Agador Spartacus said:

---

This thread is a perfect example of "big government sucks, except when it favors my side"

I don't like the precedent this sets.

---

Then go back to when Obama did it. Cause this is NOT precedent setting.

It was for the injuns.

flown-the-coop said:

---

It was for the injuns.

---

My dude…I'm gonna need a bit more to go on than that.

How did GWB wrong them?

Agador Spartacus said:

---

This thread is a perfect example of "big government sucks, except when it favors my side"

I don't like the precedent this sets.

---

As I said in my previous post, I don't like using tax payer money to make these people whole, but help me with an alternative. Some lives were destroyed and many financially damaged/ruined by a HIGHLY weaponized DOJ and government. In a sane world, the guilty would be charged, fined, and jailed, but the chances of this are as close to zero as you can get. Are they just collateral, political damage with no recourse?

I am with you on this being a unique precedent as I could see dems with a majority bring suit and a friendly DOJ settle in the forms of a slush fund to pay all the legal fees they racked up suing Trump for everything. Interested in opinions about options other than to do nothing, if there are any.

Maybe they shouldn't have rioted and attacked the capitol.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Agador Spartacus said:

---

This thread is a perfect example of "big government sucks, except when it favors my side"

I don't like the precedent this sets.

---

As I said in my previous post, I don't like using tax payer money to make these people whole, but help me with an alternative. Some lives were destroyed and many financially damaged/ruined by a HIGHLY weaponized DOJ and government. In a sane world, the guilty would be charged, fined, and jailed, but the chances of this are as close to zero as you can get. Are they just collateral, political damage with no recourse?

I am with you on this being a unique precedent as I could see dems with a majority bring suit and a friendly DOJ settle in the forms of a slush fund to pay all the legal fees they racked up suing Trump for everything. Interested in opinions about options other than to do nothing, if there are any.

---

Let me separate two distinct things:
1. Capitol rioters themselves. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I have zero sympathy for anyone who decided trespassing in the Capitol was their patriotic duty and had their lives ruined as a result of their bad choices.
2. The rights of all to have their Constitutional rights as upheld regardless of the crime.

In other words, dumbasses that stormed the Capitol still get due process and Constitutional rights, and should have some restitution including class act restitution to the extent their Constitutional rights were violated.

What makes no sense to me is having the Executive Branch able to administer and self-deal to whomever it wants to, including retroactive immunity from prosecution with no public accountability. It's naked corruption and anyone saying "but Democrats" is enabling and justifying why it's totally acceptable for YOU to be ROBBED BLIND to pay Trump's slush fund.

flown-the-coop said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Blanche gets to appoint all the members (one has to be done in consultation with Congress, whatever that means), the President can fire any of them without cause, the commission gets to set its own rules without any oversight, and all settlements will be confidential, including who gets money and how much. If you ever want to commit fraud, this is how you do it.

---

It is subject to oversight, reporting, disclosures, legal challenges and FOIA rules.

Why simply lie? I know you are capable at reading and understanding the details provided. But nah, Orange Man is Fraudster is all you can arrive at. What a shame…

---

Go read the actual report. It flat out says the settlements will be reported in a confidential memo. If you think any of this has a chance of being made public, I've got a bridge to sell you.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Maybe they shouldn't have rioted and attacked the capitol.

---

Interesting, if true.

HTownAg98 said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Blanche gets to appoint all the members (one has to be done in consultation with Congress, whatever that means), the President can fire any of them without cause, the commission gets to set its own rules without any oversight, and all settlements will be confidential, including who gets money and how much. If you ever want to commit fraud, this is how you do it.

---

It is subject to oversight, reporting, disclosures, legal challenges and FOIA rules.

Why simply lie? I know you are capable at reading and understanding the details provided. But nah, Orange Man is Fraudster is all you can arrive at. What a shame…

---

Go read the actual report. It flat out says the settlements will be reported in a confidential memo. If you think any of this has a chance of being made public, I've got a bridge to sell you.

---

I did read it which is why I know if is subject to the oversight and disclosures.

Just because your TDS has flared up and you assume a guilty verdict on corruption that has not taken place, we don't live under the precogs and minority reports no matter how much you wish it were so for Trump.

Go read it.

Kansas Kid said:

---

YNWA.2013 said:

---

So in conclusion, Trump sued himself three times, his own lawyer (Todd Blanch) settled the claims, taxpayers appear to be paying it, his hand picked commission selects who collects. And the money can flow to January 6 rioters. So it's being sold as fixing weaponization but it is, in fact, weaponization.

---

Just wait to see the reaction on Texags when the Dems do a similar situation under the next Dem President to settle lawsuits being brought by the Trump
Administration. It will start with this time is (D)ifferent when in reality they are using the same playbook to hand money to their supporters.

---

And this is why Dems always attack first.

They can blame any future response by the Republicans as being "weaponization".

And then when the Dems do the same thing AGAIN, it's a "justified response" to the evil weaponization of the Republicans.

redseven94 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

redseven94 said:

---

Since Hunter Biden was indicted during the previous administration, is he eligible for a settlement. :-D

---

Hunter Biden is a real criminal.

Nice try, though.

---

How about all the pardoned people from J6 including those that beat police, are they not real criminals?

By law, they all acknowledged their actions by accepting pardons in 1/25. So what about them?

Eligible?

---

So, if you were wrongly convicted and imprisoned due to prosecutorial malfeasance, and then accepted a pardon for the crime you were wrongly convicted of, that means that you acknowledged your "actions" in the crime?

Ervin Burrell said:

---

TOUCHDOWN! said:

---

I still can't believe how willingly the Tea Party Republicans abandoned everything they claimed to hold dear and bent the knee to a billionaire from NYC. Never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined they would be lining up to applaud a $1.7 trillion transfer of wealth from middle class taxpayers to the president, to be handed out to whomever he deems worthy or needs a favor from.

---

Cults are a thing for a reason.

---

Yes...

We know ALL ABOUT the Democratic Party...

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Secolobo said:

---

Seeing libs get upset about this is like them being pissed about building the border wall.
If the law would have been properly enforced to begin with, there would be no need for it.

---

If the laws were not followed, then let them go to court to get it settled. Not by getting a handout. That sounds like a liberal thing.

---

Ummm...

This is the result of a SETTLEMENT due to a lawsuit when they WENT TO COURT.

richardag said:

---

redseven94 said:

---

YNWA.2013 said:

---

So in conclusion, Trump sued himself three times, his own lawyer (Todd Blanch) settled the claims, taxpayers appear to be paying it, his hand picked commission selects who collects. And the money can flow to January 6 rioters. So it's being sold as fixing weaponization but it is, in fact, weaponization.

---

The level of contortion that MAGA can do to explain away trumps fraud is impressive!

---

What fraud, please be specific with documentation and references.

---

The FRAUD!!! DUH!!!!

He doesn't need to explain it. He's SAID IT!!! Better yet, he DECLARED IT!!!!

Explain what you mean by "wrongly convicted." Trespassing in the US Capitol and going to jail for that is not a wrongful conviction. By all means, if they got charges added like child abuse or sentenced for 50 years for walking orderly through the rotunda, I can understand revisiting the case, and there are probably many examples of overzealous prosecution there. But my suspicion is that you're sympathetic to what they did and they just got a little carried away and any accountability apart from minor slap on the wrist is Democrats weaponizing justice.

Yes, when the President's personal lawyer is also in a dual role as the public's lawyer and the settlement is favorable to the President, some of us have our eyebrows raised about how effective or even if the public's interests were taken into account.

Malibu said:

---

Yes, when the President's personal lawyer is also in a dual role as the public's lawyer and the settlement is favorable to the President, some of us have our eyebrows raised about how effective or even if the public's interests were taken into account.

---

Wingman Eric Holder says hello.

And Blanche was a lifelong Democrat who served as Trumps defense attorney in cases of… overzealous persecution of POTUS.

Seems like he is the perfect one to manage this.

Malibu said:

---

Explain what you mean by "wrongly convicted." Trespassing in the US Capitol and going to jail for that is not a wrongful conviction. By all means, if they got charges added like child abuse or sentenced for 50 years for walking orderly through the rotunda, I can understand revisiting the case, and there are probably many examples of overzealous prosecution there. But my suspicion is that you're sympathetic to what they did and they just got a little carried away and any accountability apart from minor slap on the wrist is Democrats weaponizing justice.

---

There were a number of people convicted using the Sarbanes-Oxley "obstruction of official proceedings" clause. Which was only meant for destroying documents...they had to pay for lawyers to defend themselves and most ended up in jail (how much compensation would YOU want for having to wrongly spend 6+ months in jail?)


The *******s that fought police or caused damage rightly deserved punishment.


However, the punishments for many of them were far harsher than usual - to make a point, I can only assume.

But there were a number of people who were completely clueless that they were breaking the law - you've seen the pictures and videos of people peacefully entering and walking through politely, even staying within the ropes. And yet THESE people were also punished harshly.

Of course, when you see left-wing folks do a sit-in in a Republican congressman's office, their punishments were far less severe.

Punish all of the people that committed actual crimes - but do it FAIRLY (something Democrats preach but rarely practice)...

Malibu said:

---

Yes, when the President's personal lawyer is also in a dual role as the public's lawyer and the settlement is favorable to the President, some of us have our eyebrows raised about how effective or even if the public's interests were taken into account.

---

flown-the-coop is correct in his comments.

Eric Holder LITERALLY called himself Obama's "wingman". And no one on the left batted an eyelash at that.

So, spare us outrage...

Let's not forget most independent Merrick Garland met secretly with Biden's WH counsel and the head of NARA to plan the M-A-L raid to recover files that now show the depth of the weaponization.

But by god Todd Blanche appointing people to administer funds under the oversight of Congress and OIG is the biggest corruption ever.

After the resurfacing of the pond at the mall.

Here's the problem with what you're saying. You're not actually defending Trump right now. You're saying, see, they do it too. My criteria is: don't steal money from the public to give to people you choose without oversight and accountability. I don't support criminal behavior in government office and don't check party affiliation when public trust is broken.

Malibu said:

---

Here's the problem with what you're saying. You're not actually defending Trump right now. You're saying, see, they do it too. My criteria is: don't steal money from the public to give to people you choose without oversight and accountability. I don't support criminal behavior in government office and don't check party affiliation when public trust is broken.

---

It has oversight and accountability and it was not stolen.

Why lie? You say you don't check party affiliation then you lie like a Dem. Why?

If you can't see the blatant self-dealing here I can't help you.

It's a shame Trump and the other Trump Republicans who plotted to stop the counting of the certified electoral votes and conspired to overthrow the duly elected incoming Administration aren't serving prison sentences for their crimes. They tried to overthrow our country. They all deserved to be indicted and prosecuted. However I understand the legal reasons why Jack Smith made the necessary decision to limit the scope to Trump and a few of the key co-conspirators.

As for the J6 rioters, they are dupes who believed the lies told by Trump and rightwing media. They are gullible fools, but they also had agency. They knowingly committed crimes against our country. Most of them deserve no sympathy and no remunerations. It will be more corruption by Trump and his corrupt adherents if Trump and Blanche succeed in giving our taxpayer dollars to J6 rioters.

Malibu said:

---

If you can't see the blatant self-dealing here I can't help you.

---

Libs can offer me no assistance. I prefer if that way. Thanks for complying.

DeschutesAg said:

---

It's a shame Trump and the other Trump Republicans who plotted to stop the counting of the certified electoral votes and conspired to overthrow the duly elected incoming Administration aren't serving prison sentences for their crimes. They tried to overthrow our country. They all deserved to be indicted and prosecuted. However I understand the legal reasons why Jack Smith made the necessary decision to limit the scope to Trump and a few of the key co-conspirators.

As for the J6 rioters, they are dupes who believed the lies told by Trump and rightwing media. They are gullible fools, but they also had agency. They knowingly committed crimes against our country. Most of them deserve no sympathy and no remunerations. It will be more corruption by Trump and his corrupt adherents if Trump and Blanche succeed in giving our taxpayer dollars to J6 rioters.

---

Dear diary, believe everything James Comey, Biden and Kamala has ever told me about Orange Man Bad.

Bring on more corruption by Trump. I'm cheering it on now.

Folks would take Trump curing cancer and said he only did it to benefit his Tulsis husband and his ex daughter in law.

You TDSers are funny sometimes. Total delusionment that Orange Man is evil.

DeschutesAg said:

---

It's a shame Trump and the other Trump Republicans who plotted to stop the counting of the certified electoral votes and conspired to overthrow the duly elected incoming Administration aren't serving prison sentences for their crimes. They tried to overthrow our country. They all deserved to be indicted and prosecuted. However I understand the legal reasons why Jack Smith made the necessary decision to limit the scope to Trump and a few of the key co-conspirators.

As for the J6 rioters, they are dupes who believed the lies told by Trump and rightwing media. They are gullible fools, but they also had agency. They knowingly committed crimes against our country. Most of them deserve no sympathy and no remunerations. It will be more corruption by Trump and his corrupt adherents if Trump and Blanche succeed in giving our taxpayer dollars to J6 rioters.

---

Seek help.

Malibu said:

---

Here's the problem with what you're saying. You're not actually defending Trump right now. You're saying, see, they do it too. My criteria is: don't steal money from the public to give to people you choose without oversight and accountability. I don't support criminal behavior in government office and don't check party affiliation when public trust is broken.

---

I'm not defending Trump AND I'm not saying "they do it too".

I'm saying there were a number of people that were improperly attacked by the federal government for political purposes and they need to be made whole as a result of that.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

It's a shame Trump and the other Trump Republicans who plotted to stop the counting of the certified electoral votes and conspired to overthrow the duly elected incoming Administration aren't serving prison sentences for their crimes. They tried to overthrow our country. They all deserved to be indicted and prosecuted. However I understand the legal reasons why Jack Smith made the necessary decision to limit the scope to Trump and a few of the key co-conspirators.

As for the J6 rioters, they are dupes who believed the lies told by Trump and rightwing media. They are gullible fools, but they also had agency. They knowingly committed crimes against our country. Most of them deserve no sympathy and no remunerations. It will be more corruption by Trump and his corrupt adherents if Trump and Blanche succeed in giving our taxpayer dollars to J6 rioters.

---

Seek help.

---

This is a bot.

What about the fools like you that believed Steele dossier?

Can somebody who's read this thing and found the relevant text copy and paste the sections that describe oversight? I've seen summaries such as "five people appointed by Trump and one who is appointed but serves as trump's pleasure" and "settlements will be reported in a confidential memo." That sounds pretty sketch, but I'd like to see the text from the primary source before I decide one way or another.

Ag with kids said:

---

redseven94 said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

redseven94 said:

---

Since Hunter Biden was indicted during the previous administration, is he eligible for a settlement. :-D

---

Hunter Biden is a real criminal.

Nice try, though.

---

How about all the pardoned people from J6 including those that beat police, are they not real criminals?

By law, they all acknowledged their actions by accepting pardons in 1/25. So what about them?

Eligible?

---

So, if you were wrongly convicted and imprisoned due to prosecutorial malfeasance, and then accepted a pardon for the crime you were wrongly convicted of, that means that you acknowledged your "actions" in the crime?

---

Prosecutorial Malfeasance can cause sentences to be vacated. It's called an appeal. It is SC precedent that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

Can somebody who's read this thing and found the relevant text copy and paste the sections that describe oversight? I've seen summaries such as "five people appointed by Trump and one who is appointed but serves as trump's pleasure" and "settlements will be reported in a confidential memo." That sounds pretty sketch, but I'd like to see the text from the primary source before I decide one way or another.

---

Here you go.

Regarding the appointments

Quote:

---

The Anti-Weaponization Fund shall consist of five Members. Within 30 days of the Effective Date, the Attorney General shall issue an order appointing the Members, including the Chair of The Anti-Weaponization Fund, with such order being treated as incorporated herein. One of the Members shall be chosen in consultation with congressional leadership. The Members shall serve until The Anti-Weaponization Fund is concluded as described below, unless they resign or are removed by the President, who can remove any Member without cause. Any replacement shall be made by the same method as the initial appointment. A quorum is three Members. A majority of a quorum is authorized to take action.

---

Regarding confidentiality

Quote:

---

On a quarterly basis, or otherwise as directed by the Attorney General, The AntiWeaponization Fund shall provide to the Attorney General a confidential written report that includes the name and address of each claimant who has received any relief and if so, nature of such relief.

---

Even the procedures for the committee dont have to be public

Quote:

---

Consistent with this Settlement Agreement, The Anti-Weaponization Fund shall have the power to determine its own procedures for submitting, receiving, processing, and granting or denying claims. See In re Oil Spill by the Oil Rig ''Deepwater Horizon" in the Gulf of Mexico. on April 20, 2010, No. 2:10-md-02179, ECF No. 1098 (E.D. La. Feb. 2, 2011). The Anti-Weaponization Fund may make those procedures public in whole or in part, in its discretion.

---

But don't worry the same person appointing the members is also the one responsible for investigating if them. Not potential conflicts there.

Quote:

---

The Department of Justice, or a third-party contractor of the agency as designated by the Attorney General, may audit the claims submitted pursuant to this Agreement. The Department of Justice and/or any other government agency may, to the full extent pennitted by law, make referrals for investigation or prosecution or prosecute or take other enforcement action to address any evidence of fraud.

---

https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1441201/dl?inline