According to The Verge, a New York Times report published on June 8th, 2025, revealed that billionaire venture capitalist and podcaster David Sacks has become Silicon Valley’s primary backchannel to Donald Trump as a “special government employee.” The investigation found Sacks has hundreds of undisclosed conflicts of interest due to his investments in AI and crypto companies he now influences policy on. Despite supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016 and initially backing Ron DeSantis for 2024, Sacks hosted a major fundraiser for Trump last year, spoke at the Republican National Convention, and has gained significant trust within the White House. In response to the story, Sacks has threatened to sue the Times, demanding they “abandon” it, while fellow tech titans have publicly rallied to his defense.
The Valley’s Opportunistic Flip
Here’s the thing that struck me from Ryan Mac’s interview: the total, bizarre normalization. He points out that in 2016, Peter Thiel was a “pariah” in tech for endorsing Trump. Even David Sacks, a Thiel acolyte, backed Hillary. Fast forward eight years, and it seems like everyone’s in line. Sergey Brin went from protesting Trump’s Muslim ban at an airport to standing behind him at an inauguration. That’s not a political evolution; it’s a cold, calculated business decision.
They’ve learned resistance is futile, or more accurately, unprofitable. So now it’s all about fealty. Massage the ego, pledge money to the library, settle the lawsuits. It’s less about ideology and more about opportunism. The tech mindset Mac describes—seeing government as just another “influenceable” system—is on full display. Moving fast and breaking things now applies to political norms and disclosure rules.
Why Sacks And Not Musk?
This is the fascinating part. As Mac notes, there used to be two influential South African billionaires close to Trump. Now there’s basically one. Elon Musk’s falling out was engineered by MAGA insiders who dug up dirt on his allies, like Jared Isaacman being dinged for past Democratic donations. Sacks has the same skeleton in his closet—he was a DeSantis guy until about a year out from the election! So why does he get a pass?
Mac’s analysis is simple: Sacks met the right people and said the right things. He shielded his past. But I think it’s more than that. Musk is a massive, uncontrollable persona. Sacks, for all his podcast bluster, is a more traditional operator. He’s a conduit, not a competitor. For a factional White House, he’s a useful channel for the tech lobby that doesn’t overshadow the boss. Trump is attracted to success and wealth, and Sacks delivers the whole Valley’s fealty in a neat package.
The Brazen Response Playbook
Sacks’ reaction to the Times story is a masterclass in modern reputation management, and it’s utterly transparent. Threaten to sue for defamation over a story you haven’t factually disputed. Demand a publication “abandon” a premise. It’s not a legal strategy; it’s a performance for the base on X. And it works! His tech buddies tweet support, which just amplifies the very story they’re supposedly angry about.
It’s all aura farming, as The Verge piece puts it. Before this, Sacks wasn’t on the shortlist of politically influential tech billionaires. Thiel and Musk sucked up all the oxygen. Now, thanks to a scandal about his conflicts and a response full of grievance, everyone knows his name. He’s playing a dangerous game, but in today’s attention economy, maybe any headline is a good headline. The rush of Silicon Valley money to Trump needed a face, and he’s volunteered.
The Unshakeable Influence
The most astounding takeaway is how the tech set has swayed Trump on core issues against the instincts of his MAGA base. Look at H-1B visas. Populists like Steve Bannon and Laura Loomer railed against them, but Trump eventually came out in favor. Now it’s happening with AI. The protectionist, anti-Big Tech rhetoric has softened because billionaires with exciting toys are in the room.
So what’s the endgame? Sacks’ position looks secure for now. He represents access, and access is what the industry is buying. But the factionalism hasn’t gone away. As his own convention speech showed, he’s walking a tightrope between his coastal tech world and the party base. One misstep, or one rival digging up his Hillary donation receipt, and the Musk-Isaacman playbook could be used against him. For now, though, he’s proof that in Trump’s Washington, past disloyalty is forgiven if you promise future usefulness.
