

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The fund is stunningly, blindingly illegal, and the defendants must be prohibited from transferring money to this corrupt and illegal monstrosity," said a lawyer representing the officers.
A pair of police officers who defended the US Capitol from President Donald Trump's supporters on January 6, 2021 filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday challenging the Republican's "$1.776 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and
paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name."
The so-called "Anti-Weaponization Fund" is part of an agreement finalized this week to settle Trump's "frivolous" $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax records. As part of the deal, the IRS is also "forever barred" from pursuing any other actions against the president and his family—which experts have warned violates federal law and puts agency officers at risk.
The complaint filed in a Washington, DC court on behalf of retired US Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Daniel Hodges argues that the fund is also "illegal," as well as "the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century."
"No statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution and federal law," the filing states. It also makes the case that the fund "endangers the lives and safety" of the plaintiffs by encouraging "those who enacted violence in the president's name to continue to do so" and directly financing "the violent operations of rioters, paramilitaries, and their supporters who threatened plaintiffs' lives that day, and continue to do so."
"Although Trump and his cronies have been secretive about the fund's ends, reporting leaves no doubt that it will be used, among other purposes, to pay the nearly 1,600 people charged with attacking the Capitol on January 6, 2021," the complaint warns.
Trump—who was convicted of 34 felonies in New York after his first term—notably pardoned the Capitol insurrectionists when he returned to office last year. Some then went on to commit various other crimes, including sexual violence, illegal possession of weapons, and driving while impaired or under the influence.
"This fund creates enormous physical dangers for Officers Dunn and Hodges, who risked their lives on January 6, 2021, and who continue to do so by refusing to let that day be forgotten," said Brendan Ballou, founder of the Public Integrity Project, which is representing the plaintiffs. "The fund is stunningly, blindingly illegal, and the defendants must be prohibited from transferring money to this corrupt and illegal monstrosity."
Ballou was previously a prosecutor at the US Department of Justice, where he worked on cases related to the Capitol attack.
Dunn—who became known nationally for his testimony to the US House of Representatives select committee that investigated the Capitol attack—urged "everybody else to sue" over Trump's slush fund during an interview with MS NOW on Wednesday.
"Everybody should, this can't happen," he said. "So, we believe that we, the officers in this suit, will be harmed by this. We have been subjected to countless death threats in addition to all the violence that we faced on January 6. But for just speaking out the truth, I mean, I guarantee you somebody's watching this right now and typing death threats to us right now. And deaths only continue to embolden and potentially continue to arm a militia that Donald Trump will have on retainer."
Also in DC on Wednesday, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal (D-Mass.) demanded that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and IRS CEO Frank Bisignano supply documents and explanations for how they settled the Trump suit.
Raskin also introduced the No Taxpayer-Funded Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2026 to block Trump's fund, and moved to subpoena Blanche, Bessent, and Bisignano, plus Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, who signed the settlement, and Treasury Department General Counsel Brian Morrissey, who resigned as the deal was being announced. The Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee rejected the proposed subpoenas in a party-line vote.
This article has been updated to include Rep. Jamie Raskin's bill and the results of the subpoena vote.
"Never in American history has a president pursued corruption this brazenly or on such a colossal scale," wrote Reps. Jamie Raskin and Richard Neal.
Top Democrats on a pair of panels in the US House of Representatives on Wednesday demanded that Justice and Treasury department leaders answer for how they settled President Donald Trump's $10 billion "sham" lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax records.
In their letter to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and IRS CEO Frank Bisignano, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal (D-Mass.) slammed the settlement as "one of the most brazen acts of public corruption and self-dealing in American history."
"Rather than protect the public fisc from obvious plunder, this DOJ and IRS caved," the lawmakers argued, condemning the creation of a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" as a "taxpayer shakedown" intended to line the pockets of the president's allies, including pro-Trump rioters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
"This massive slush fund will be governed by a sham commission of the president's cronies," Raskin and Neal noted—and due to the terms of the agreement, "the public and members of Congress may never know who received payments."
CNN reported Tuesday that longtime Trump adviser and former administration official Michael Caputo has filed the first known claim, describing his family as "survivors of the illegal Russiagate investigations" and seeking $2.7 million.
"Congress and Congress alone has the power of the purse under the appropriations clause of the Constitution. But Congress never authorized or appropriated funds for a $1.776 billion political slush fund," the House Democrats stressed. "This settlement is a transparent attempt to circumvent the separation of powers and use the judgment fund for a scam Congress never contemplated: rewarding the president’s political allies at the expense of American taxpayers."
Additionally, under the settlement, the IRS is "forever barred" from pursuing any other actions against Trump and his relatives.
"Essentially, the federal government threw in a super-pardon for the president, his family, and related and affiliated entities, freeing them not only from any accountability for any taxes they may have dodged, but other pending federal criminal or civil investigations like insider trading, antitrust violations, false statements, or even sexual harassment," the lawmakers wrote.
Raskin and Neal called on the federal departments to "retain all documents, including both hard copies and electronically stored information (ESI), related to the settlement and establishment of the fund," including messages sent via "private email addresses, text messages, mobile applications (e.g., Signal), or other forms of electronic communications."
They also directed the agency leaders to send over the IRS memorandum on the settlement, other related records, and answers to their list of questions by next week, before Bessent’s scheduled appearance before the Ways and Means Committee.
Blanche was on Capitol Hill Tuesday to testify about the DOJ budget request. However, he faced various other questions, and attempted to counter Democrats' framing that, as Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (Wash.) put it, Trump is using "tax dollars to set up a slush fund to enrich his own friends."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) questioned Blanche about public disclosures of payouts and measures to ensure Trump family members don't get any fund money, while Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) asked about the eligibility of January 6 rioters, including those who assaulted Capitol Hill police or committed sex crimes against children.
A pair of police officers who helped defend the Capitol during the 2021 attack filed a lawsuit in federal court on Wednesday with the aim of dissolving the fund, arguing that "no statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution and federal law."
After the House Democrats' letter was released Wednesday morning, Raskin introduced the No Taxpayer-Funded Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2026 to block Trump's fund. He also moved to subpoena Blanche, Bisignano, Bessent, and other individuals involved in creating the fund: Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward and Treasury Department General Counsel Brian Morrissey.
"Mr. Blanche orchestrated this outrageous slush fund as part of the settlement with Donald Trump, which was also signed by Mr. Woodward, and Mr. Bessent will oversee the payout of these funds. Mr. Bisignano signed off on this settlement for the IRS, and Brian Morrissey remarkably resigned as this deal was being announced," Raskin said. "These individuals all possess critical insights into Trump's self-dealing scheme with his own agencies to create this fund and reward his supporters and friends."
The Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee rejected the proposed subpoenas in a party-line vote.
This article has been updated to include Rep. Jamie Raskin's bill and the results of the subpoena vote.
"The White House is a 24/7 grift machine and we should not stop being outraged about this," said Sen. Chris Murphy.
Less than a day after a $1.77 billion settlement announced in President Donald Trump's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service was denounced as "highway robbery" by one Democratic lawmaker, other members of Congress expressed disgust after it was reported that the taxpayer-funded deal had been updated by a top administration official to ensure the president and his family could potentially get away with defrauding the IRS in perpetuity.
A one-page document was posted on the US Department of Justice (DOJ) website early Tuesday morning, saying that under the settlement, the IRS is "forever barred and precluded" from prosecuting and pursuing any and all claims and other actions against Trump and his family members, regarding unpaid taxes.
The landmark judgement in a civil fraud case against Trump found that his two eldest son's were implicated in an extensive financial and tax fraud scheme along with the president.
The release specifically notes that it also applies to “tax returns filed before the effective date” of the settlement, which was Monday.
"The president is now exempt from our tax laws while everyone else has to obey them," said US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). "Got it. It's just mind-blowing that is what's happening in America."
Politico reported on the document a day after 93 US House Democrats joined an amicus brief filed in Trump v. IRS, aiming to block the creation of a so-called "Anti-Weaponization Fund" as part of the deal for the president to drop his lawsuit against the tax agency, which he filed over a leak of his tax returns.
The "slush fund," as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) called it, could be used to give monetary rewards to people convicted of felonies in connection with the January 6, 2021 attempted insurrection.
The one-page document that was attached to the settlement Tuesday was signed by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
US Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) called the preemptive and permanent blocking of any IRS enforcement against the Trump family "the height of corruption."