Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump Says Americans’ Pain ‘Doesn’t Matter’ as $1.7B Aids His Allies

With families squeezed by inflation, Trump champions a $1.7B fund for allies.

Opinion

A woman with an empty wallet spent on shopping. Bankrupted woman sitting with her shopping bags

President Donald Trump says Americans’ financial struggles matter “not even a little bit” as inflation rises, gas prices surge, and a controversial $1.7 billion taxpayer-funded compensation plan for political allies emerges.

Getty Images, Twenty47studio

Perhaps the most effective ad in the 2024 campaign was “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.” Since that ad ran, the American people have learned that it is anything but true.

With gas prices having surged 28% in two months, inflation climbing to a three-year high of 3.8%, and the average family is spending an estimated $5,000 more this year than last due to rising costs across the board, a reporter asked Trump a simple question: To what extent are Americans’ financial situations motivating him to reach a deal to end the war in Iran?


Trump's answer was startling in its candor.

“Not even a little bit,” the President said. “The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran — they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody.”

But perhaps the most clarifying lens through which to view those words is what emerged just days later: Trump was suing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for $10 billion in damages over an IRS contractor’s leak of his tax returns but is now expected to drop that $10 billion lawsuit, not because justice has been served, but in exchange for the creation of a $1.7 billion fund to compensate his political allies.

The money would come not from any congressional appropriation but from the Treasury Department's Judgment Fund, a public fund funded by taxpayers that exists to pay legitimate court judgments against the federal government.

Under the proposed terms, a five-member commission with total authority to disburse that $1.7 billion would operate with no obligation to disclose its procedures or decision-making. Trump himself would retain the power to remove commission members without cause.

The beneficiaries? Among them: the nearly 1,600 individuals charged in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack, some of whom pleaded guilty, and people Trump already pardoned upon returning to office, as well as allies who claim they were targets of “weaponization” of the legal system under former President Joe Biden. Entities associated with Trump himself are not explicitly barred from filing claims.

The contrast here is not subtle. When asked directly whether the financial pain of working Americans factors into his decision-making, the president answers “not even a little bit.”

Yet within the same week, a deal surfaces in which $1.7 billion in public funds could flow to Trump allies, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and potentially Trump-linked entities — all under a commission the president controls, with no transparency requirements.

While ordinary Americans are losing ground financially, the president himself is doing remarkably well — and the numbers are staggering.

According to Forbes, Trump's net worth jumped from roughly $2.3 billion when he returned to the White House in January 2025 to an estimated $6.3 billion by April 2026 — nearly tripling his fortune in little over a year.

A New York Times investigation found that he personally gained approximately $1.4 billion in 2025 alone, a single-year increase that approaches the combined net worth of every other U.S. president while in office throughout American history.

The primary engine of that growth has not been real estate, the business that built his brand over five decades, but rather cryptocurrency ventures, meme coins, and media deals, all industries he has simultaneously deregulated from the Oval Office.

The American people are not the constituency this president governs for. The data bears that out. Real wages are losing ground as energy costs surge. The personal savings rate has dropped to 4%. Small businesses have shed hundreds of thousands of jobs under the weight of tariffs. Gas sits at over $4 a gallon. And the president's answer to the question of whether your financial pain is even in his mind is: no.

There is, of course, an argument to be made that preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is a legitimate and serious national security priority that may justify some economic disruption.

But that argument is entirely separate from whether a president should care about the daily financial suffering of the people he was elected to serve. One can hold two things in mind at once. Trump apparently cannot — or will not.

We clearly have a portrait of a president whose conception of governance begins and ends with him and his loyalists. And when ordinary Americans ask if their struggles even register, they get the most honest answer this administration has offered: not even a little bit.


Lynn Schmidt is a columnist and Editorial Board member with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. She holds a master's of science in political science as well as a bachelor's of science in nursing.


Read More

A café owner hangs an “Open” sign on the front door at the start of the business day. Concept of entrepreneurship and readiness.
Getty Images, Willie B. Thomas

Cassidy’s Latest Chance To Boost The Small Businesses He Has Long Championed

When election season rolls around, voters are accustomed to hearing politicians proclaim their support for small businesses–institutions that routinely top Gallup’s list of America’s most trusted by a country mile.

It’s easy to talk the talk during campaign season. It’s much harder to do the work when the cameras are off, and the spotlight fades.

Keep Reading Show less
A person sits at a table, going through papers, using a calculator.

Middle-class families face rising costs and policy uncertainty as economic rules shift. How instability in governance is reshaping the American Dream.

Getty Images, Olga Rolenko

America’s Middle-Class Contract Is Breaking Down

In a growing suburb outside Columbus, Ohio, two households are coming to the same realization: the rules they have long relied on still exist, but they are no longer working for them.

Jake and Emily Carter, both in their early 30s, had planned to buy their first home this spring. He manages a retail store; she’s a nurse. Together, they earn about $85,000 a year, near the local median. They’ve saved carefully and thought they were ready. But the numbers no longer add up. Mortgage rates shift, insurance is higher than expected, and grocery bills remain stubborn. Add in tariffs, healthcare uncertainty, and shifting tax policy, and the path forward is unclear.

Keep Reading Show less
Slavery Claims and Drug Prices Cited in Trump’s New Tariff Plan

A look into Donald Trump’s renewed tariff strategy after a U.S. Supreme Court setback.

Getty Images, Andriy Onufriyenko

Slavery Claims and Drug Prices Cited in Trump’s New Tariff Plan

Donald Trump does not give up easily. When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his tariffs as being illegal because he invoked so-called “emergency powers”—even though there was no emergency—did the president throw up his hands and say, “Oh well, I guess that’s the end of that?" Not in the slightest. Now the White House is back with another attempt at tariffs, apparently based on even more preposterous claims.

Trump’s Trade Commission is holding hearings to find justification for an “accelerated timeframe” for invoking a new clause, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as a vehicle for reinstating the previous tariffs. The Trade Commission is investigating unfair trade practices to determine whether “the acts, policies, or practices of a foreign country are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce.”

Keep Reading Show less
Bar graph of shopping carts

A deeper look at inflation in today’s economy—beyond money printing. Explore how trade fragmentation, geopolitics, tariffs, and industrial policy are driving structural inflation and rising costs in the U.S.

Andriy Onufriyenko/Getty Images

Inflation Has Changed—And So Has Who Pays for It

A familiar conservative argument is back: inflation is the result of government printing and overspending. Too many dollars, too much demand, not enough goods. It is a tidy explanation, one that has the advantage of clarity and a long intellectual pedigree. It is also incomplete.

That story assumes a stable, globalized economy in which production is efficient, supply chains are reliable, and market signals dominate political ones. In that world, inflation can plausibly be reduced to a question of monetary discipline or fiscal restraint. But today’s economy no longer operates under those conditions. Inflation is now driven less by excess demand and more by rising costs tied to trade fragmentation, industrial policy, and geopolitical conflict. These forces are not temporary disruptions. They are reshaping how goods are produced, where they are produced, and at what cost.

Keep Reading Show less