Police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol turn the tables on Trump and his "slush fund," suing to block payouts and demanding the illegal fund be dissolved

Officers Daniel Hodges and Harry Dunn (Bloomberg, via Getty Images)

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Tuesday told a Senate Appropriations subommittee, in so many words, that all systems are go on Donald Trump's plan to use a "weaponization fund" to compensate his allies who claim they were unlawfully targeted by the Joe Biden administration. In the process, Blanche brushed away concerns from one senator that proceeds from the fund could go to a very real Trump ally who was pardoned and released from prison for his crimes in the Jan. 6 riot, only to be convicted of child molestation and sentenced to life. A second senator voiced concerns about a theoretical ally who, having assaulted police officers on Jan. 6, could receive money as a reward for his actions. Blanche essentially brushed that off, too.

But we learned yesterday, that two officers who helped defend the Capitol have said, "Not so fast, Mr. acting attorney general." Blanche might find that he can't dismiss these officers so readily, according to a report at Associated Press (AP), under the headline "Officers who defended Capitol from rioters sue to block payouts from $1.8B 'anti-weaponization' fund." Reporter Michael Kunzelman writes:

Two police officers who helped defend the U.S. Capitol from attack by a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters sued on Wednesday to block anyone — including Jan. 6, 2021, rioters — from receiving payouts from a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for people who claim to be victims of politically motivated prosecutions.

The officers’ attorneys filed the federal lawsuit a day after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the fund’s creation during a congressional hearing. Blanche, a personal attorney for Trump before joining the Justice Department, wouldn’t rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 would be eligible for fund payouts.

By attempting to block anyone -- not just Trump allies -- from receiving payouts, attorneys for the officers appear to be playing a serious game of hardball. They seem to be saying that the "weaponization fund," in its entirety, is an unlawful mechanism that cannot disburse funds to anyone. In fact, the officers are pushing for the fund to have a short lifespan because it is illegal. And that is exactly how the AP article  frames it. Kunzelman writes:

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.

“No statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution and federal law,” the suit says.

As I often heard while growing up in the Ozark Mountains -- which explains my fandom of the Ozark Mountain Daredevils -- "That's telling 'em how the hog ate the cabbage." The AP report contains this telling paragraph about the sketchy nature of Trump's handiwork:

The fund stems from a settlement of Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns. It’s designed to compensate those who believe they were mistreated by prior administrations’ Justice Department. Decisions on payouts will be made by a five-member commission appointed by the attorney general.

Notice that the fund is "designed to compensate those WHO BELIEVE they were mistreated . . . " To borrow another phrase from my Ozarks heritage, "I 'believe" doves will fly out of my butt one day, but that doesn't mean it will actually happen." In short, the factual basis for Trump's lawsuit -- and the resulting settlement that led to formation of the "weaponization fund" -- appears at this time to be virtually non-existent. Consider these words from our post of Tuesday (5/19/26):

Here are some obvious questions this all raises: Who are these Trump allies who claim the Biden DOJ targeted them? No one seems to know. How were they targeted, and what investigations or charges did they face? No one seems to know that, either. Did they present evidence of their innocence to the White House before the lawsuit was filed? You guessed it; No one knows.

These are the kinds of questions that surface when you have a hideously corrupt president who has filled the DOJ with his incompetent loyalists, and we have Republicans in Congress who checked their spines -- and their oversight authority -- at the door. Here is more from AP:

More than 100 police officers were injured during the Capitol riot. Nearly 1,600 people were charged with Jan. 6-related crimes, but Trump used his pardon powers to erase all of those cases in a sweeping act of clemency last year.

The plaintiffs suing Trump over the fund are Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges and former U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, who is running in Maryland for a seat in Congress. Hodges and Dunn both testified before Congress about their harrowing experiences on Jan. 6. Videos captured a rioter ripping a mask off Hodges as he was pinned against a door during a fight for control of a tunnel entrance.

For the plaintiffs, issues raised by the Trump fund are matters of life and death, but it's not clear that Blanche is taking the process seriously, Kunzelman reports:

The officers claim the fund “encourages those who enacted violence in the President’s name to continue to do so.”

“Dunn and Hodges already face credible threats of death and violence on regular basis; the Fund substantially increases the danger,” the suit alleges.

A commission, whose members will be chosen by Blanche but have not yet been announced, will be charged with deciding who gets paid and how much.

Blanche said in a CNN interview on Wednesday that the board will have to consider the person’s actions, among other factors, when deciding whether to give them money. But the attorney general added: “Whether the commissioners will give that person money — that claimant — it’s up to them.”

Blanche said “it’s abhorrent” to harm law enforcement, but added that “people that hurt police get money all the time” from suing the government. He dismissed backlash to the fund as “fake outrage.” 

Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also are named as defendants in the officers’ lawsuit. Spokespeople for the Justice and Treasury departments didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the suit.

One of the attorneys for the officers is Brendan Ballou, a former Justice Department prosecutor who handled Jan. 6 cases.