Blanche wins support from GOP holdouts after vowing to scrap ‘anti-weaponization fund’
PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-03 17:55:00 — www.pbs.org
Trump Defends Possibility of Payouts to January 6 Rioters, Sends Mixed Messages on DOJ Fund
President Donald Trump is once again at the center of controversy over a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund that could have provided settlements to Trump allies, including January 6 rioters. Despite a new written order from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche rescinding the fund, Trump continues to defend the idea of compensating those involved in the Capitol attack and has left the door open to reviving the fund in the future.
Trump’s Position on the Fund
Speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Trump characterized January 6 defendants as victims, stating, “These people were attacked. And this would be a reimbursement, going to pay them. A lot of people like it. If they don’t approve Todd, I will put it back on the table. A lot of people like it. A lot of big supporters of Trump like it.” This statement directly contradicts bipartisan concerns that the fund could result in large payouts to individuals convicted of violent acts during the insurrection.
Contradictory Statements
Trump’s messaging on the issue has been inconsistent. While he has publicly defended the fund and suggested it could return if his nominee is not approved, he also told a reporter that there were no other avenues he knew of for such payouts. This pattern of mixed messaging has been a hallmark of Trump’s approach to contentious issues, leaving both supporters and critics uncertain about his true intentions.
Democratic Criticism and Legal Concerns
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have dismissed the recent deal to rescind the fund as meaningless. Senator Adam Schiff argued that the agreement “doesn’t prevent payouts to violent insurrectionists in the future. It doesn’t prevent the administration from bringing the slush fund back from the dead next week or using an existing DOJ settlement fund for the same purpose.” Schiff also noted that the deal leaves in place a controversial tax immunity provision for Trump and his family.
Background and Implications
The fund originated as part of a settlement in a lawsuit Trump filed against the IRS over leaked tax returns. It faced immediate bipartisan criticism and was blocked by a federal judge. Acting Attorney General Blanche initially claimed the fund was dead but only recently put that in writing under pressure from Senate Republicans.
Despite the written order, the language does not explicitly prevent future payouts to January 6 defendants or the revival of the fund. Trump’s continued defense of the fund and his willingness to reconsider it highlight ongoing concerns about accountability and the potential for government resources to be used for the benefit of individuals involved in the Capitol riot.
Conclusion
President Trump’s statements and shifting positions on the “anti-weaponization” fund underscore the ongoing debate over accountability for the January 6 attack and the use of government settlements. While the fund has been formally rescinded for now, Trump’s comments suggest the issue is far from settled, raising questions about future actions and the message being sent to those who participated in the insurrection.