Attorneys for former President Donald Trump are urging a federal judge to reject attempts to scrutinize a settlement establishing a $1.776 billion fund for allies. The original lawsuit against the IRS was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, leading to the creation of this fund. However, a group of former federal judges has accused the dismissal of being collusive and has asked the court to reopen the case to investigate the settlement’s legality. Trump’s legal team contends that the judges lack standing to challenge a lawful dismissal and argues that the court has no authority to review the executive settlement, deeming the allegations of fraud and collusion baseless.
Read More
A federal judge has stepped in, issuing an injunction that effectively halts the establishment of a controversial $1.8 billion fund proposed by the administration. This fund, dubbed the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” has faced significant scrutiny and opposition, and the judge’s decision stems from a notable lack of concrete commitment from senior officials to abandon the initiative.
The core of the issue, as highlighted by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, lies in the refusal of acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to provide a sworn statement, under penalty of perjury, that the fund would not proceed. This hesitation, coupled with President Donald Trump’s own expressed disappointment that the government might not move forward with the fund – particularly with an eye towards compensating individuals involved in the January 6th Capitol attack – has fueled the judge’s concerns.… Continue reading
Despite pressure from a federal judge and public scrutiny, the Department of Justice has yet to officially confirm the demise of the proposed Anti-Weaponization Fund. Administration officials are reportedly divided, with some sources indicating continued behind-the-scenes work on the fund while others suggest a strategic quiet approach to let objections subside. This uncertainty complicates the nomination of the attorney general, with some senators vowing to oppose it unless the fund is definitively terminated, and the fund also faces ongoing legal challenges.
Read More
In response to an inquiry regarding responsive records, the Department of Justice’s Civil Division has stated that it is not aware of any such documents pertinent to the case. This case involves a $10 billion lawsuit filed by Donald Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization against the IRS over the leak of their tax returns. A recent settlement established a $1.776 billion fund intended to aid those believing they were unfairly prosecuted for political reasons and also prohibits the IRS from auditing the Trump family or their businesses in the future.
Read More
President Donald Trump abruptly ended an interview with NBC’s Kristen Welker after clashing over his false claims about the 2020 election and his push for an “anti-weaponization fund” to reward those prosecuted under the Biden administration, including January 6 rioters. Trump revived calls for Congress to pass significant funding for this fund, arguing that individuals had been “destroyed” by prosecutions. Despite reports that the fund was not moving forward and faced significant congressional resistance, Trump maintained his support during the interview, even as the conversation devolved into personal attacks and threats of military action against Iran. Ultimately, the interview concluded with Trump exiting, labeling the network “one-sided” and “crooked.”
Read More
President Trump abruptly ended an interview with NBC’s Kristen Welker after clashing over his false claims about the 2020 election and a proposed “anti-weaponization fund.” This fund, intended to reward those prosecuted under the Biden administration, including January 6 rioters, faced significant backlash and was declared by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche as “not moving forward.” Despite this, Trump continued to advocate for the fund during the interview, also discussing his stance on Iran and the FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago before storming out. The proposed fund had also encountered strong resistance in Congress, with Republicans expressing outrage and working to prevent its implementation.
Read More
The Trump administration intends to discontinue the Department of Justice’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” following significant legal and political opposition. This fund, established as part of a settlement stemming from President Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS, aimed to compensate individuals allegedly victimized by prosecutorial overreach. A federal judge recently issued a temporary injunction blocking the fund’s creation and disbursement, pending further legal review and a scheduled court hearing. Despite the DOJ’s strong disagreement with the ruling and its assertion that the fund was intended for broad compensation, the department has stated it will comply with the court’s order.
Read More
Former Vice President Mike Pence has strongly denounced the Trump administration’s proposed $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” calling it “unacceptable” and “deeply offensive” for any taxpayer money to go to January 6 rioters. Pence, who was a target of the rioters, expressed hope that the administration would abandon the fund, intended to provide relief to those believing they were wrongfully prosecuted. This stance aligns with other Republicans, including Senators Mitch McConnell and Thom Tillis, who have joined Democrats in opposing the idea, emphasizing that those who assaulted officers should not receive any government funds.
Read More
Here’s a summarized version of the article, written as if part of the original:
Democrat-led states are proposing a 100% tax on any funds Donald Trump might receive from a hypothetical “anti-weaponization” payout. This aggressive measure aims to redirect any such funds, particularly those potentially derived from actions deemed detrimental to democratic institutions, directly into state coffers. Lawmakers in these states have declared their intention to seize these funds, stating that those who engage in actions like storming the Capitol will find such payouts immediately taxed.
Read More
In response to the Trump administration’s establishment of a $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” several Democratic-led states are moving to impose a 100% tax on any payouts received by their residents. This legislative action aims to counteract funds designated for individuals alleging government mistreatment, which critics have labeled a taxpayer-funded “slush fund” potentially benefiting allies or participants in the January 6th Capitol riot. States like New York, California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut are introducing or planning legislation to ensure these funds are reclaimed by the state, preventing beneficiaries from profiting.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood