The Unseen Hand: Trump Media's Proposed Alliance with Ex-Intelligence Chiefs

A startling revelation has come to light regarding Donald Trump's burgeoning social media enterprise, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). Documents obtained by The Associated Press indicate that the company had proposed a controversial arrangement to grant a significant equity stake to a group of former U.S.

intelligence officials and tech experts. This advisory body, envisioned to lend its expertise, was slated to receive millions of dollars in company shares, sparking immediate ethical concerns and raising questions about the intersection of national security and private media ventures.

At the heart of this proposed alliance was an "Intelligence Advisory Board," a formidable collective whose members reportedly included John Ratcliffe, the former Director of National Intelligence under Trump.

Their ostensible mission was to guide TMTG on critical issues ranging from national security implications to content moderation policies for its flagship platform, Truth Social. Proponents of the deal suggested it would help "build a free-speech platform that does not enable illegal activity," positioning the company as a credible and responsible player in the digital landscape.

The specifics of the arrangement, outlined in an early draft, painted a picture of a lucrative partnership.

The advisory board and its consulting firm were projected to receive shares potentially worth millions, contingent on the company's valuation following its merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), Digital World Acquisition Corp. This significant financial incentive was intended to compensate the experts for their guidance on matters such as combating foreign disinformation campaigns, identifying national security threats, and navigating complex legal and ethical questions surrounding content on a platform dedicated to "free speech."

However, the proposed deal quickly drew scrutiny from ethics watchdogs and political observers.

The prospect of high-ranking former intelligence officials receiving substantial financial compensation from a company deeply intertwined with a prominent political figure, especially one who could potentially return to the presidency, presented a minefield of potential conflicts of interest. Critics questioned whether such an arrangement could compromise the integrity and perceived impartiality of individuals who once held positions of immense public trust, potentially blurring the lines between public service and private gain.

Beyond the immediate financial aspects, the "optics" of the deal were undeniable.

While the advisory board was framed as a guardian against illicit activity, the involvement of former intelligence chiefs could also be interpreted as an attempt to imbue TMTG with a veneer of official credibility, perhaps even leveraging their past roles for commercial or political advantage. The situation highlighted the increasing challenges in regulating the flow of information and influence in the digital age, particularly when politically charged platforms engage with individuals from sensitive government backgrounds.

Ultimately, the article suggests that this specific deal with the "Intelligence Advisory Board" as initially conceived, either never fully materialized or was significantly altered following the public scrutiny and internal discussions.

TMTG itself has faced a turbulent journey, including delays in its SPAC merger and questions surrounding its financial viability and user base. This unfulfilled partnership serves as a potent reminder of the complex ethical landscape surrounding tech startups with political affiliations and the delicate balance required when figures from national security circles engage with the private sector.