DOJ Trumpets That It Will ‘Abide by’ Slush Fund Court Order After GOP Balks At Funding ICE, Ballroom
This is your TPM evening briefing.
‘It’s Dead for Now’ But Is It?
There are two threads of developments to unspool today regarding President Trump’s surreally corrupt “anti-weaponization fund,” which has even some of the more spineless members of the Republican congressional conference raising concerns.
First, the Justice Department posted a cryptic statement on Monday suggesting that it would do what it is, in fact, required to do — abide by court rulings — in the wake of an order issued on Friday by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema that temporarily blocked the establishment of the program while she considers whether to block it more permanently. Brinkema is presiding over a case stemming from a lawsuit that was filed against the DOJ’s creation of the slush fund — which has been brought by a former federal prosecutor involved in Jan. 6 cases.
Her order blocks the DOJ from “taking any further action pursuant to the creation or operation” of the fund temporarily — that includes transferring money to the fund, working through applications for compensation and paying any funds out — for the time being. She set a hearing on the issue for June 12. There are other cases unfolding involving the fund, including one examining its origin in a collusive lawsuit Trump filed against his own IRS to reach the point of settling and creating the fund, which my colleague David Kurtz unpacks here.
By stating that it will comply with the order for now, the DOJ leaves open the question of whether the fund will be revived again. It also leaves unanswered why it felt the need to release a statement saying it would abide by the ruling, as everyone involved would have expected it to — at least in normal times.
Here’s the DOJ’s full statement, which was posted on Twitter:
The Department of Justice disagrees strongly with the decision on the Anti-Weaponization Fund put forth by the United States District Court Judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, wherein the Court stated that, under no circumstances, may the Department of Justice proceed with the Anti-Weaponization Fund recently established in order to make up for the tremendous abuse, harm, and hate unfairly shown to so many people. This Fund was open to anybody who was so weaponized, targeted, or persecuted, whether they were Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Independent, or otherwise. The Department will abide by the Court’s ruling.
The statement was released around the same time that reporting was beginning to emerge from Punchbowl, Axios, Politico and other Beltway outlets suggesting that Trump, in conversations with Republican leadership, may be retreating on the idea of the fund in the first place. Axios was first to report on Monday that the Trump administration “plans to drop” the weaponization fund, in Axios’ words, citing two senior administration officials.
“It’s dead for now,” one of the sources told Axios.
Reporting from Politico suggests that Trump has decided to drop plans for the slush fund due to intense pushback from Republican members of Congress and that that decision was communicated to Republican leadership on Monday. If that’s true, someone better clue in Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), who has been uncharacteristically vocal about the fact that members of his conference would like to put guardrails on the fund, at the very least, into the must-pass reconciliation package if the administration moves forward with it.
Trump reportedly met with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) on Monday to discuss the $1.8 billion fund — in part because lawmakers’ displeasure with it is imperiling the $70 billion immigration enforcement bill, along with another billion in funding for the Secret Service related to Trump’s vanity ballroom. Johnson told Trump that it might not be viable due to GOP opposition in the Senate, according to Politico. Senate Republicans reportedly tore into acting Attorney General Todd Blanche about the fund, especially the optics of giving payouts to people who assaulted police officers, shortly after it was announced.
Per Politico:
It’s not immediately clear whether pledge to obey the court ruling will be enough to staunch the uproar among Republicans on Capitol Hill, however, as the administration’s immigration agenda hangs in the balance.
Tina Peters Dives Right Back In
The former elections clerk in Colorado who was convicted on multiple charges related to her decision to breach secure voting equipment as she helped to spread lies about the 2020 election results is back to spreading conspiracy theories!
Fresh out of prison Tuesday after Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) commuted her sentence, Tina Peters joined Steve Bannon’s podcast to make the baseless suggestion that Democrats are going to “cheat” in the 2026 midterms, ostensibly because they have … won a few recent elections?
“I see these elections that are taking place in real time: the Mamdanis, the Virginia governor — Spanberger — and then what’s going on in California and Texas and Maine — just all over the country,” Peters said. “And I know that the Democrats are going to cheat, and no one’s really addressing the problem that I spent my time in prison as retribution for, and that was exposing the election machines that allow the votes to be flipped.”
Hegseth Blocks Promotions for Women and Black Navy Officers
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — one of the more extreme anti-DEI members of the Trump administration — blocked promotions for seven Navy officers. Two of the officers up for promotion were women and two were Black men, according to the New York Times. The officers were selected by senior Navy admirals for promotion.
It’s not the first time Hegseth, who has said women should not serve in combat, has taken such actions. Per the Times:
No female officers were included on the new one-star list, which was released publicly in late May, despite the fact that women make up about 21 percent of the active-duty Navy. The list appears to include only two nonwhite officers, even though sailors who identify as racial minorities make up about 38 percent of the active-duty Navy.
Mr. Hegseth’s removal of the officers from the one-star list is highly unusual, said the current and former defense officials. According to Pentagon rules, the defense secretary is only supposed to pull officers from the list for moral, mental, physical or professional failings that raise questions about the officers’ fitness to lead.
In Case You Missed It
What’s going on with Iowa primaries tomorrow evening? Kate Riga has a primer for you: Iowa Dems Mull ‘Electability,’ the ‘Establishment’ in Tuesday Primary as They Try to Pull Off the Unthinkable
Josh Marshall: Surveying the Criminal Conduct Terrain
Morning Memo: Judge Demands Answers On Trump’s Collusive IRS Deal
Yesterday’s Most Read Story
Artists Flee Trump’s State Fair, Proving MAGA Radioactive as Ever
What We Are Reading
Florida GOP gubernatorial front-runner Byron Donalds breaks with Trump on AI
Pentagon bans journalists from press office, designating it a classified space
No mention by the WH or newsy media whether the "tax audit immunity" addendum covering trump, his offspring, and his companies is still in play...one could argue that for the trump crowd it's THE most important feature of the so-called "settlement", and one would believe that they would die in that hill.