Beyond the brazen venality and disdain for the other branches of government, Trump’s attempted sham IRS lawsuit settlement and $1.776 billion slush fund raise the prospect of a new and frightening danger. That is the use of funds from the government to support and incentivize the same people who attacked our government on January 6 to do it again, as new elections loom, only now as well-funded, better- armed, paramilitary-like mobs.
Fortunately, one district court has temporarily enjoined the establishment of the settlement slush fund, and another is demanding explanations from the administration. The Acting Attorney General says the President is abandoning the slush fund, but as of this writing, nothing is in place to confirm its formal abandonment or to ensure that something like it will not resurface. No matter what happens, the fact that a President and his enablers have created this danger would, in more ordinary times, be grounds for impeachment. It should be an alarm bell for continual vigilance.
The Lawsuit Was a Pretext
Trump was suing and controlling the defense of a suit about something that occurred while Trump himself oversaw the government and for which the government would have no liability in the first place (a leak of Trump data by a private contractor, not the IRS) Trump waited to file the suit until he was back in office, with a DOJ and IRS he controlled. But by then the statute of limitations had expired.
Instead of moving to dismiss, Trump’s DOJ, led by an acting Attorney General who was recently Trump’s personal criminal lawyer, never made an appearance or filed any papers in the case. Then, shortly before it was ordered to file briefs justifying the case's existence, the DOJ dropped it. No “settlement” was presented to the court for approval.
The Settlement Fund Would Have Been a Sham
The administration pretends the settlement would be covered by a pre-existing Judgment Fund established by Congressional legislation. It needs this cover because the President has no independent power to appropriate funds from the treasury; that is a power reserved exclusively to Congress. (The Treasury Department’s general counsel resigned shortly after the settlement was announced.)
The Judgment Fund does not provide that cover. At most, it might allow compensation for people other than Trump harmed by the act at issue in the lawsuit Trump dropped—a leak of Trump’s data. But the slush fund did not even purport to be related to the data leak. It was to compensate people for unspecified, unrelated acts of government law-enforcement “weaponization.”
And then there is the Constitution. The terms of the Fourteenth Amendment to the same Constitution Trump relied on to pardon the intended fund beneficiaries who stormed our Capitol forbade the Government from compensating insurrectionists.
The “1776” Settlement Fund Was Set Up as A Slush Fund
There would be no Congressional or judicial oversight of this proposed giveaway of nearly $ 1.8 billion in taxpayer dollars. There was no requirement for public disclosure of how or to whom the funds would be disbursed. Implementation was entrusted to five people to be selected by Trump’s DOJ, all of whom the President could fire at will. All kinds of Trump cronies or MAGA supporters—even Trump enterprises-- might conceivably be beneficiaries. To get votes to approve the slush fund, the Acting Attorney General even presented a document to Republican Senators showing that several of them could have expected to be among its beneficiaries.
We Have Every Reason to Be Scared
A slush fund like this could be misused in many ways, but there is no mistaking its ultimate aim and objective. 1776 was used for a reason: it sounds patriotic, but it is a code word for the January 6 insurrectionists. A principal goal of this fund was always to find a convenient way to give generous rewards to the “victims” of the government’s defense of the Capitol on January 6— “victims” who are, in reality, the people who attacked it.
We should be very fearful of where the goal may lead. Every day, we hear the administration’s lies about election integrity. We see the tireless full-court press for voter suppression legislation. We have had foretastes already of the deployment of the National Guard, ICE, and even the postal service to turn away voters and undermine states’ electoral processes.
Controlling sources of compensation, whether through the slush fund settlement or some other means, gives Trump a new tool from the autocrat’s playbook: rewards for the insurrectionists and encouragement for them to do it again. This time, they would be primed in advance and would have other administration-appointed allies. This time, compensation from the slush fund would allow them to be well-resourced and well-armed. This time, they might succeed.
We may think that the courts, Congress, and public outcry from the rest of us have prevented this scenario from happening. But even if the slush fund is abandoned, the proposal has only whetted the insurrectionists’ appetite for generous compensation, as some already have; the lawsuit-settlement maneuvers leave no doubt about the President’s appetite to facilitate it. We are right to take heart in temporary victories. But we should be appalled that kowtowing to unitary executive power has allowed us to even approach the point where any of this could conceivably occur.
James B. Kobak, Jr., has been a lawyer in New York for over fifty years. He is a former President of the New York County Lawyers Association and currently chairs the National Center for Access to Justice. He prepared this article as a volunteer with Lawyers Defending American Democracy.
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner speaks to voters at a town hall at the Elks Lodge 188 on June 7, 2026, in Portland, Maine.
McConnell and Platner both feel entitled
The two men could not be more different. One, a Republican, octogenarian, seven-term Southern senator, the other a progressive, millennial Maine oysterman who’s never spent a day in elected office.
But Mitch McConnell, the senior senator from Kentucky who’s been MIA for the past few weeks and Graham Platner, the Maine Senate candidate who’s facing calls to drop out of his race against Sen. Susan Collins, apparently do have something in common: an outsized sense of entitlement.
McConnell, who is 84 and not running for reelection, has been hospitalized for three weeks, and yet we still don’t fully know what he was admitted for or what his condition is. Per CNN, “his office has not disclosed a medical reason for the hospitalization or provided specifics on his health status beyond saying last week that he ‘continues to improve’ and ‘is working closely with his staff on Kentucky and Senate matters.’ ”
While several legislators have said they’ve talked to him and insist he sounds strong, others have said they are completely in the dark. One MAGA influencer, Laura Loomer, posted ”High level source close to the White House tells me ‘Mitch McConnell is officially brain dead. He’s not coming back.’ ”
Meanwhile, up in Maine, Platner has been artfully dodging calls from his own party to drop out of his race after several allegations of misconduct from women, including a sexual assault allegation from a former girlfriend, came to light. While Platner, who has managed to survive a Nazi-tattoo scandal, a sexting scandal, and several old tweets scandals, denies the allegations, he has not quit.
High-profile Democrats including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer, the latter of whom had unsuccessfully hand-selected Maine Gov. Janet Mills to face Collins instead of Platner, have urged Platner to drop out, while other Dems have accused him of trying to influence the picking of his replacement.
Maine Democratic Party Executive Director Devon Murphy-Anderson released a statement Tuesday, which said in part:
“Unfortunately, Graham Platner’s team has repeatedly reached out to us in an attempt to put their thumb on the scale of what this process looks like. We have repeatedly reiterated to Graham Platner’s team that they have no role in determining our next Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate nor in determining what this process looks like.”
Both incidents show a deep lack of accountability to voters, who in one case deserve to know whether their senator is capable of performing his duties, and in another deserve a candidate who isn’t being accused of crimes, bigotry and deception.
The offensive and odious entitlement of both McConnell and Platner stands out not because it is particularly unique among today’s political class. Tom Kean, the New Jersey GOP congressman, missed more than 100 votes, only sharing after a three-month mystery absence that he was dealing with depression.
Former President Joe Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin failed to disclose a hospitalization for prostate cancer surgery, flouting the established rules for Cabinet members and senior U.S. officials.
From Biden’s insistence on running for reelection despite his obvious cognitive and political weaknesses to Trump’s brazen flouting of laws and norms, few politicians seem to appreciate that their public service job comes with responsibilities to constituents, including transparency and honesty.
But both parties increasingly justify the chicanery, because the stakes of winning elections and keeping power are simply too high. But that’s no excuse. If we’ve learned anything over the past decade, it’s that character and accountability do, in fact, matter. And when we, the voters, stop caring about it, well, so do they.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.