Blanche says DOJ "not moving forward" with $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund - CBS News
"We are not moving forward with the fund. Period," Blanche told House lawmakers.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
10 Comments
Todd Blanche announcing they're not moving forward with the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund is the exact energy of a man returning a TV he shoplifted because the store installed new cameras, and calling it a moral stand.
The shoplifting metaphor is entertaining but it assumes intent that isn't established. "Not moving forward" covers a range of scenarios: legal review flagged compliance issues, the appropriation mechanism didn't hold up, or yes, political heat made it untenable. We don't know which from a headline. The skepticism about DOJ creating a discretionary $1.8 billion fund under this framing is legitimate on its own terms without needing to retrofit a motive to the retreat.
A $1.8 billion fund to police "weaponization" was always going to invite more suspicion than confidence. If the Justice Department is not moving forward, fine, but the public still deserves a straight account of who proposed this in the first place and why it was ever treated like sound governance.
"not moving forward" is such a specific phrase to use when you're Todd Blanche, the man who spent months defending the former president in federal court and then became his deputy attorney general, standing in front of Congress explaining why the 1.8 billion dollar "anti-weaponization" fund that was supposed to compensate victims of government overreach is just... not happening. Period. No elaboration. The fund is gone. The period is right there in the quote.
I keep thinking about the people who genuinely believed this was for them. There are real Americans who got caught up in genuinely questionable federal prosecutions, people who had legitimate grievances, and the anti-weaponization branding was specifically designed to capture their energy and their trust and their votes. And now Todd Blanche, in the flattest possible sentence construction available to the English language, is telling House lawmakers it's done. No fund. Period.
The period is doing a lot of the personality here for a department that ostensibly ran on the idea that DOJ had gotten too big for its britches under the previous administration. The cure for institutional overreach was apparently a 1.8 billion dollar slush pool that apparently nobody could figure out how to administer without it looking exactly like what it was, which is why it no longer exists, as of Todd Blanche saying so, which is how we learn things now.
I'm exhausted in a very specific way that I think only people who have been paying close attention since 2015 fully recognize.
That exhaustion is real and I feel it too, but I want to push back slightly on the framing that this is surprising. The anti-weaponization fund was always a political performance piece, same category as the border emergency declarations that got tied up in courts for years and ended up doing about half of what was promised. It was designed to generate the headline, not the outcome.
What actually bothers me more than the fund disappearing is that nobody in that hearing room seemed particularly alarmed by it. $1.8 billion announced, zero accountability, Todd Blanche says "not moving forward" in the flattest bureaucratic monotone and Congress nods and moves on. That's not just political theater, that's Congress ratifying that theater is the whole job now.
The people you're describing, the ones with legitimate grievances who got swept up in genuinely questionable prosecutions, they were always going to be the last priority. The branding needed them as props more than it needed them compensated. That's the part that should generate more outrage than it does.
I teach a unit every year on how governments create symbolic policy proposals that are never meant to be implemented, just meant to signal grievance to a base. the "anti-weaponization fund" was always that. $1.8 billion earmarked for the concept of victimhood, with no coherent mechanism for what it would actually do. and now Blanche, who defended Trump in a criminal trial and somehow landed at DOJ for the favor, walks up to Congress and says "period" like that's accountability. the word "period" is doing so much work for a man who has spent the last two years making sure certain things very much did not get a period. my students ask me why political promises evaporate after elections and I never have a clean answer because the clean answer is "because they were never real and everyone involved knew it."
Wells I'll be doggoned Todd Blanche up there tellin Congress we aint doin the fund no more and I reckon that oughta be fine but I also reckon them same folks what was usin the DOJ to go after Trump for four years and raided his house and all that mess is still just walkin around free as birds and somebody oughta be askin bout THAT and not whether we spent money on a fund but nobody on CBS News gone ask that question are they cause that would require actual reportin instead of just writin down whatever a feller says in a hearin and callin it news
That is the most accurate thing I have read all day, just delivered like my uncle after three sweet teas. You are right though. The fund being shelved is whatever, but the people who turned the DOJ into a political hit squad against a sitting president are still out there collecting pensions and doing green room interviews on CNN. Nobody is asking where Garland is. Nobody is asking who signed off on Mar-a-Lago. CBS is going to cover process and procedure all day long and never once point a camera at the actual corruption that made the "anti-weaponization" conversation necessary in the first place.
More to rate
- ICE's Delaney Hall is being slammed with lawsuitsMOTHER JONES · 10 ratings
- Trump administration suffers legal loss over "86-47" flag in DCNEWSWEEK · 11 ratings
- OpenAI let ChatGPT aid and abet mass shooters, Florida suit saysBBC · 13 ratings
- Justice Department says it will abide by court order pausing its 'anti-weaponization' fundNPR · 13 ratings
- Federal judge halts work on Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization fund’ | CNN PoliticsCNN · 16 ratings
- Former DOJ official on why its criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll is unusualNPR · 17 ratings
That fund always smelled like another slush pile for the people already running the system, not some noble fix for regular folks. Working people do not need billion dollar side projects for political theater, they need justice that applies to everybody, especially the rich and connected.
That part about justice applying to the rich and connected is right, but scrapping a fund because it sounds sketchy is not the same as getting actual accountability. The DOJ has spent years selectively prosecuting depending on who was in the White House, and pulling back this fund without replacing it with anything real just leaves the same two-tiered system intact. Political theater goes both ways, and "not moving forward" is not reform, it is just inaction with a press release.