pull down to refresh
So two points. First off, Trump is dismissing two lawsuits over this, including one that everyone I know, be it Democrats or Republicans, knew he was going to win over the leaked tax documents. I mean, that's significantly illegal lol. That lawsuit alone was $10 billion. Plus, he is dropping the $230 million Mar-a-Lago one, and this fund would put an end to all of the lawsuits flooding the courts by Jan. 6th protestors.
I mean, I can speak from experience since I was at the Capitol Complex that day, and as soon as it turned rowdy, I left. Over a year later, I found out that the Justice Department had acquired all of the ID's of people who pinged at the Complex before, during, and after that time.
I didn't do anything wrong. I was on the opposite side of the building, walking around to see what was going on, but I still ended up on a list that could, in theory, have been used against me. On this list alone, there are well over 15k people, and using your number of 1.6k, that seems like a significant overstep by the government when that method was not needed, given all the CCTV, social media, body-cam, etc., footage out there.
Given these lists, a hell of a lot more people are highly likely to be eligible on both sides of the aisle. There were plenty of people who were against the protest on those grounds that day esp. on the East side of the Capitol facing the Supreme Court Building. They all got tagged and listed.
This is a move that prevents complexity more than it manages it. It ends hundreds of lawsuits and saves the taxpayers at a minimum of $8.53 billion. Do I like or agree with it? No, not really, but compared to what was coming, this was a pretty easy deal to take to end two major lawsuits and hundreds of smaller ones across the U.S.
Also.... you kinda didn't address anything I said about how you would address those things. This is one that does have a clear path; those others, I don't see any ideas being presented. These are important things that need to be addressed but no one seems to really be providing any sort of solution that could address this stuff.
Quite frankly, one of the biggest steps taken to address your complaints has been the establishment of Opportunity Zones by President Trump. There are 8,764 zones across all 50 states and 5 territories. In 1.0 of these zones, over $100 billion has been invested, creating 400k homes and half a million jobs. This success has led to 2.0 going into effect Jan of 2027 to make these permanent and further them.
I think we’re talking past each other a little.
I’m not defending illegal leaks, abusive surveillance, or sloppy dragnet investigations. If innocent people were swept into lists because their phone pinged near the Capitol, that deserves scrutiny. Civil liberties do not disappear because the crowd was ugly.
But that does not erase the signal in this proposed fund.
The article says the fund could compensate “anyone” claiming Biden-era weaponization, including nearly 1,600 Jan. 6 defendants and potentially Trump-associated entities. It also says the commission could distribute $1.7B with little transparency, and Trump could remove commission members.
That is the part I’m pointing at.
Opportunity Zones are not the same thing.
OZs are investor tax incentives. They may have drawn capital into distressed areas. Fine. But they are not direct restitution to families harmed by slavery, redlining, discriminatory housing policy, or generational wealth extraction.
That distinction matters.
When the claim is repair for historic racial harm, the answer is usually:
“too complicated”
“too messy”
“where do you draw the line?”
But when the claim is repair for Trump allies, Jan. 6 defendants, and politically useful “weaponization” narratives, suddenly the government can imagine a path, create a commission, and attach $1.7B.
That was my point.
Not that every claimant is guilty.
The signal is who gets complexity solved for them.
I don’t think my title is inaccurate. I think your own quote proves the point.
The article says the fund could cover “anyone” claiming harm from Biden-era “weaponization,” including nearly 1,600 Jan. 6 defendants and potentially Trump-associated entities.
Yes, other people may be included.
But the political signal is still obvious:
A $1.7B taxpayer fund is being discussed for Trump allies and Jan. 6 defendants, with a commission Trump can reportedly influence, little required transparency, and possible private recipients.
That is not normal “legal compensation.”
That is a state-backed restoration project for the president’s political coalition.
And the reparations comparison is the point:
When the harm is slavery, redlining, discriminatory housing, or generational wealth theft, we suddenly hear:
But when the beneficiaries are politically useful Jan. 6 defendants and Trump-aligned claimants?
Suddenly complexity is manageable.
That tells you who this government sees as worthy of repair.