Gordo14 said:

---

EFR said:

---

I have a hard time wrapping my head around this.
The guy that did it went to jail, his company has lost millions in business over it. That should be end of story. Yet somehow people genuinely believe that trump was harmed far in excess of his actual net worth and are willing to pay him using your own money.

---

(It's a cult)

---

The American left is the biggest, most dangerous, most highly propagandized, and stupidest cult the world has ever seen. The left calling MAGA a cult is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. Stop guzzling down idiotic propaganda and try to think critically and you can escape this cult.

Gordo14 said:

---

EFR said:

---

I have a hard time wrapping my head around this.
The guy that did it went to jail, his company has lost millions in business over it. That should be end of story. Yet somehow people genuinely believe that trump was harmed far in excess of his actual net worth and are willing to pay him using your own money.

---

(It's a cult)

---

iTs a cULT!!!!


great insight

Yeah, he should just roll over and allow bureaucrats to violate his rights with impunity.

this has to be all about discovery right?

Settlement off for now!

BREAKING:

A federal judge in Miami just made a striking turnabout — essentially reopening Trump's $10 billion case against the IRS, saying that she wanted to investigate "grievous allegations" that the hasty deal to resolve it was "premised on deception."

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) May 29, 2026

Good thing he doesn't take a salary.

Same Obama-judge who cried about Alligator Alcatraz (and was slapped down).

Of all the stupid rulings today, this one takes the cake. https://t.co/fbnB8v361h

— Chad Mizelle (@chad_mizelle) May 30, 2026

Legally illiterate.

Create situation that liberals are against which is anything Trump does. Let them file suit. Take it to SCOTUS. Favorable ruling and he gets his fund and the entire thing is protected by case law. Libs never learn.

Deerdude said:

---

Create situation that liberals are against which is anything Trump does. Let them file suit. Take it to SCOTUS. Favorable ruling and he gets his fund and the entire thing is protected by case law. Libs never learn.

---

That's because they aren't trying to learn. They're about creating chaos and division and lawfare is one piece of that. They fight on every front. They're flanking us and we're still trying to negotiate nicely with them.

Great points by you both, but yall do realize Trump filed this lawsuit, right?

AggieVictor10 said:

---

Good thing he doesn't take a salary.

---

he deserves tens of millions for what democrats have maliciously and punitively done to him.

Im Gipper said:

---

Great points by you both, but yall do realize Trump filed this lawsuit, right?

---

Absolutely, and it follows the same course. He will leave a fund and SCOTUS decision that will protect future folks from political lawfare.

Chances this reaches SCOTUS are slim to none.

May not need to.

This fund is the gorilla these lawfare lawyers will have to fight.

Im Gipper said:

---

Great points by you both, but yall do realize Trump filed this lawsuit, right?

---

Except Trump had willingly withdrawn the lawsuit and accepted the settlement.

This is about a set of judges AFTER THAT filing to reopen the case because they didn't like the settlement. And OF COURSE the judge agreed with them.


I'm curious though, now that the judge has reopened it, can Trump withdraw his withdrawal and then go back to fighting it in court? Right now, the amount is $1.776B - but if he won the full amount, it's $10B - and ALL OF THAT would go directly to Trump...

I would almost laugh my ass off if it backfired like that on the left...

Close, it's actually worse than that.

The Judgment Fund isn’t a Trump invention. Congress created it in 1956. No judge sign-off required.

Obama’s DOJ used it for “discrimination” farm payouts and steered leftovers to nonprofits that filed zero claims.

DOJ paid Strzok and Page $2M from it too.

Funny how it only… pic.twitter.com/B7LTuz3dpR

— Election Wizard (@ElectionWiz) May 30, 2026

No judges/retired judges filed a lawsuit when the FBI lovebirds or sham NGO's were paid from US tax coffers.

If there is a judgment, guess who will pay it? You and me! Where will the DOJ be in all of this? Will they be working to protect the American people or will they be complicit with Trump?

We pay for everything does good or bad. Well 50% does the other 50% pay nothing in income tax and are moochers. Complicit with Trump? If the government wronged people shouldn't the government pay?

Complicit? Trump's a deserving victim.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Complicit? Trump's a deserving victim.

---

You are an astonishingly effective troll. And the Ayn Rand username is a nice touch.

Do you think the leaking was illegal? Should there not be people held responsible? Isn't that what this lawsuit will decide?

Canvasback said:

---

If there is a judgment, guess who will pay it? You and me! Where will the DOJ be in all of this? Will they be working to protect the American people or will they be complicit with Trump?

---

The DoJ is part of the executive branch and works for the President of the United States, fyi. Miranda Divine: Dems can cry corruption all they want, fund is justified/has precedent/was created by congress:

Quote:

---

It's not unprecedented or corrupt or Trump's personal "slush fund," no matter how loudly they shriek.
It's just a rebranding of an existing legal settlement fund Congress authorized decades ago, as Washington lawyer and veteran Senate oversight investigator Jason Foster points out.

Administrations of both parties have repeatedly used the DOJ's "Judgment Fund" to settle legal claims against the federal government, and Democrat administrations have used it for far more questionable payouts than the Trump administration's proposal to compensate genuine victims of lawfare.

The Biden DOJ paid off FBI anti-Trump plotters Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe, for instance, along with numerous convicted criminals, who alleged bad treatment by the Bureau of Prisons.

By contrast, Trump allies and administration officials who suffered unjustly at the hands of Joe Biden's weaponized FBI and DOJ, like Michael Caputo, Christina Bobb and Jeff Clark, are genuinely worthy victims who should be made whole.

---

Best not to fall for inveterate liar talking points from a scum bag like Ron Wyden:

Quote:

---

"The pre-existing Judgment Fund is a permanent, infinite appropriation that the Attorney General can use to settle any claim. DOJ can and has used it to pay damages resulting from lawfare/weaponization.

"It can continue doing so in whatever amounts it wants unless Congress repeals or amends 31 U.S.C. 1304."

In other words, the "Anti-Weaponization Fund" is simply a subset of the DOJ's existing unlimited Judgment Fund, and the $1.776 billion get it?! war chest the DOJ trumpeted is just a branding gimmick.

The DOJ clumsily gave an opening to a Democrat smear campaign when it tied the "anti-weaponization fund" to Donald Trump's legal agreement with the IRS that he would drop his $10 billion lawsuit over the IRS leak of his private tax information.

In reality, it has nothing to do with Trump's settlement.

The fund exists independently, whatever its branding. Agreeing to dismiss his claim without receiving a penny himself was simply a generous gesture by the president to try to ensure that those who were wronged in his name are compensated for their legal fees, medical bills and other costs.

But Democrats have cynically twisted that generosity into bogus allegations of corruption.

---

She's right, as usual, and also has an excellent podcast fyi.

Aggie Dad Sip said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Complicit? Trump's a deserving victim.

---

You are an astonishingly effective troll. And the Ayn Rand username is a nice touch.

---

I'm not trolling, pal.

I'm not sure why you are saying the fund had nothing to do with the Trump settlement of his case. Below is what Trump said on Truth.

"I gave up a lot of money in allowing the just announced Anti-Weaponization Fund to go forward. I could have settled my case, including the illegal release of my Tax Returns and the equally illegal BREAK IN of Mar-a-Lago, for an absolute fortune," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "Instead, I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!"

Trump isn't getting money from the fund but will almost certainly have influence over the fund payout. The big carrot he is getting in the settlement is he and his businesses can't be audited for any prior year presumably up until 2025 which almost certainly does create a lot of value as essentially all businesses of the size of his get audited with adjustments done and if nothing else, it avoids substantial expenses in going through audits.

Kansas Kid said:

---

I'm not sure why you are saying the fund had nothing to do with the Trump settlement of his case.

---

I'm not asserting Trump's settlement of his suit and the anti-weaponization fund have nothing to do with him, I am saying none of this is without precedent, which was really just a paraphrase of Ms. Devine's piece.

Shipwrecked has an article on the various (4) leftist lawfare suits trying to get Obama-Biden judges stop him from magnanimously/charitably using this mechanism to help those who were victimized under Biden/Garland et al.:

Quote:

---

There are four legal actions that I am aware of seeking to challenge the validity of the Anti-Weaponization Fund (AWF) created by the Administration. The AWF ostensibly comes out of a "settlement" reached by members of the Trump family including President Trump with the IRS over the leak by an IRS contract employee of Trump tax returns while litigation was pending over production of those returns to Congress. The four actions are as follows:

• By USCP Officers Daniel Hodges and Harry Dunn in the D.C. District Court who were present at the Capitol on January 6 during the riot.
• By CREW "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington" also in the D.C. District Court.
• By former DOJ Prosecutor Andrew Floyd in the Eastern District of Virginia federal court.
• The last is not a complaint, but a motion to reopen the case filed by Trump and his family members in the

The lawsuits all lack merit. The DOJ has authority given to it by Congress to settle litigation or even claims filed prior to litigation with money allocated to it in an annual appropriation to the "Judgment Fund."

DOJ represents the federal government in thousands of civil actions seeking money from it. DOJ is not required to obtain court approval in advance of settling claims, nor is there any jurisdictional basis for a court to seek to intervene in such settlement that have never been filed in an Article III Court. Congress has vested this authority in the Executive Branch without providing for judicial review, and any interference by district judges is likely violation of "Separation of Powers."

But statutes expressly stripping district courts of jurisdiction haven't proven to be much of a barrier to liberal/progressive federal district judges over the past 17 months and I fear it is not going to slow down at least two of the judges involved in the cases noted above.

The motion filed by 34 "Former Federal Judges" they either quit or retired rather than take Senior Status in the Southern District of Florida is almost certainly to be meaningless. The announcement was that Pres. Trump was dismissing all claims by him and his family members in exchange for the IRS funding the "Anti-Weaponization Fund" in the amount of $1.776 billion dollars to settle claims brought by persons who claim to have been victimized by the Department of Justice during the past 10 years. The Judge in that case, and Obama appointee, issued an order last week directing the plaintiffs attorneys not DOJ to respond to allegations that the lawsuit was a fraud on the Court. But all she is suggesting by her order is that those attorneys might be open to Rule 11 sanctions if she concludes that the entire episode of filing a complaint for $10 billion and then settling for the creation of the AWF was a sham from the start. She's already dismissed the complaint with prejudice, and her order makes clear the "settlement agreement" whatever its genesis is not part of the record of the case. There really is nothing for her to do with regard to the settlement she can't "void" something that was never before her. But, as I mentioned above, the "settlement" is not necessary to what the Administration is proposing to do via the AWF.

---

More at the link, though pay-walled.

Ok because what you quoted was

"The DOJ clumsily gave an opening to a Democrat smear campaign when it tied the "anti-weaponization fund" to Donald Trump's legal agreement with the IRS that he would drop his $10 billion lawsuit over the IRS leak of his private tax information.

In reality, it has nothing to do with Trump's settlement."

These comments are false as shown by Trump's own comments.

I agree there have been settlements paid out by the DOJ.

Folks the court did NOT rule that the fund is dead. She only ruled that for a two-week period the fund would be on pause while the judge could sort through the legal issues. Abiding by the court order does not mean killing the fund. https://t.co/QRCpIbSBt5

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 1, 2026

Does this mean they are abandoning the fund for good? Or just while motion to pending?

It sounds like the Administration is using this ruling as the off ramp to cancel the program given all of the backlash from a number of Republicans in Congress that are supporters of Trump. It also hasn't been polling well even amongst MAGA identifying members of the public.

The presidency has been the most profitable business venture Trump has taken on.

Canvasback said:

---

The presidency has been the most profitable business venture Trump has taken on.

---

Considering his wealth went DOWN by at least a billion dollars during his first term, I'm not sure you accurate...

Ag with kids said:

---

Canvasback said:

---

The presidency has been the most profitable business venture Trump has taken on.

---

Considering his wealth went DOWN by at least a billion dollars during his first term, I'm not sure you accurate...

---

Awwww, poor billionaire

Class envy, a democrat tenet and a bad look. Do better