The Trump administration will drop its $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” that was widely criticized as a payout for the president’s allies, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a congressional hearing Tuesday.
“We’re not moving forward with the fund, period,” said Blanche in remarks before the House appropriations subcommittee that oversees funding for the Department of Justice.
Republican blowback from the announcement of the fund has stalled movement on an immigration enforcement bill in the Senate, where GOP leaders feared their members would vote on Democratic amendments to nix or put guardrails on the account. Separately, a judge late last week paused the administration’s ability to administer the fund, prompting DOJ to release a statement saying it would follow the court’s orders.
But Republican senators have been hopeful Blanche would make clear in his testimony that the administration would abandon this effort altogether, which could clear the way for Congress to vote on the party-line package with fewer political headaches.
Asked whether he believed Blanche’s comments would satisfy his members, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said in an interview, “I’m hoping they’re going to be [set] … We’ll see, it’s been an interesting week.”
If Blanche’s comments, coupled with additional outreach this week from the White House, are enough to smooth over concerns, Republicans could take up the immigration enforcement bill as soon as Wednesday.
But Thune said leaders were “still trying to figure out how to land the plane” — while noting Senate Republicans need to secure 50 votes not just on the bill itself but to defeat attempts to make changes to the bill. Democrats will use a marathon vote-a-rama to force Republicans to take politically difficult positions on any number of issues, too.
Several Republican senators indicated Tuesday they still had questions about the fate of the fund, created as part of the agreement that Trump should drop his lawsuit against the federal government for the leak of his tax returns. Blanche, at the hearing Tuesday, did not suggest the administration had any intention of withdrawing from that settlement, which included an addendum the IRS would stop pursuing activities against Trump, his family and affiliated businesses.
In other words, Blanche was effectively asking lawmakers to trust that the DOJ would not administer the fund in the event the court eventually allows it to proceed.
Blanche refused to put anything in writing promising the administration would abandon the effort.
“I’m not committing to putting anything in writing. I’ve said it today over and over again,” he told lawmakers. “I don’t know what the purpose of putting something in writing — I’m telling you what we’re doing.”
He also continued to defend its purpose: “The reasons for the fund — it’s something that President Trump talked about for a long time, which is the fact that there were a lot of people in this country who had their government weaponized against them,” he said. “The reasons for the fund … remain as important as [they] were before.”
Ultimately, Blanche’s testimony won’t be enough to prevent senators from trying to insert language into the immigration enforcement bill to formally nix the fund, which Thune acknowledged could spark a veto threat from the president. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has vowed an amendment to kill the Anti-Weaponization Fund will be the first amendment Democrats offer in relation to the immigration measure, while Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told reporters earlier Tuesday that he will file an amendment to nix the fund, too.
The fallout could continue in the House, too, as Democrats continue to accuse the Trump administration of orchestrating a scheme to give payouts to people who participated in the attacks on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
At the House hearing Tuesday, Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) slammed Blanche for attempting to grant taxpayer dollars through the fund to “insurrectionists and other violent felons.”
“This administration has engaged in what are perhaps the most brazen acts of flagrant corruption I’ve ever seen,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the House Appropriations Committee’s top Democrat. “When you preside over a deal to take $1.8 billion of taxpayer money to create a slush fund to pay out violent criminals who pleaded guilty to assaulting police officers, you cannot be surprised when people question your impartiality.”
DeLauro argued with Blanche over whether the broader settlement with Trump constituted “immunity” and criticized the decision to drop the fund but keep the rest of the concessions to the president and his inner circle.
“Simply put, you just gave the president and his family a tax immunity to the tune of about $100 million,” DeLauro said.
Read the full article here