-(4)-1731951738-q80.webp){kind=small}
Calls for an investigation into President Donald Trump’s sudden tariff reversal intensified over the weekend, as Democratic lawmakers continue to raise alarms over what they say is suspicious timing, market manipulation, and possible insider trading.
Appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday, Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said there is “enough smoke” to justify congressional hearings and possibly a federal investigation into whether Trump or individuals in his administration profited from private knowledge about a major policy shift.
The controversy centers around Trump’s announcement last Wednesday of a surprise 90-day pause on sweeping global tariffs—excluding those on Chinese imports—that had sent markets tumbling just days earlier.
In the hours before the announcement, Trump posted on his Truth Social account: “Everything is going to work out well. It’s a great time to buy!” The post followed a week of market volatility and was read by some as a signal to his followers and possibly insiders who may have traded on the information.
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) quickly followed Trump’s post with a formal letter to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Paul Atkins, urging the commission to investigate whether any insiders—including administration officials or members of Trump’s family—benefited from early knowledge of the tariff pause. Now, Booker has joined the fray, insisting the matter deserves more than passing scrutiny.
Host Kristen Welker pressed Booker during the Sunday show, asking whether there was actual evidence beyond Trump’s social media post to justify such serious allegations.
“Do you believe that Democrats have any real evidence that anyone in the administration profited off of the president’s policies and announcements, or is this just a fishing expedition?” she asked.
Booker acknowledged the lack of a smoking gun but argued that Congress should not wait for one before beginning oversight. “There is enough of an offense here. There’s enough smoke here that should demand congressional hearings,” he replied. “Real, legitimate, justifiable questions are being raised.”
Booker framed the issue in terms of democratic accountability. “Here’s the problem with Donald Trump and congressional Republicans,” he said. “Our system was designed for checks and balances. Trump has created an administration like none we’ve ever seen before. He’s attacking the very agencies meant to provide independent oversight.”
When Welker interrupted to ask again if there was any hard evidence that anyone had profited, Booker doubled down: “Congress would be spineless and submissive if it did not act in the face of this kind of behavior. We owe it to the American people to investigate.”
On April 2, President Trump’s tariffs officially took effect—levying a 10% blanket tax on all foreign imports and a staggering 145% on Chinese goods. The stock market responded predictably: all three major indices plunged, with many analysts warning that the tariffs would have a chilling effect on global trade and increase prices for American consumers.
Throughout the week, administration officials insisted there would be no backing down. But on April 9, just days after the markets hit a new low, Trump posted on Truth Social: “Everything is going to work out well. It’s a great time to buy!” Hours later, he announced a 90-day pause on the tariffs—except those on China.
The markets surged, recovering much of their earlier losses. For anyone with foreknowledge of the pause, there was a clear window to make substantial profits.
It’s this sequence of events that has prompted scrutiny. Trump’s cheerleading post, combined with the subsequent reversal, created massive shifts in stock values within a very short window.
“Anyone with insider knowledge could have made a killing,” said financial analyst Renée Lin of the Institute for Market Ethics. “This isn’t just about optics—it’s about potential abuse of market-moving information by people in power.”
The outcry from Booker, Warren, and Schumer has put the focus squarely on the SEC, the independent agency charged with regulating Wall Street and protecting investors from fraud and manipulation. In their joint letter, Senate Democrats were direct:
“We urge the SEC to investigate whether the tariff announcements, which caused the market crash and subsequent partial recovery, enriched administration insiders and friends at the expense of the American public and whether any insiders, including the President’s family, had prior knowledge of the tariff pause that they abused to make stock trades ahead of the President’s announcement.”
The letter also raised concerns about “signals” sent through Truth Social, which the senators suggested could be used to telegraph policy shifts in a way that benefits allies and family members.
“The American people deserve to know whether public policy is being manipulated for private gain,” the letter stated.
So far, few Republicans have spoken publicly about the issue, although a handful have hinted that the situation warrants a closer look. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has previously supported legislation to limit presidential authority over tariffs and has called for greater transparency in trade policy.
In a statement unrelated to the insider trading allegations, Grassley said, “The Constitution gives Congress—not the president—the power to regulate foreign commerce. We have given up too much of that authority, and now we are paying the price.”
Privately, some Republicans are said to be uncomfortable with the tariff reversal and Trump’s behavior online. But most have remained silent, wary of provoking a president who still wields immense influence within the GOP base.
According to Booker, that silence is unacceptable. “This is a test of Congress,” he said. “Will we allow one man to act without oversight, or will we uphold our constitutional responsibilities?”
This is not the first time Trump has faced allegations of using public office for private financial gain. Throughout his first term, ethics watchdogs criticized the president for failing to fully divest from his businesses, allowing his properties to receive payments from foreign governments, and pushing policy decisions that aligned closely with his financial interests.
This latest incident, while not yet proven to involve direct profit-taking, adds to that legacy of ethical ambiguity.
“Even if Trump didn’t personally profit, the very fact that these questions are being raised is damaging,” said Norm Eisen, former White House ethics czar under President Obama. “The lack of transparency, the social media teases, the sudden reversals—these all create an environment ripe for abuse.”
Eisen supports the call for SEC investigations and says Congress should issue subpoenas if necessary to determine whether trades were made based on insider information.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has not yet confirmed whether it will launch a formal investigation, but the pressure is mounting. If it does, the inquiry would likely involve subpoenas for trading records, communication logs, and possibly testimony from Trump officials and family members.
Congressional hearings are also on the table. Senate Democrats say they plan to force a vote on a resolution within the next 15 days to terminate the economic emergency Trump declared to justify the tariffs. While Republicans are expected to oppose the measure, any defections could signal growing unease within the party about Trump’s economic policies.
The issue could also have implications for the upcoming 2026 midterm elections, where Democrats hope to retake the House and strengthen their position in the Senate.
If the insider trading narrative gains traction, it could become a rallying cry for progressives seeking to emphasize corruption and lack of accountability under Trump’s leadership.
“This isn’t just a story about one post or one trade,” said Booker. “It’s a story about whether democracy can function when public office is used as a tool for personal power.”
Among the public, reactions to the allegations have been mixed—largely along partisan lines. Progressive activists have seized on the moment to demand stronger ethics laws and tighter restrictions on market activity by government officials.
“Every American should be furious,” said activist Bree Newsome. “You can’t trust a system where billionaires in office make secret decisions that tank your retirement fund one day and pump it the next.”
Conservative voices, however, have largely dismissed the controversy as overblown.
“This is just another Democratic witch hunt,” said Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson. “They can’t beat Trump at the ballot box, so they’re trying to do it through the SEC.”
Still, the broader public is showing signs of fatigue. A recent NPR/Marist poll found that while a majority of Americans believe ethics in government is important, only 38% trust that either party will enforce them consistently.
Senator Cory Booker’s assertion that “there’s enough smoke” to justify an investigation into Trump’s tariff reversal has opened a new front in the ongoing battle over presidential accountability.
Whether the SEC chooses to act, and whether Congress is willing to confront the potential misuse of policy for personal gain, will shape not just this story—but the public’s faith in democratic institutions.
In a political era defined by disruption and scandal fatigue, one question remains: how much smoke will it take before lawmakers are finally moved to act?
