The President has gotten the Justice Department to agree to an “anti-weaponization” fund that anyone who the government went after abusively can draw money from.
Well they released them. So we're not waiting anymore. Typical dem. It's not federal law to release your taxes if you want to be president. You know why he didn't release them. Because he knows people will speculate. nitpick, conspiracy theory, bang the pots that he doesnt pay enough taxes, search for possible avenues to indict him like they have already on made up charges. It's not a win for him. Likely why he made the deal they are not allowed to nefariously investigate him or his family.
A separate fund of money for claims against the DOJ being weaponized that bypasses the current system in place is wrong and bad precedent. It seems that for many years, each time the political party in power abuses its power while in office, the opposite party once in power not only does the same thing (in this case weaponizing the DOJ against perceived "political enemies"), but uses it as an excuse to also enact an even bigger power grab or $ grab. The ante forever goes up at the expense to all of us. My question is foundational, WHY are we allowing the DOJ to constantly be weaponized AT ALL?!!!
Erick, you cannot be serious. The amount of metaphorical Kool-Aid that you've chosen to drink is made apparent by the very first sentence of this piece: "The President has gotten the Justice Department to agree to an “anti-weaponization” fund." Anyone who will not do exactly what Trump wants has either resigned or been fired from this Justice Department. Anyone with half a brain therefore knows that referring to this arrangement as any sort of "agreement" is so disingenuous as to border on being an outright lie.
Under the Constitution, Congress has the power to decide how our tax dollars are spent. Accordingly, it set up a "judgment" fund with which to settle cases brought against the government in court. In devising and funding a system by which people he likes can have their claims paid without even going to court, Trump's "anti-weaponization fund" would be spending taxpayer dollars in a way not authorized by Congress. In this respect, it allows him to usurp the role of Congress.
A "judgment" can only be obtained from a court. The ethical duty of a Justice Department lawyer to defend the government's (our) interests means that a claim paid out of the judgment fund must, at the very least, be able survive a motion to dismiss. Trump's fund would eliminate any role for the courts in the administration of justice with respect to any claims made against it.
In sum, Trump wants his executive branch to perform the roles of both Congress and the courts here. And the problem you have with it is that Democrats might be able to make claims against the fund too? I mean, seriously?
Some have asserted that the first job of the President is to protect the American people. It is not. The very first thing that the Constitution requires of him is to swear an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Since its ratification, allegiance to that Constitution is what has made us, not just Federalists, Whigs, Democrats, or Republicans, but Americans. In this respect, your failure to even mention these gross violations of our Constitution could be even more of a disgrace than your justification for Trump's purging of the GOP based on supposed defects in the service or character of those purged, knowing full well that their actual transgression was failure to bend the knee (or in John Cornyn's case, failure to bend it quickly or far enough).
[The original version of this comment accused Erickson of having reached a new low here. However, lows are now flowing from his pen at such a rate that of this, I cannot be certain. Again making reference to his piece a couple of days ago - defending Trump's efforts to punish not just his enemies, but fellow Republicans in their primaries - this faint-to-almost-nonexistent criticism of the President's effort to also reward his friends with our tax dollars might not even be Erickson's low of the week. Day after day, he tries to somehow put lipstick on the pig that is Donald Trump. Every day it seems, the stench only grows stronger.]
Are Trump's stock purchases, just before he does or says something to juice their value, also wrong only because a Democrat might do it too?
Democrat Administrations have been doing far worse for far longer, using the Justice Department to settle bogus lawsuits brought by Democrat front groups, and using these lawsuits to make policy that they cannot achieve through the legislative process. Please; spare us your sanctimony.
I certainly believe the DOJ weaponized against conservatives going all the way back to the IRS actions against conservative org getting tax exempt status, Giulani being driven into poverty, many of the J6'ers that were jailed and treated poorly and so many others. This is a really serious problem and has not been a "both parties" thing in my mind. That said, while I have some acceptance of the grievance, this approach certainly does not seem to be a workable solution as you point out likely to be applied in very abusve/ excessive ways. Buty, we do need an effective process to using the justice system to cancel, control and bankrupt individuals that simply don't support the pregressive agenda/
I don't know about you all, but I just learned something I didn't know, that there is a Justice Fund. That makes sense. This does not. In typical government fashion, this will grow into something beyond its original intent. Yes, there have been people with legit reasons for now being able to reach out, but isn't that the purpose of the Justice Fund? Just as what happened with the Covid fund allocations, this seems destined for the same fate. This deal clearly benefits the Trump family, but at what expense? Have we just handed the midterms to our opponents?
It's a terrible idea - now or ever! Bet it would be used by congressional perverts as well to settle sexual abuse/intimidation cases as well. Why or why would he ever think this was a good idea?!!
I think the president is beyond what I would call small ball tactics. He wants loyal republicans willing to stand up for something. The democrat party has shifted so far left they are beyond recognizable. There should not be any moderate republican positions. What you sort of support men in women's sports or open borders...He not concerned with the timing. The timing is he has about two more years to complete his agenda, before he once again goes back to private life and if republicans are not winning and these rinos are still in office he and his family will be put right back on the fire to scape goat the dems failures and satisfy their Jacobian party blood lust. Damn the torpedos Full speed ahead...
I dont think he is running into a minefield but he is not sweating some of these senators moods swings and he does feel like himself and many other people were run over by the democrat department of justice bus and deserve compensation. If the republicans can continue to build off his legacy. People like Comey will have to wait a long time before they can apply for compensation.
Doesn't matter if they do & many do, there are other avenues with less fallout & more control. The days of only a few D or R taking mishandling money are long gone he does this, they will do this - taxpayers lose. He still needs Congress to actually pass legistration that lasts. Executive orders, etc. when D's take over which at this rate could be in a few months govt will come to a halt nothing done or impeachment and the good that he has done and might still do gone.
You say "The President has gotten the Justice Department to agree to an “anti-weaponization” fund" - Gee if I can fire everyone in said Department, it's not that hard to get them to agree to whatever I want now is it? We already have a system where people can seek compensation when they have been wronged - It involves going through the COURTS and there are plenty of lawyers that work on contingency who will gladly take GOOD cases that are likely to result in payouts. But because Trump does not unilaterally control courts he came up with this banana republic bs process that he will effectively control to pay his loyalists with our money.
Separately, I am worried what Trump is going to be like after the midterms - he already operates as though he has virtually no accountability, but after the midterms I think we will be able to remove the word virtually (after the retirements, no one left in the GOP has an ability to stand up to him). Trump has realized that having 30-35% of the country in a cult gives you complete control of a political party and thus nearly complete control of the country. Also, our conservative media ecosystem is now set up to prop up one person as the cult/party leader. It's been the business mode for a decade to essentially be adult film movie set style fluffers in service to one cult leader - it's too profitable and the structure is in place to just keep this rolling. So whether it continues to be Trump after he leaves office or it becomes some other bozo, The Right is now set up to be led by a singular "strong man" for the foreseeable future....
I think you're on to something in terms of Trump's thinking. Erickson struggles to understand why Trump is doing things that are counterproductive for his agenda and for the Party. However, if all one really wants to do is walk out the door with as much money in your pocket and as many memorials built in your everlasting honor as possible, all one really needs is a minority in either house of Congress that is large enough to defeat any attempt to override his veto or drive him out of office. Whereas the GOP needs Cornyn, he needs a loyalist - every bit as corrupt as him - like Paxton.
There is hardly a 'best time' in politics to do a 'right deed'. In our climate of fabrication for the sake of outrage no good deed or idea will be presented accurately or go unpunished.
There are those (on here and elsewhere) that will view this as a Trump failure whether it's a good idea or a blunder. It will be spun according to desired political outcomes, but not according to the truth, whatever that may be.
David notes that it will be a few years down the road and opinions will change. Yes, that is likely true but quite doubtful as to the way it will lean. Each according to his bias at the time. It often takes time to adequately encapsulate a set of actions. Every leader both gets flak by some and protection from others during their tenure only to be appreciated (or villified) decades or even centuries later. This is borne out through history over thousands of years.
It is beyond me to determine what the depth of the machinations are and whether it is proceeding according to a grander plan or a poorly conceived scheme.
Years after Trump is gone Erick will admit that this was a kleptocracy, complete with oligarchs like Putin, Trumps hero. He will just need a "decent interval" to pass.
I hope you're right. It feels to me like Erick needs to keep ever present in his and everyone else's mind how horribly evil the Democrats are. That way, he never has to really face how horribly evil Trump is. As you said, after a decent interval passes, perhaps he will be able to do so. I cling to the belief that at his core, Erickson is well intentioned and he seems too smart not to realize how utterly dishonest and lacking in character Trump is, but I really don't know anymore.
In 2017 when Trump was first elected a few of the conservative pundits spoke out against him and MAGA turned on/abandoned them. Hugh Hewitt was one and I think Erick was another. Their audience abandoned them and it took a couple of years to get them back. Since then every time they say anything negative about Trump it is accompanied by "but the Dems are much worse". It doesn't matter what it is they have to. Yes, I think at his core Erick is a good and decent person who sees Trump for what he is. But he has to make a living and he's no David French. Still better than most.
I just commented on the “four things” post from yesterday that the primary reason voters supported him in the first place was because he was viewed as a non-politician. Here recently, his actions have seriously undercut that viewpoint. The “agreement” between him and the IRS? This slush fund? Taxpayer money for his ballroom? Yeah, he’s just as swampy as the creatures whose home he once stated he was going to drain…
Ballroom will have layers of intelligence and communications on lower levels. I bet he will say he is paying for the ballroom. Tax payers are paying for the security upgrades. He was un justly attacked and the irs leaked his taxes. Also famously denied conservative groups in profit status against the rules. So a little bit of retribution goes a long way. He's helping those that have been abused. Sad a person like Comey might take advantage of the program, but I'm betting he thinks republicans and his legacy will take the next 4 years and comey will have to wait a long time before he can apply.
Well they released them. So we're not waiting anymore. Typical dem. It's not federal law to release your taxes if you want to be president. You know why he didn't release them. Because he knows people will speculate. nitpick, conspiracy theory, bang the pots that he doesnt pay enough taxes, search for possible avenues to indict him like they have already on made up charges. It's not a win for him. Likely why he made the deal they are not allowed to nefariously investigate him or his family.
A separate fund of money for claims against the DOJ being weaponized that bypasses the current system in place is wrong and bad precedent. It seems that for many years, each time the political party in power abuses its power while in office, the opposite party once in power not only does the same thing (in this case weaponizing the DOJ against perceived "political enemies"), but uses it as an excuse to also enact an even bigger power grab or $ grab. The ante forever goes up at the expense to all of us. My question is foundational, WHY are we allowing the DOJ to constantly be weaponized AT ALL?!!!
Erick, you cannot be serious. The amount of metaphorical Kool-Aid that you've chosen to drink is made apparent by the very first sentence of this piece: "The President has gotten the Justice Department to agree to an “anti-weaponization” fund." Anyone who will not do exactly what Trump wants has either resigned or been fired from this Justice Department. Anyone with half a brain therefore knows that referring to this arrangement as any sort of "agreement" is so disingenuous as to border on being an outright lie.
Under the Constitution, Congress has the power to decide how our tax dollars are spent. Accordingly, it set up a "judgment" fund with which to settle cases brought against the government in court. In devising and funding a system by which people he likes can have their claims paid without even going to court, Trump's "anti-weaponization fund" would be spending taxpayer dollars in a way not authorized by Congress. In this respect, it allows him to usurp the role of Congress.
A "judgment" can only be obtained from a court. The ethical duty of a Justice Department lawyer to defend the government's (our) interests means that a claim paid out of the judgment fund must, at the very least, be able survive a motion to dismiss. Trump's fund would eliminate any role for the courts in the administration of justice with respect to any claims made against it.
In sum, Trump wants his executive branch to perform the roles of both Congress and the courts here. And the problem you have with it is that Democrats might be able to make claims against the fund too? I mean, seriously?
Some have asserted that the first job of the President is to protect the American people. It is not. The very first thing that the Constitution requires of him is to swear an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Since its ratification, allegiance to that Constitution is what has made us, not just Federalists, Whigs, Democrats, or Republicans, but Americans. In this respect, your failure to even mention these gross violations of our Constitution could be even more of a disgrace than your justification for Trump's purging of the GOP based on supposed defects in the service or character of those purged, knowing full well that their actual transgression was failure to bend the knee (or in John Cornyn's case, failure to bend it quickly or far enough).
[The original version of this comment accused Erickson of having reached a new low here. However, lows are now flowing from his pen at such a rate that of this, I cannot be certain. Again making reference to his piece a couple of days ago - defending Trump's efforts to punish not just his enemies, but fellow Republicans in their primaries - this faint-to-almost-nonexistent criticism of the President's effort to also reward his friends with our tax dollars might not even be Erickson's low of the week. Day after day, he tries to somehow put lipstick on the pig that is Donald Trump. Every day it seems, the stench only grows stronger.]
Are Trump's stock purchases, just before he does or says something to juice their value, also wrong only because a Democrat might do it too?
Democrat Administrations have been doing far worse for far longer, using the Justice Department to settle bogus lawsuits brought by Democrat front groups, and using these lawsuits to make policy that they cannot achieve through the legislative process. Please; spare us your sanctimony.
How can anyone "make policy" by means of cases that, if settled, never resulted in an opinion?
I certainly believe the DOJ weaponized against conservatives going all the way back to the IRS actions against conservative org getting tax exempt status, Giulani being driven into poverty, many of the J6'ers that were jailed and treated poorly and so many others. This is a really serious problem and has not been a "both parties" thing in my mind. That said, while I have some acceptance of the grievance, this approach certainly does not seem to be a workable solution as you point out likely to be applied in very abusve/ excessive ways. Buty, we do need an effective process to using the justice system to cancel, control and bankrupt individuals that simply don't support the pregressive agenda/
So right this is a major political blunder even if one thought it a good idea (not). Marco will completely gray by 2028.
'Somalia first': Nancy Mace goes after Ilhan Omar with proposed constitutional amendment. I hope Erick is going to discuss this today.
I don't know about you all, but I just learned something I didn't know, that there is a Justice Fund. That makes sense. This does not. In typical government fashion, this will grow into something beyond its original intent. Yes, there have been people with legit reasons for now being able to reach out, but isn't that the purpose of the Justice Fund? Just as what happened with the Covid fund allocations, this seems destined for the same fate. This deal clearly benefits the Trump family, but at what expense? Have we just handed the midterms to our opponents?
I knew nothing about that either. I imagine most people were unaware of it.
Yep, I think you're right.
It’s obscene. No conservative should defend it in any way. 🤦🏼♂️
Well, that works petty nicely for Trump. Because he's not a conservative. He is a Trumpist. He only cares about himself.
Good grief.
It's a terrible idea - now or ever! Bet it would be used by congressional perverts as well to settle sexual abuse/intimidation cases as well. Why or why would he ever think this was a good idea?!!
They already have a fund for that one. Which also isn't a good look.
I think the president is beyond what I would call small ball tactics. He wants loyal republicans willing to stand up for something. The democrat party has shifted so far left they are beyond recognizable. There should not be any moderate republican positions. What you sort of support men in women's sports or open borders...He not concerned with the timing. The timing is he has about two more years to complete his agenda, before he once again goes back to private life and if republicans are not winning and these rinos are still in office he and his family will be put right back on the fire to scape goat the dems failures and satisfy their Jacobian party blood lust. Damn the torpedos Full speed ahead...
As your battle line runs into a minefield and starts capsizing. Yeah, that’s the way.
I dont think he is running into a minefield but he is not sweating some of these senators moods swings and he does feel like himself and many other people were run over by the democrat department of justice bus and deserve compensation. If the republicans can continue to build off his legacy. People like Comey will have to wait a long time before they can apply for compensation.
Doesn't matter if they do & many do, there are other avenues with less fallout & more control. The days of only a few D or R taking mishandling money are long gone he does this, they will do this - taxpayers lose. He still needs Congress to actually pass legistration that lasts. Executive orders, etc. when D's take over which at this rate could be in a few months govt will come to a halt nothing done or impeachment and the good that he has done and might still do gone.
You say "The President has gotten the Justice Department to agree to an “anti-weaponization” fund" - Gee if I can fire everyone in said Department, it's not that hard to get them to agree to whatever I want now is it? We already have a system where people can seek compensation when they have been wronged - It involves going through the COURTS and there are plenty of lawyers that work on contingency who will gladly take GOOD cases that are likely to result in payouts. But because Trump does not unilaterally control courts he came up with this banana republic bs process that he will effectively control to pay his loyalists with our money.
Separately, I am worried what Trump is going to be like after the midterms - he already operates as though he has virtually no accountability, but after the midterms I think we will be able to remove the word virtually (after the retirements, no one left in the GOP has an ability to stand up to him). Trump has realized that having 30-35% of the country in a cult gives you complete control of a political party and thus nearly complete control of the country. Also, our conservative media ecosystem is now set up to prop up one person as the cult/party leader. It's been the business mode for a decade to essentially be adult film movie set style fluffers in service to one cult leader - it's too profitable and the structure is in place to just keep this rolling. So whether it continues to be Trump after he leaves office or it becomes some other bozo, The Right is now set up to be led by a singular "strong man" for the foreseeable future....
I think you're on to something in terms of Trump's thinking. Erickson struggles to understand why Trump is doing things that are counterproductive for his agenda and for the Party. However, if all one really wants to do is walk out the door with as much money in your pocket and as many memorials built in your everlasting honor as possible, all one really needs is a minority in either house of Congress that is large enough to defeat any attempt to override his veto or drive him out of office. Whereas the GOP needs Cornyn, he needs a loyalist - every bit as corrupt as him - like Paxton.
This is a terrible idea. I will be calling Rick Scott’s office this morning. Trump is off the rails and so out of touch at this point. What a mess.
Wishing you all a lovely weekend.
There is hardly a 'best time' in politics to do a 'right deed'. In our climate of fabrication for the sake of outrage no good deed or idea will be presented accurately or go unpunished.
There are those (on here and elsewhere) that will view this as a Trump failure whether it's a good idea or a blunder. It will be spun according to desired political outcomes, but not according to the truth, whatever that may be.
David notes that it will be a few years down the road and opinions will change. Yes, that is likely true but quite doubtful as to the way it will lean. Each according to his bias at the time. It often takes time to adequately encapsulate a set of actions. Every leader both gets flak by some and protection from others during their tenure only to be appreciated (or villified) decades or even centuries later. This is borne out through history over thousands of years.
It is beyond me to determine what the depth of the machinations are and whether it is proceeding according to a grander plan or a poorly conceived scheme.
Years after Trump is gone Erick will admit that this was a kleptocracy, complete with oligarchs like Putin, Trumps hero. He will just need a "decent interval" to pass.
I hope you're right. It feels to me like Erick needs to keep ever present in his and everyone else's mind how horribly evil the Democrats are. That way, he never has to really face how horribly evil Trump is. As you said, after a decent interval passes, perhaps he will be able to do so. I cling to the belief that at his core, Erickson is well intentioned and he seems too smart not to realize how utterly dishonest and lacking in character Trump is, but I really don't know anymore.
President Trump is not evil. But the Democrat Party is demonstrably evil.
In 2017 when Trump was first elected a few of the conservative pundits spoke out against him and MAGA turned on/abandoned them. Hugh Hewitt was one and I think Erick was another. Their audience abandoned them and it took a couple of years to get them back. Since then every time they say anything negative about Trump it is accompanied by "but the Dems are much worse". It doesn't matter what it is they have to. Yes, I think at his core Erick is a good and decent person who sees Trump for what he is. But he has to make a living and he's no David French. Still better than most.
I just commented on the “four things” post from yesterday that the primary reason voters supported him in the first place was because he was viewed as a non-politician. Here recently, his actions have seriously undercut that viewpoint. The “agreement” between him and the IRS? This slush fund? Taxpayer money for his ballroom? Yeah, he’s just as swampy as the creatures whose home he once stated he was going to drain…
Ballroom will have layers of intelligence and communications on lower levels. I bet he will say he is paying for the ballroom. Tax payers are paying for the security upgrades. He was un justly attacked and the irs leaked his taxes. Also famously denied conservative groups in profit status against the rules. So a little bit of retribution goes a long way. He's helping those that have been abused. Sad a person like Comey might take advantage of the program, but I'm betting he thinks republicans and his legacy will take the next 4 years and comey will have to wait a long time before he can apply.
An IRS contractor, who Biden's Justice Department put in jail for it, leaked Trump's taxes.
And he should not have had to. Trump said he would release his tax returns upon completion of some audit. Ten years later, we're still waiting.
He is not obligated to release his tax returns. Stop being so nosey!
Nor, apparently, to tell the truth.