Trump Now Gets a $1.8BN Taxpayer Slush Fund to Pay Others

Kewl. Got some names? How much?
1.7 billion

The first name is Caputo.

Former Trump administration official Michael Caputo on Tuesday filed the first known claim under the Justice Department’s new $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” claiming he was the target of “political weaponization.” […] “I was the target of the illegal Crossfire Hurricane investigation and our family suffered greatly during that dark era of political weaponization,” Caputo wrote in a letter to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, referencing the FBI’s 2016 investigation into possible collusion between the Russian government and individuals associated with Trump’s first presidential campaign.

You're welcome.
 
1.7 billion

The first name is Caputo.

Former Trump administration official Michael Caputo on Tuesday filed the first known claim under the Justice Department’s new $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” claiming he was the target of “political weaponization.” […] “I was the target of the illegal Crossfire Hurricane investigation and our family suffered greatly during that dark era of political weaponization,” Caputo wrote in a letter to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, referencing the FBI’s 2016 investigation into possible collusion between the Russian government and individuals associated with Trump’s first presidential campaign.

You're welcome.
Where'd you get this nonsense from?
 
Congress has oversight powers over the DOJ, and the AG, and other members of the DOJ are often called before the Oversight Committee.

This happens routinely,

And no, they have limits on what they can pay out....Congress only gives so much to the Settlement Fund they created back back in the 1950s. It's part of the budget every year, since then.

Again, I am really really shocked you are here posting on a message board about the US Govt, and have such little insight into basic Civics
How does Congress prevent the DoJ from inappropriately handing out settlements?
 
Not their only chance.
The first motion to dismiss would say that the plaintiffs already had their chance to make this claim.
An elected politician, or a partisan hack appointed by a politician and confirmed by a hundred politicians?
Weak. Judges are not supposed to be partisan. It’s essential to the system.
The "nonpartisan arbitrator" who dismissed the case determined that no further judicial oversight was required. Legislative oversight is still in place, as your OP indicates.
The settlement was never approved by the judge. It was dismissed because Trump agreed with Trump to dismiss it in exchange for a pardon.
 
How does Congress prevent the DoJ from inappropriately handing out settlements?
They conduct oversight hearings.

Congress of course isn't the DOJ, the DOJ decides what is approciate or not. They represent the USA in civil cases.
 
They conduct oversight hearings.

Congress of course isn't the DOJ, the DOJ decides what is approciate or not. They represent the USA in civil cases.
How does an oversight hearing stop the DoJ from
corruptly deciding to give money to someone who doesn’t deserve it?
 
How does an oversight hearing stop the DoJ from
corruptly deciding to give money to someone who doesn’t deserve it?
They stop funding the Settlement Account, or impeach the AG

They have to fight have the hearing to determine corruption.

It’s not corruption amply because dembots don’t like it
 
Last edited:
If only Biden hadn't weaponized the government against his political enemies. We wouldn't have to worry about this
So you're claiming that Biden ordered the FBI to hunt down those animals who rioted, ordered prosecutors to prosecute them & also ordered Judges to sentence some to prison while at the same time supposedly suffering from Dementia, you asswipe? :funnyface:
 
There already is a DOJ victim fund. This is a slush fund run by Trump.
Well there is a settlement fund

The agreement trump worked out earmarked a specific amount of that to go to victims of weaponization like he was
 
Well there is a settlement fund

The agreement trump worked out earmarked a specific amount of that to go to victims of weaponization like he was
Yes cop beaters and anyone else he wants. Why do you support money to cop beaters? Neither Blanche nor Vance specifically ruled it out when asked.
 
The first motion to dismiss would say that the plaintiffs already had their chance to make this claim.
Where do you get this? It sounds completely made up.
Weak. Judges are not supposed to be partisan. It’s essential to the system.
The Department of Justice is not supposed to be partisan either. Yet. It clearly was before the eight years before trump a second term.

Our judiciary is heavily dominated by liberal lawyers.
The settlement was never approved by the judge. It was dismissed because Trump agreed with Trump to dismiss it in exchange for a pardon.
Pardon? Where are you getting that?
 
15th post
If only Biden hadn't weaponized the government against his political enemies. We wouldn't have to worry about this
Merrick Garland was a do-nothing.
There was no weaponization under Biden because of that.
and Biden asking Garland to do such things is fantasy.
 
Merrick Garland was a do-nothing.
There was no weaponization under Biden because of that.
and Biden asking Garland to do such things is fantasy.
Joe Biden was a do-nothing, except for the weaponization of his justice department
 
Yes cop beaters and anyone else he wants. Why do you support money to cop beaters? Neither Blanche nor Vance specifically ruled it out when asked.
well i guess it would depend on why the person was beating the cop.....was teh cop using excessive force? was the person defending themselves? Your question is far to broad to answer
 
So you're claiming that Biden ordered the FBI to hunt down those animals who rioted, ordered prosecutors to prosecute them & also ordered Judges to sentence some to prison while at the same time supposedly suffering from Dementia, you asswipe? :funnyface:
You are right, Biden wasn't really in charge. You were fooled
 
Back
Top Bottom