Stop calling it an f-ing "settlement"

[pat_k]

https://apnews.com/article/irs-trump-settlement-tax-returns-police-capitol-riot-fc73eb5f35481bb6d8892ac1e14e98bd

...The lawsuit claims the government’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is an illegal slush fund that Trump will use to “finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name.” It describes the fund’s creation as “the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century” and calls for dissolving it.
...
The fund stems from a settlement of Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns.

For the love of journalistic integrity, stop calling this a settlement. There was no "controversy" to settle. Suing yourself and then "settling" with yourself with OUR tax dollars isn't just the most corrupt act by a president this century, it is the most corrupt act in our history. Heather Cox Richardson is spot on on this:

[yellow dahlia]

1. Ari Melber called it a "Thug" Fund.

It is corruption!

It is theft!

[pat_k]

7. At least WAPO had the decency to put it in quotes.

Yeah, it's an editorial... I would sure love to see the quotes used in other reporting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/05/21/congressional-republicans-can-block-trump-weaponization-fund/

The Trump administration’s creation of a $1.776 billion fund of taxpayer money under the president’s control to pay favored individuals outside the judicial process is drawing bipartisan condemnation. “From all outward appearances, this doesn’t pass the smell test,” said Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah). “We’re considering legislative options,” added Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pennsylvania). “You can’t do that.”

...The “Anti-Weaponization Fund” announced this week is part of the “settlement” of President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns by a contractor in 2019 and 2020.

[GoodRaisin]

10. Weisman called it theft.

On Ari’s show.

[pat_k]

25. And so it is. Attempted theft. However you look at it.

The executive branch has no power to set up such a fund. And a so-called "contract" -- whatever the terms -- between a president and the agencies that president controls is absolutely NOT a "settlement" in any way shape or form.

And in fact I can't imagine how the document qualifies as a contract that has any legal force whatsoever. It is a contract to payout money that neither party to the contract has any legal authority over the distribution of.

Perhaps there is some bullshit "legal" argument, but the thing is that the law is not actually all that complex. As far as I'm concerned, however you slice it, this is an attempt to usurp Congressional power in words of an agreement that violates the right of "We the People" to determine how moneys appropriated are spent. The Executive Branch has NO place, except to execute OUR WILL as represented in OUR Laws. The agreement does not qualify.

[Irish_Dem]

2. If Trump robbed a bank at gunpoint, everyone would just call it a "settlement."

[pat_k]

8. The next president better check that he hasn't made off with fort knox gold a la Marcos.

Although, at this rate, it would be superfluous with all he is stealing from public coffers in plain sight.

I just can't stop thinking that he wants to personally "check" gold reserves for the same reason they do everything (i.e., preemptively accuse others of doing that which you are doing, or plan to do).

[Irish_Dem]

9. 100% certain trump has already made off with some gold

Or is working out how to do it.

[pat_k]

24. Given his obsession with gold, you're probably right.

[Irish_Dem]

26. He keeps talking about checking to make sure none of it has been stolen.

So we can see he is obsessed with stealing it.

Yes he loves gold, so this is something he really wants to do.

[MadameButterfly]

18. or shot someone on Fifth Avenue

[Irish_Dem]

20. Part of his presidential duties.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Essentially it's an extortion payout...nt

[pat_k]

4. It's not even that because there was no threat.

It was crystal clear that NO amount of "briefing" could turn this nonsense "controversy" into a valid lawsuit. The felon/would-be blackmailer in this case had NOTHNG.

[Wounded Bear]

5. Understand it was a setup. Start a bogus "threat" of a lawsuit and then settle out of court...

And yes, trump was basically both parties in the "lawsuit." It was all a scheme to steal money from taxpayers.

[Justice matters.]

6. Yep. Add the con about hey, the IRS cannot audit me for that crime AND

oh yeah, ALL the other market manipulations on a daily basis OH AND BTW, add all my corrupt SPAWN to that coerced corrupt scheme... hey, peons, you can't even TRY to find that criminal gangsters family guilty of robbing every investor AND every taxpayer blind!!

[spooky3]

11. Well said! The judge herself noted clearly that there was NO "settlement."

Words do have meanings.

[pat_k]

14. Al least The Prospect makes this clear...

... in the body of the article. The title leaves something to be desired tho.

Wish the judge has simply dismissed, as would have been the most obvious course of action. I suppose she wanted to create an indisputable record to withstand appeal. What is truly horrific about this is that such "caution" is only necessary because six black-robed traitors have hijacked SCOTUS.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/law/the-weekly-constitutional/73630/trump-irs-extraordinary-settlement-with-own-government

The extraordinary ‘settlement’ agreement between Trump and his own government

The first remarkable feature, which this Weekly Constitutional blog has covered before, is that there was not really a dispute between the parties capable of being adjudicated by the courts. The judge in this case doubted that the court had jurisdiction to hear a suit brought by one person against entities he effectively controlled.

The judge could have then struck out the case for want of jurisdiction, but she instead wanted to hear the arguments of the parties on the point. The deadline for those submissions was this week. But Trump and his fellow plaintiffs—his son and his corporation—did not make any submissions. They “settled” the case instead.

And this brings us to the second remarkable feature: the extraordinary nature of the supposed “settlement”. Here, the starting point is that in the eyes of the court there is no settlement. According to the court record—the docket is publicly available here—the suit has been withdrawn. The plaintiffs have simply dropped the case.
...
Many things can be done by a contract, the legal device by which parties can agree to have obligations and rights which they otherwise would not have at law. Sometimes agreements, including those for settling litigation, can contain complex and imaginative provisions. But what is being done here is something else.

This “settlement” agreement is setting out the sort of thing which is normally done by primary legislation. It is taking taxpayers’ money and creating the means by which parties not connected to the litigation can benefit from payments by that money. This is not about litigation or its settlement: this is fiscal policy by other means.

[Bengus81]

12. "Cop beaters" slush fund.......Sheldon Whitehouse

Exactly what it is..........

[MLWR]

13. One or two cops were killed.

Insurrection is a felony; that makes a death felony murder.

[pat_k]

19. Officer Brian Sicknick's death the following night was clearly a direct result

... of the attack. We should all remember the names and circumstances of all who committed suicide in the subsequent weeks and months, particularly that of Officer Jeffrey Smith.

There is no doubt in my mind that the level of abuse by "fellow Americans" they endured played a direct role:

Officer Howard Liebengood (U.S. Capitol Police)

Officer Jeffrey Smith (D.C. Metropolitan Police), who died by suicide after a head injury sustained during the Riot

Officer Kyle DeFreytag (D.C. Metropolitan Police)

Officer Gunther Hashida (D.C. Metropolitan Police)

[BattleRow]

22. Cop killers reward money.

Award a reward.

[RB77]

23. "Anti Law Enforcement Slush Fund"

Is exactly what it is.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. Judge is taking the position that the lawsuit does not include any settlement

The lawsuit was void due to a lack of a "case or controversy" and is not mentioned in the motion to dismiss. The court is in effect ruling that this settlement is not part of the lawsuit and has no force or effect.

Link to tweet

NEWS A federal judge closes Trump's lawsuit against the IRS, noting there's "no settlement of record" because DOJ never mentioned one on the docket. We'll see if that upends the $1.776B fund to Trump's allies.

Again, the court had no jurisdiction in this case due to a lack of a case or controversy. There will be some litigation on this "settlement"

[pat_k]

17. "there is no settlement of record"

Time for more journalists to do their damn jobs and make it clear there is no settlement. It's a corrupt plan to appropriate tax dollars without seeking congressional approval.

More theft in plain sight.

Like all the other criminal impoundments and expenditures they perpetrate by fiat, they know that even the trumpublicans in Congress would be unlikely to go along with acts so broadly condemned by the public.


.

[BBbats]

16. SETTLEMENT MY ASS!

IT'S A GODDAMN OUT & OUT IN YOUR FACE MIDDLE FINGER TO EVERY USA CITIZEN!
With A whopping side order of "What Da Fuck You Gonna Do About It!" delivered with sick evil glee!
Right in your face Muthafucka's! With a Kiss My Ass added for good measure!
But your Social Security & Medicaid & Medicare & Disability & SNAP?
They're "Entitlements" that scum like you are taking out of their pockets!
None of that's going to exist by the end of this administration.
Oh! I forgot! There isn't going to be an end to this administration!

[pat_k]

27. The fact that even some trumpublicans balked speaks to how monumentally corrupt it is.

I wonder if the fact that there is no way out of the criminal war in Iran with the felon in the WH is sinking in?

It feels like there is more driving the "revolt" and recess than the monumentally corrupt slush fund and get-out-of-jail fee declaration.

And Tulsi leaving (good riddance) seems more about the CIA narrative on Iran contradicting the felon than anything else.

I could be way off base, but I think the criminal war on Iran -- and the unprecedented damage to our economy, along with the global destabilization and disruption -- is the real driving force.

A few more of his co-conspiators in the House and Senate may be allowing an inkling of reality penetrate their pea brains.

[SergeStorms]

21. Amen.

It's robbery, plain and simple. It's robbery and every godamned republican in our government is an accessory!

[Iggo]

28. Right after I start.

[pat_k]

29. The plea was to news outlets... even half-way decent ones, that persist in calling it a "settlement"