Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice, told NPR that he believes some moves by the Trump administration amount to “epic corruption in plain sight,” arguing that they reflect manipulation of legal and political systems. In an interview with NPR host Mary Louise Kelly, Waldman said the issue spans both spending structure and what he characterized as weaknesses in conflict-of-interest protections and disclosures.
Waldman focused first on a proposed nearly $1.8 billion “antiweaponization” fund that the administration has described as helping people he says were unfairly targeted by the justice system. He said the plan is linked to a settlement connected to President Trump’s lawsuit against the federal government, with the settlement structure, in his view, allowing money to be directed outside the routine role of Congress.
NPR’s Kelly asked Waldman to lay out why he characterized the arrangement that way. Waldman said President Trump “sued the federal government” and then had his own Justice Department settle the suit, and that the fund is part of that settlement. He added that he sees it as an extraordinary effort to reshape where spending decisions are made, because it “bypasses Congress and all the other ways in which money is supposed to be decided.”
Kelly also pointed to political backlash from lawmakers, including within Trump’s own party. Waldman said it was notable that there had been “so little pushback on so much,” but he described the current reaction as a symptom of a broader problem: Congress, under the Constitution, has the power and duty to set spending decisions, and the fund’s design, in his view, evades that responsibility by relying on money flowing through litigation. He said he sees the fund as crossing a line that has become especially difficult for some lawmakers to ignore.
As an additional check, Kelly asked whether a lawsuit filed by two police officers who were at the Capitol during the January 6 insurrection could serve as a sufficient safeguard. Waldman responded that courts would have to decide whether the officers have standing and whether a court would hear the case, saying the question of whether the case can proceed “is” something to be determined.
The interview then turned to stock trading disclosures. Kelly asked what Waldman said people learned from the disclosures detailing President Trump’s trades. Waldman said that during a fight among Trump allies over whether Netflix or Paramount would take over Warner Bros., Trump bought stock in all three companies. He also said Trump did not put assets in a blind trust and instead put them in the hands of his children, adding that he questioned the explanation that third-party advisors made the trades.
Waldman said he also questioned the basis for trusting those explanations. He described the legal framework as looser for a president than it is for other government officials or for members of Congress, and he said this is one reason, in his view, the issue requires strengthening through changes to the rules.
Kelly then asked whether the Brennan Center’s report on corruption solutions offered practical steps for addressing what Waldman described. Waldman said the center has argued that the United States needs to address the growing role of big money in politics, including legislation to end dark money and, as he described it, a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. He also said he thinks other reforms are needed to address what he characterized as an older form of corruption tied to officials using power for personal benefit.
When Kelly asked whether there is political will in Congress to act, Waldman said he believes the outcome depends on whether voters care enough to push change. He said: “if the public calls for it loudly enough, you can be surprised by what can happen.”
NPR said it reached out to the White House for comment on Waldman’s remarks. In a response, spokesperson Anna Kelly wrote, in part, that “President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public, which is why they overwhelmingly reelected him to this office. There are no conflicts of interest.”