WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans have defeated the first legislative attempts to eliminate President Donald Trump's controversial fund for rioters, known as the 'Anti-Weaponization Fund.' The Senate may consider additional proposals targeting the fund on Thursday, but it appears Republicans are stepping back from a confrontation with the president.
Senate Votes and Reactions
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) expressed no surprise at the outcome. 'There's only one rule here: In the end, he gets anything he wants,' Murphy told HuffPost, referring to Trump. For a brief period on Thursday, it seemed Senate Republicans might support a motion by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to send an immigration funding bill back to committee with instructions to outlaw the slush fund. The bill had been stalled for weeks due to Republican concerns about the fund, which Trump created through a dubious 'settlement' of a lawsuit he filed against his own administration over a past leak of his tax returns.
Supporters of Trump prosecuted for attacking the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, have long argued they deserve cash compensation for alleged mistreatment by the Justice Department, and the fund appeared designed for that purpose. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) voted for Schumer's motion, while three other Republicans — Sens. Jon Husted (Ohio), Dan Sullivan (Alaska), and Bill Cassidy (La.) — initially abstained. However, Cassidy later voted against, while Husted and Sullivan voted yes, resulting in a 49-50 failure.
Subsequently, the Senate overwhelmingly rejected an amendment from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) to redirect the 'weaponization' money to anti-fraud enforcement, with a vote of 15 to 84.
Administration's Stance
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the settlement last month but later stated the administration was 'not moving forward with the fund' due to backlash from Republican lawmakers. Blanche's statement during a committee hearing was enough for Republican senators to restart their immigration bill. Despite the president's apparent belief that the fund still exists, some senators used Blanche's comments to dismiss questions. 'It's a moot point,' Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) told HuffPost. 'There is no fund.'
Tillis, one of the most vocal critics of the fund, offered an amendment far weaker than Democratic proposals, such as one by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) to ban the president from suing his own government to create sham settlements. Trump's deal also freed him, his family, and his businesses from ongoing IRS audits, potentially saving the president millions. Republicans showed less interest in undoing that part of the settlement.
'We need to make it illegal for the president to create a slush fund,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told HuffPost. 'That's our job.'
Future Prospects
Tillis indicated there might be more Republican-supported efforts to target the fund and said he would not support a final immigration bill that lacks anti-fund language. However, he also stated he did not want to vote for a Democratic amendment. 'I want this to be a Republican-led solution,' he said.
Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) noted that the Senate could have other opportunities to kill the fund and emphasized the importance of Republican unity on funding immigration-enforcement sub-agencies within the Department of Homeland Security. They are using a special budget process to pass funding for ICE and Border Patrol because Democrats have refused to do so since January. 'If I can get an opportunity to kill the fund, I will kill it, but we need to fund these departments,' Curtis said.
