The Trump administration is facing a storm of scrutiny after a series of high-stakes deals with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) involving advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips and massive cryptocurrency investments came to light. At the heart of the controversy are allegations of conflicts of interest, ethical lapses, and potential risks to U.S. national security, sparking calls for a federal investigation led by prominent Democratic senators.
On September 26, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) formally requested that inspectors general at the Departments of Commerce and State probe what they described as a "deeply troubling" sequence of transactions between senior Trump administration officials and UAE-backed entities. According to The New York Times and Analytics Insight, the senators’ letter points to two major events that unfolded in May 2025: the administration’s approval for the UAE to import advanced, American-designed AI chips, and, almost simultaneously, a staggering $2 billion investment by a UAE sovereign wealth fund into World Liberty Financial (WLF)—a financial firm created by Donald Trump, his family, and real estate billionaire Steve Witkoff.
This timing, the senators argue, raises the specter of a quid pro quo. Was a favorable U.S. policy decision for the UAE linked to a lucrative investment in a Trump-connected business? The senators are determined to find out, warning that such arrangements could put personal enrichment ahead of the nation’s best interests. "The engagement involves two major players: Steve Witkoff, a real estate billionaire and friend of the Trump family, and David Sacks, a White House adviser on A.I. and cryptocurrency. Their relationship has raised serious questions about the ethical lines drawn by this administration in high-stakes, international transactions," the senators wrote, as reported by Analytics Insight.
The details of these deals are dizzying. The AI chip export approval is no small matter—sales of such advanced technologies are tightly regulated due to their potential military and intelligence applications. Allowing the UAE, a key but complex ally in the Middle East, to access them set off alarm bells for lawmakers already wary of the country’s close ties with China. At the same time, the massive investment into WLF, and specifically the Witkoff family’s stake in World Liberty Financial, valued at nearly $800 million, raised further eyebrows. As Analytics Insight notes, "The overlapping interests of policy advocacy and private business interests have attracted the sharp attention of lawmakers."
Steve Witkoff’s trajectory is particularly notable. Having moved from a role at the State Department to a senior White House position earlier in 2025, he was reportedly a key advocate for the AI chip export clearance to the UAE. Meanwhile, his family’s business, World Liberty Financial, was securing that multi-billion-dollar investment from a UAE sovereign wealth fund. This dual role—government official and private business beneficiary—has become a focal point for the investigation. "Witkoff, who moved from a role at the State Department to a senior role at the White House earlier this year, was reportedly a key proponent of action that allowed the AI chip exports to the UAE. At the same time, the firm his family co-founded was securing the multi-billion-dollar investment from a UAE sovereign wealth fund," Analytics Insight reports.
David Sacks, another figure at the center of the probe, served as a White House adviser on AI and cryptocurrency while also maintaining private investment interests. Sacks participated in discussions about the UAE chip deal and, according to the administration, was granted an ethics waiver to do so. This waiver, a legal mechanism allowing officials with potential conflicts to participate in certain policy matters, is not unusual in Washington—but it is often controversial. Critics argue that such waivers can erode public trust, especially when high-value deals are involved. "David Sacks, a tech investor serving as a White House adviser, is also implicated for his participation in discussions surrounding the chip deal. The senators allege that his involvement raises separate conflict-of-interest concerns," Analytics Insight notes.
The White House, for its part, has pushed back against allegations of impropriety. A spokesperson stated that Steve Witkoff is "working to divest from his private investments in order to eliminate any potential conflicts of interest." This, they argue, is standard procedure for officials taking on senior government roles. As for David Sacks, the administration maintains that he "has no financial stake in the chip deal under consideration and has received an ethics waiver that allows him to speak on that policy matter." Still, these assurances have done little to quell the concerns of lawmakers and the public.
Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who sits on a panel overseeing Commerce Department funds, has been vocal in demanding greater transparency. According to Analytics Insight, Van Hollen is "seeking transparency through his seat on a panel that oversees Commerce Department funds." Meanwhile, several Democratic congressmen are investigating whether Sacks violated rules for exceptional government employees—a group subject to special ethical restrictions due to their dual public-private roles.
The broader worry is that the blending of personal financial interests and foreign policy could undermine U.S. national security and erode faith in the government. As Analytics Insight puts it, "Lawmakers argue that the blending of personal financial interests and foreign policy has the potential to erode public trust." The senators’ letter also highlights the risks of exporting cutting-edge AI technology to foreign powers, particularly when those powers have intricate relationships with U.S. rivals. If officials advocated for these deals under the shadow of personal gain, the implications could reverberate far beyond this one case.
Beyond the immediate controversy, these revelations have reignited debate over the Trump administration’s approach to cryptocurrency regulation and technology exports. The administration has long faced criticism for its lenient oversight and willingness to blur the lines between public service and private profit. This latest episode, with its cast of powerful insiders and eye-popping sums, is only adding fuel to the fire.
For now, the ball is in the inspectors general’s court. They must determine whether the evidence warrants a full-scale investigation—one that could have serious consequences not just for Witkoff, Sacks, and other officials, but for the broader policies governing ethics and international technology transfers. The outcome could reshape how future administrations handle the delicate balance between national security, economic interests, and personal gain.
As the investigation unfolds, one thing is certain: the intersection of politics, personal wealth, and national security remains as fraught—and as fascinating—as ever.
