Weaponization fund controversy ends in a blurry trade-off |
Weaponization fund controversy ends in a blurry trade-off
Last week Capitol Hill was in roiling turbulence. At the epicenter was a $70 billion, multi-year reconciliation bill for immigration enforcement. On the periphery were disputes over war powers, White House ballroom security, foreign intelligence surveillance, and payouts for victims of federal prosecutions.
The latter rumble was the major stumbling block in passing the reconciliation bill. A significant number of Republican senators balked at the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” as unseemly, especially because some of it could potentially go to rioters who violently attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to disrupt the Electoral Vote count. The trauma of that event left an indelible mark on many members.
To be patriotically precise, the payout fund was actually $1.776 billion, befitting our nation’s 250th anniversary. It was part of a settlement of a $10 billion lawsuit President Trump personally filed against the IRS for the illegal leak of his tax returns. Instead of awaiting a judicial decision, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, formerly Trump’s personal attorney, created the weaponization fund. He said it was done to prevent Trump, his family, and businesses from availing themselves of any of its monetary benefits.
The second part of the settlement, though, was a proviso that neither Trump, his family nor his businesses could be audited or prosecuted for past failures to report or pay taxes owed — estimated by some at more than $100 million.
In a policy reversal on Tuesday of last week, Blanche informed a House appropriations........