Democrats Press Treasury Over Trump-Linked Crypto Venture Security Risks

The core of the congressional concern is a substantial foreign investment in World Liberty Financial. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, more than 40 Democratic lawmakers, led by Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, highlighted a half-billion-dollar investment made last year by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a prominent member of the UAE’s royal family. The sheikh, who has been informally referred to as the ‘spy sheikh’ due to his reported intelligence ties, represents a significant point of contention.

In a statement, Representative Meeks explicitly linked the financial transaction to broader security implications. ‘The Trump family’s $500 million deal connected to the Emirati royal family is not only a matter of national financial instability, but it also carries serious national security implications,’ he stated. This framing elevates the issue beyond a standard regulatory review, directly questioning whether foreign governments or their proxies could gain leverage within the U.S. financial system through such investments.

The lawmakers’ inquiry is timed to coincide with World Liberty Financial’s active pursuit of a national bank charter from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). This process grants a company access to the federal banking system, making the scrutiny of WLFI’s ownership and funding sources particularly acute. The Democrats are explicitly seeking assurances that this chartering process remains ‘insulated from political or foreign influence.’

In their letter, the group argued that the situation has moved past abstract policy debates. ‘This is no longer just a debate about crypto chartering theory,’ they wrote. ‘It is about foreign ownership, national security, regulatory integrity, and whether our bank‑chartering process is resilient to political and geopolitical pressure.’ They have asked Treasury officials to detail what specific safeguards exist to prevent politically connected investors or foreign entities from exploiting the chartering process to access sensitive U.S. financial and technological infrastructure.

Beyond the investment and charter, the House Democrats are pressing for clarity on the administrative process itself. They have requested that the Treasury Department clarify the role, if any, played by the White House and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in reviewing or influencing charter decisions made by the OCC. This line of questioning underscores a deep-seated concern about the potential for political interference in what should be an independent regulatory function.

The lawmakers set a deadline of February 26 for a response from the Treasury Department. In closing their letter, they emphasized the foundational principles at stake, writing, ‘The credibility of America’s banking regulatory framework, and of the institutions charged with protecting it, depends on transparency, independence, and a demonstrated willingness to resist undue influence.’ This appeal to public trust frames the WLFI review as a bellwether for the integrity of the entire U.S. financial regulatory system.

Amid the political firestorm, World Liberty Financial’s native cryptocurrency, WLFI, has shown volatility. At the time of the report, the token was trading at $0.1168, reflecting a 3% decline over the previous 24 hours. However, broader market data from CoinGecko indicated the asset had risen nearly 10% over the preceding seven days, suggesting investor sentiment may be reacting to factors beyond the immediate congressional scrutiny.

The confrontation also follows a notably tense House Financial Services Committee hearing earlier this month, where Representative Meeks sharply criticized Treasury Secretary Bessent, referring to him as a ‘flunky’ of President Trump. This acrimonious backdrop adds a layer of political friction to the substantive policy questions surrounding WLFI. The outcome of the Treasury’s review, and its response by the February 26 deadline, will be closely watched as an indicator of how the administration navigates the complex intersection of cryptocurrency, national security, and political optics.