WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday questioned U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a hearing on President Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget request for the U.S. Department of State. Murphy challenged Rubio on the administration’s misleading foreign aid claims and raised serious concerns about Trump’s ongoing business ties with foreign governments, warning they undermine U.S. national security.
Murphy called out Rubio for downplaying the harm caused by shutting down USAID and misrepresenting key facts in his opening statement: “It would certainly shock Americans to hear that only 12% of our foreign aid reaches needy recipients on the ground – the people who need the help. That is not actually an accurate number. That is the amount of our aid that goes directly to local groups on the ground, but as you know, most of our aid runs through bigger international organizations, like Save the Children. Those entities are [giving] somewhere around 80%, 85% of the aid we give them directly to recipients on the ground. So I think that what you have done to shutter USAID is illegal, but I also think it is bad policy, and I do think it is important for us to all be operating with the same set of facts. The fact is not that only 12% of taxpayer dollars are ending up in the hands of the people who really need it on the ground.”
Murphy condemned Trump for abandoning his pledge to keep family business separate from foreign deals, warning the reversal creates dangerous conflicts between national security and personal profit: “During his first term, [Trump] made the decision to not enter into any new business deals during his presidency – that Trump-affiliated businesses would not enter into any foreign business arrangements. And that made sense, because obviously it can be confusing for foreign governments to know how to try to win favor with the U.S. government if they have one route – making concessions that are good for U.S. national security – and they also have another route – which is perhaps helping the President's business interests. The President obviously changed that policy, and in this administration, his business interests are announcing new agreements and new investments into those business interests by foreign governments. And I think it stands to reason that that creates a real problem for foreign policy. It creates a problem for foreign governments in which they don’t exactly know what the best way is to try to get on good terms with the U.S. government and with the White House. Is it to do what’s right for American national security, or might it also be to do a business deal with the President of the United States and the entities he controls?”
After Rubio denied knowing about Trump’s upcoming meme coin dinner, a closed-door gala promising exclusive access to the President in exchange for anonymous multi-million dollar investments in Trump’s meme coin, Murphy concluded: “I think that represents a real problem for this Committee, because there is clearly a way around the State Department for foreign individuals of significant influence and wealth, to be able to directly lobby the President of the United States. And so, if your answer is that you don't know this is happening, that in and of itself is a problem. These are individuals who just bought their way into a meeting with the President. I think you should endeavor to get your hands on the list to make sure that there aren’t individuals there who are perhaps contravening national security interests that the Department of State is prioritizing.”
A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Rubio can be found below:
MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here.
“Before I ask my questions, I just ask that after this hearing you go back and reconsider a claim that you made in your opening statement. It would certainly shock Americans to hear that only 12% of our foreign aid reaches needy recipients on the ground– the people who need the help. That is not actually an accurate number. That is the amount of our aid that goes directly to local groups on the ground, but as you know, most of our aid runs through bigger international organizations, like Save the Children. Those entities are getting somewhere around 80%, 85% of the aid we give them directly to recipients on the ground. So I think that what you have done to shutter USAID is illegal, but I also think it is bad policy, and I do think it is important for us to all be operating with the same set of facts. The fact is not that only 12% of taxpayer dollars are ending up in the hands of the people who really need it on the ground.
“Mr. Secretary, I wanted to talk to you about the President’s personal business interests. During his first term he made the decision to not enter into any new business deals during his presidency– that Trump-affiliated businesses would not enter into any foreign business arrangements. And that made sense, because obviously it can be confusing for foreign governments to know how to try to win favor with the U.S. government if they have one route – making concessions that are good for U.S. national security – and they also have another route – which is perhaps helping the President's business interests. The President obviously changed that policy, and in this administration, his business interests are announcing new agreements and new investments into those business interests by foreign governments. And I think it stands to reason that that creates a real problem for foreign policy. It creates a problem for foreign governments in which they don’t exactly know what the best way is to try to get on good terms with the U.S. government and with the White House. Is it to do what’s right for American national security, or might it also be to do a business deal with the President of the United States and the entities he controls? Just to clarify, when the President's businesses are engaged in negotiations, for instance with the UAE on their stable-coin business – there was this big investment announced recently – you are not part of those negotiations. Those are being done by the President's family or those representing the President’s businesses?”
RUBIO: “I am not aware the President is involved in managing any business, other than the presidency of the United States. His family is allowed to make business deals. They continue to operate the enterprises that his family ran. I also don't accept the notion that these deals – for example in Saudi Arabia, or the UAE or Qatar – had anything to do with the President. For example, Qatar bought $200 billion worth of airplanes from Boeing. The President’s not – as far as I know– a shareholder of Boeing. He certainly does not own Boeing. The overwhelming – if you look at the deals that were structured, they were involved with investments in the United States, that’s the deals he signed, and/or investments in, for example, the UAE or Saudi Arabia, involving artificial intelligence.”
MURPHY: “UAE did announce a massive investment in World Liberty Financial, and World Liberty Financial is controlled by the President. And the President does actively engage in these businesses. He uses his social media to market the businesses that are being run by his family. I mean, just go on to his social media feed and you will see him marketing his meme coin. That is the President of the United States, that is not his sons doing it.”
RUBIO: “But just to be clear, that was not an announcement as part of this trade visit that was conducted into the Middle East.”
MURPHY: “Well, whether or not it was made during the time the President was there, there are obviously business deals being done between Trump entities and these countries.
“Let me ask you about the one that is probably most confusing to this Committee, which is the planned gift of a plane to either the United States government or the President. Is it your understanding that this luxury plane that Qatar has offered the President – and the President has announced he is willing to accept – is a gift to the United States government? Or is it a gift, ultimately, to the President himself that he can use in his library?”
RUBIO: “Well you would have to talk to the Department of Defense because this is a replacement, or at least a temporary bridge plane, for Air Force One – the new Air Force One – which is way off of its delivery schedule. And so that would have to be with the Air Force. They operate Air Force One. My understanding of it basically has been from the very beginning that this is a plane that was identified after talking to Boeing about what other planes around the world would fit the bill – that are out there, that could be used now – they identified the ones the Qataris had as an opportunity for one, and the ones the UAE had as an opportunity for one, and that’s how that–“
MURPHY: “And it’s not your understanding that the plane ultimately will belong to the President, or to the President's library, after?”
RUBIO: “I’m not involved at that level of it. I’ve never heard that before. What I’ve heard is that that plane will replace Air Force One which is an Air Force plane.”
MURPHY: “Let me ask you about the dinner that’s happening this Thursday night. The President has offered access to him to the 200 top purchasers of his meme coin. Reports are that maybe about half or more of those individuals, who will be meeting with him, many in a VIP reception, are foreigners. Do you have a list of those foreign individuals who will be meeting with the President?”
RUBIO: “I don't. I don’t know anything about it. I didn’t even know there was a dinner on Thursday night, so I’m not sure what you're referring to.”
MURPHY: “So you don't know whether any of the foreign individuals who are going to be meeting with the President this Thursday night, for instance, are on our list of sanctioned individuals, or whether any of those individuals have connections to, let’s say, terrorist organizations abroad?”
RUBIO: “Well I think if they had terrorist links the Department of Homeland Security probably would not have allowed them into the country. But, again, I don’t even know there is a dinner on Thursday. You’re asking me about something I don't know about.”
MURPHY: “Listen, this is a dinner that the President is having. It is likely going to involve some very significant foreign interests. You have to be pretty wealthy in order to be able to get inside this dinner. Isn't that a relevant question for the Secretary of State–”
RUBIO: “I’m not the Social Secretary.”
MURPHY: “–which foreign interests are going to be speaking to the President?”
RUBIO: “No.”
MURPHY: “I mean, it’s kind of naive to believe they aren’t going to be in that room talking about national security matters.”
RUBIO: “I don't think that that’s the case at all, because I would be aware if it was the case. The truth of the matter is I interact with government officials and others in governments of other countries. You’re asking about a dinner I don't know anything about. I can’t answer you because I don't know anything about this dinner. It’s the first I heard of it. Like I said, I don’t keep the President's social schedule. It’s not on my phone. It’s not in my pocket. I can’t comment on a dinner I know nothing about.”
MURPHY: “I think that represents a real problem for this Committee, because there is clearly a way around the State Department for foreign individuals of significant influence and wealth, to be able to directly lobby the President of the United States. And so if your answer is that you don't know this is happening, that in and of itself is a problem.”
RUBIO: “I don’t think that’s fair. I don’t know that there’s a dinner, and I don't know what the guest list is, but I can tell you I’ve run into the President of FIFA from the World Cup. He’s here all the time. I see him. He’s a private individual, it’s not a government entity, and he’s met with the President and is friendly with the President. He doesn’t have to go through me to meet with the President. The President has relationships and friends and people he’s known for a long time. Some of them are foreigners. That’s not unusual. But you’re asking me about a specific dinner and implying nefarious impact. I can’t comment on a dinner.”
MURPHY: “Yeah, but those are people that he’s known for a long time. These are individuals who just bought their way into a meeting with the President. I think you should probably endeavor to get your hands on the list to make sure that there aren’t individuals there who are perhaps contravening national security interests that the Department of State is prioritizing.”
RUBIO: “I don’t have any concern about that. I don't have any concern that the President having dinner with someone is going to contravene the national security of the United States.”
MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”
###