Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

While Trump Slush Fund for Convicted Criminals Could Die, It’s Another Example of Trump Tyranny

Opinion

Protesters interact with Capitol Police inside the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2021.

Protesters interact with Capitol Police inside the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Congress held a joint session today to ratify President-elect Joe Biden's 306-232 Electoral College win over President Donald Trump.

Win McNamee / Getty Images

Whichever political ideology you belong to, the current President, Donald A. Trump, literally made it “okay” to be a criminal for him. While there has been push-back from the courts and members of his own political party, which could lead to the slush fund’s abandonment, it’s a slap in the face for all law-abiding citizens. It’s yet again an attempt by Trump and his cronies to legitimize his followers’ illegal conduct that benefits a cruel and oppressive government.

On May 18, 2026, Trump's personal lawyers and Trump-loyal lawyers inside the Justice Department settled a lawsuit filed by the Trump family against the IRS by creating a $1.8 billion slush fund, and hoping the patriotic label would distract from who was receiving the money, calling it the “1776 Fund.”


J.D. Vance tried to make sense of it all for the American people during a contemporaneous press conference. Vance didn’t deny that the slush fund was understood to compensate so-called “supporters of President Trump” who attacked our nation’s capital on January 6, 2021, but added “anyone else who wants to apply for it,” could do so, as if that mattered.

Vance tried to soften the blow of the bad news for American taxpayers by characterizing the subsequent prosecutions of “J6ers” as they are known as “lawfare by the Biden Administration” against “people of different viewpoints” and not “people who broke the law.” However, Vance admitted to reporters, as he must, that the payouts would be to people who did in fact commit crimes.

Despite this, Vance characterized the payouts as “compensation” to these adjudicated criminals, who were convicted of their crimes or pled guilty to them, as they were “disproportionately punished” for the crimes they committed. Apparently, receiving a Presidential pardon for committing serious crimes against America is not enough.

They were, after all, criminals “mistreated by the justice system,” exclaimed Vance, unlike every other common, poor, and uneducated criminal, convicted and sentenced to federal prison for decades. And for the Capitol police injured or killed because of their actions, “bupkis” is the word for what they get. And the icing on the cake of the scam perpetrated on Americans was another agreement, which surfaced a promise not to prosecute Trump or any of his associates for tax fraud.

Fortunately, for now, federal court judges intervened. One judge temporarily blocked the slush fund after several lawsuits were filed. Another federal court judge questioned the legitimacy of Trump’s tax case settlement since he was represented by both sides, individually and as President, and questioned whether the settlement was fraudulent in the first place. The court went as so far as to question whether the court itself was “the victim of fraud.”

While the Trump-run Justice Department said it would obey the federal courts, it found, as we expected it would, the courts’ actions objectionable.

If you were waiting for a thoughtful conservative analysis, rather than relying on my description of the deceit that occurred, it came from outgoing Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, after a closed-door two-hour meeting with Acting Attorney General and former personal attorney for Trump. McConnell stated, “So the nation’s top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops? Utterly stupid, morally wrong. Take your pick.”

One could add the whole thing --- slush fund and tax reprieves --- are illegal under the Fourteenth Amendment’s admonishment that the government “shall [not] assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States,” but that’s too technical it seems.

To sum it up and put a bow on it, outgoing North Carolina Senator Tom Tillis held nothing back, “I think it’s stupid on stilts. It will invariably put us in a position . . . [to] compensate someone who assaulted a police officer, admitted their guilt, got convicted, got pardoned, and now we’re going to pay them for that? That’s absurd. When you take money from me to give to a purpose that I vehemently disagree with, that’s tyranny.” Well said, Tom. Well said.

James “Jim” Saranteas is an attorney, contributor to the American Constitution Society Expert Forum Blog, and a Volunteer State Lead for Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and an Activist.


Read More

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

People hold Haitian flags and signs during a July 2026 rally in San Diego in support of immigrants living in the U.S. with Temporary Protected Status.

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

At the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries were living and working in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status, or TPS.

TPS is a humanitarian form of protection from deportation for people who cannot return to their home countries because of an armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

Keep ReadingShow less
vote pins

vote pins in red, white, and blue with stars and stripes.

Getty Images

The Long Fight to Secure Voting Rights for All Americans

Many Americans think that all US citizens aged 18 or older are entitled to vote. In fact, that has never really been the case in the USA. It has been a tremendously long, hard road to get to where we are today.

The easy part is that the Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1971, in response to the Vietnam War. It was considered unjust to draft men to war who were denied the right to vote. In several states felons are denied the right to vote for life.

Keep ReadingShow less
Seattle Washington city downtown skyline

Seattle Washington city downtown skyline during sunset

Getty Images

Local Seattle Government and Indigenous Communities Unite for Sustainable Efforts

Sustainability in government is a discussion at both the local and national levels. What is common today is that this conversation has long excluded Indigenous communities' voices and perspectives from the legislative process.

Too often, local governments enact environmental and sustainability legislation without considering its impact on Indigenous groups.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman checking mail

Close-up of woman's hand putting or receiving letter with voting ballot near a mailbox near her house -

Getty Images

Why Having a Ballot at Home Strengthens Civic Engagement

A legal challenge regarding mail-in voting rules and postal service regulations is currently moving through the federal court system as the midterm elections approach. The dispute involves administrative directives and postal regulations concerning ballot delivery standards and state requirements. Lower courts have previously addressed how these rules are implemented, prompting appeals and legal filings from various administration officials, state attorneys general, and election administrators over operational timelines and voter access.

Brian Miller is the executive director of Nonprofit VOTE, a nationwide organization that works to help nonprofits engage the communities they serve in voting and elections.
In the article "Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test," Miller explores mail-in voting and why giving voters time and access is critical to a healthy democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less