The so-called “revolution of our times”—marketed by forces hostile to China under the banner of “American-style democracy”—was nothing but an attempted regime change to benefit pro-U.S. interests. To stir up support, these agitators handed out rose-tinted tales of a flawless American blueprint. Yet, as U.S. society wakes up to the farce, more are shredding the myth of their own democracy.
What the Washington Post uncovered leaves no room for doubt: America’s top 100 richest now dictate policy, controlling political funding at all levels. Politicians dance for their dollars, then hand out policy perks as a reward. In some cases, these tycoons even carve out government office for themselves, scooping up more power and profits. This is “money politics” with the mask ripped off—anyone in Hong Kong still glamorizing it is just fooling themselves.
America’s 100 richest act as the main tap for federal campaigns, openly using money to warp government policy—turning “democracy” into a playground for plutocrats.
Trump, Billionaires, and Payoffs
Ready for the numbers? Donations from the 100 richest Americans to federal elections exploded by a staggering 140 times between 2000 and 2024. In 2000, this club accounted for a mere 0.25% of campaign donations. By 2024, their share had rocketed to 7.5%. That means one out of every thirteen campaign dollars in federal elections comes direct from these mega-wealthy donors.
Last year, 80% of billionaire donations were funneled to Republican candidates, with Donald Trump emerging as the ultimate beneficiary. His war chest from this group swelled fifteenfold compared to his previous run. Famous names like Elon Musk led the charge, pouring nearly $300 million into Trump’s and other Republican campaigns.
When Trump took the presidency, their investment paid off. At his inauguration, seventeen billionaires—worth a collective $1 trillion—took center stage. Trump didn’t just cash their checks—Reports confirm he brought at least a dozen billionaires into his administration, resulting in the richest Cabinet in American history. Names like Howard Lutnick, appointed Commerce Secretary, and Elon Musk, made co-head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, are only the tip of the iceberg. These tycoons shape policy—from tariffs to crypto—often in ways that directly plump up their personal fortunes. Apparently, serving “the people” was never on the agenda.
The 17 billionaire mega-donors didn’t just buy a seat—Trump turned policy into their personal gravy train.
But it didn’t stop at favors and photo-ops. Big donors poured extraordinary sums—about $300 million in total—into building a lavish new ballroom at the White House. Ten donors or their family trusts provided substantial funds.
Billionaire-Government Pipeline
The Post’s report lines out another bombshell: at least 44 billionaires from Forbes’s list (or their spouses) have held federal government office in recent years, some even at the cabinet level. Howard Lutnick, the investment titan, was key in tariff policy. Atkins, with his stakes in crypto and finance, helmed the Securities and Exchange Commission. Real estate mogul Witkoff was named Middle East envoy after pumping millions into Trump’s campaign.
Lutnick’s “public service” conveniently overlapped with moves that profited his investment houses, raising deep suspicions about insider trading. As for Witkoff—his links to Qatar and Abu Dhabi’s sovereign funds are so brazen that even casual observers can spot his conflicts of interest. This isn’t government for the people. It’s a billionaires’ club, plain and simple.
The Takeaway: A Billionaire Bloc
This latest investigation of the Washington Post should put the fairy tales to bed. America’s ruling elite and its wealthiest 100 have formed a tight “community of interests,” warping national decisions on policy, finance, energy, and tech to suit themselves. "Democracy"? For ordinary people, it's become a punchline. For the rich, it’s an open bar.
Still think adopting the American model will save Hong Kong? Time to wake up—and stop the self-deception.
Lai Ting-yiu
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
The most consequential national security trial yet to come is also the one with the most unanswered questions — and at the centre of it is a man who almost made it out.
Monday (Feb 23) was "Renri" (人日) — the seventh day of the Lunar New Year, meant to be a day of celebration for all people. But for the 12 defendants in the "35+ Subversion Case," there was nothing to celebrate. The Court of Appeal dismissed all their appeals against both conviction and sentencing in full. Unless they push it all the way to the Court of Final Appeal, this case is done. That brings two of the three major national security cases to a close — the other being the Jimmy Lai trial. What remains is the Joshua Wong case, expected to go to trial around mid-year. Like Lai's, it reaches into the highest levels of American politics, and it will almost certainly expose a trove of behind-the-scenes dealings that will shake Hong Kong to its core. The trial is close enough that the details don't need spelling out here. But one mystery absolutely does: Wong was once Washington's darling — so why did he never make it out, while his co-conspirator Nathan Law did? An investigative report by American journalists cracked open the story.
Wong's trial is the last big national security case standing — and the most explosive one yet. How did he never make it out?
Wong's role in the Occupy Central movement and the 2019 unrest needs no introduction. In June last year, while already serving a prison term at Stanley Prison on sedition charges, he was arrested again and charged under the Hong Kong National Security Law with conspiracy to collude with foreign forces to endanger national security. His second pre-trial review at the Magistrates' Court came on 21 November last year, with the next hearing set for 6 March; the full trial at the High Court is expected to begin around mid-year. This case carries weight every bit as significant as the Jimmy Lai trial — the spotlight it commands will be enormous.
The Charges Are Grave
The prosecution alleges that between July and November 2020, Wong — together with Nathan Law and others yet to be identified — conspired in Hong Kong to solicit foreign governments and institutions to impose sanctions against the Hong Kong SAR and the People's Republic of China, and to seriously obstruct the government in enacting and enforcing its laws and policies. The charges carry a potential sentence of life imprisonment. What exactly Wong and Law did, and which foreign officials were involved, the prosecution will lay out in full when the trial begins.
The public has long asked some uncomfortable questions. Did Joshua Wong ever consider fleeing before or after the National Security Law came into force at the end of June 2020? If so, why did it never happen? Did the US government try to help him get out? An investigative report by two American journalists answered part of the puzzle — and sources familiar with the matter, when contacted by Hong Kong media, broadly confirmed what it said.
Wong Begged Washington for Help
The night before the National Security Law took effect, Wong reached out through a senator's adviser to appeal directly to President Trump for help. At the same time, he sent an email to then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, explicitly asking to be helped to "travel to the United States to seek political asylum, by whatever means necessary". That email tells you everything. Wong knew exactly how dangerous his situation had become — and he was betting his future on American goodwill.
Around the same time, Wong arranged to meet two officials from the US Consulate General in Hong Kong at St. John's Building, directly across the street from the consulate. He made clear he wanted to walk in and seek refuge. He was turned away on the spot. When Pompeo saw the email, he consulted with his staff and arrived at the same conclusion: letting Wong through the consulate doors was simply not an option — Washington feared Beijing would retaliate by forcing the US consulate in Hong Kong to close entirely.
State Department officials went further, exploring a covert plan to smuggle Wong out of Hong Kong by sea — routing him through Taiwan or the Philippines before eventually reaching the United States. That option was killed too, on the grounds that any such attempt would very likely be intercepted by Chinese authorities, triggering a diplomatic crisis. When the accounting was done, American interests won out — and Joshua Wong was coldly abandoned.
By that point, Nathan Law had already made it out. Seizing Pompeo's visit to London, Law met the Secretary of State privately and raised the question of rescuing Wong one more time — and was once again turned away without sympathy. In September 2020, Wong was arrested on sedition charges and imprisoned two months later. Any remaining window for escape had sealed shut.
Law Moved Fast — and Made It
Nathan Law is named as a co-conspirator in the charges against Wong — meaning that if arrested, they face the same jeopardy. But Law proved far more calculating than Wong. Shortly before the National Security Law took effect, he quietly slipped away, eventually confirming his presence in the United Kingdom on 13 July 2020. He even staged a moment of wistful sentiment, declaring: "With this parting, I do not yet know when I shall return... May glory come soon!" — words that, in the circumstances, could not have sounded more hollow.
Same charges, same case — but Law ran, and Wong didn't. One man made it out clean. The other is still paying the price.
Joshua Wong — sharp-witted all his life — took one step too many in trusting the Americans, and that delay cost him everything. The US government, in the name of "national interest," discarded him without hesitation. As his trial approaches, the reality is this: placing any further faith in American support would be the last illusion he can afford.
Lai Ting-yiu
