration, making it harder to monitor and prevent illicit practices.
The White House, for its part, defended Donald Trump’s intentions, claiming he simply sought to “reassure” the markets and the American people amid a tense economic climate. According to his spokesperson, it is not unusual for a president to try to maintain confidence in the national economy. However, this justification has done little to convince critics, especially as allegations of conflicts of interest and questionable practices continue to mount.
Beyond any legal proceedings that may be initiated, the case raises fundamental questions about ethics in politics and the regulation of financial markets. If the accusations of market manipulation prove to be true, it could set a dangerous precedent—highlighting how political figures may influence markets for personal or political gain. While the investigation is ongoing, the scandal casts a shadow over the ability of American institutions to uphold transparency and fairness in financial markets.
