January 6 police officers sue Trump over $1.8bn fund, alleging ‘presidential corruption’
Retired Capitol police officer and DC officer allege Trump’s $1.8bn fund unlawfully rewards January 6 rioters and allies
Two police officers who clashed with rioters at the US Capitol during the January 6 insurrection in 2021 have sued Donald Trump over plans to create a $1.776bn “anti-weaponization” fund.
The fund, which critics have argued is essentially a slush fund, is set to compensate allies of the US president who he claims were victims of prosecutorial overreach.
It was created as part of an agreement in which Trump and his sons dropped a $10bn long-shot lawsuit against the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Harry Dunn, a retired US Capitol police officer, and Daniel Hodges, a Metropolitan police department officer, filed a complaint in US district court in Washington DC on Tuesday.
“In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J. Trump has created a $1.776 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name,” the lawsuit says.
Dunn and Hodges both defended the west front of the US Capitol during the insurrection attempt on 6 Jan. 2021. One rioter attempted to gouge Hodges’ eyes, and the officer was later seen in infamous video footage nearly being crushed between metal doors as he attempted to prevent rioters from breaching the building. Dunn, who unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 2024, has said he struggles with PTSD following the attack.
“By its very existence, the Fund encourages those who enacted violence in the President’s name to continue to do so,” the lawsuit says. “Dunn and Hodges already face credible threats of death and violence on regular basis; the Fund substantially increases the danger.”
Todd Blanche, acting attorney general, and Scott Bessent, treasury secretary, are also named as defendants.
In a Senate hearing on 19 May, Blanche refused to rule out that January 6 rioters would receive payouts. He said it was up to the commissioners of the fund, which he will appoint and whom Trump can fire at any time.
Reporters asked Trump on 18 May about the possibility that January 6 rioters would received money from the fund, and the president defended the possibility. “They’ve been weaponized. They’ve been in some cases imprisoned wrongly. They paid legal fees that they didn’t have. They’ve gone bankrupt. Their lives have been destroyed,” he said. “And they turned out to be right.”
Reading that “In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J — hard to argue with the logic there.
Retired Capitol has been pushing this agenda for a while now.
If “In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J, then the bigger picture starts to look very different.
The fund, which critics have argued is essentially a slush fund, is set to compensate allies of the US president who he claims were victims of prosecutorial overreach. Meanwhile it was created as part of an agreement in which Trump and his sons dropped a $10bn long-shot lawsuit against the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
The detail about it was created as part of an agreement in which Trump and his sons dropped a $10bn long-shot lawsuit against the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is something people should sit with.
What stands out is two police officers who clashed with rioters at the US Capitol during the January 6 insurrection in 2021 have sued Donald Trump over plans to create a $1.776bn “anti-weaponization” fund. That is the part worth paying attention to.
So the bottom line is the fund, which critics have argued is essentially a slush fund, is set to compensate allies of the US president who he claims were victims of prosecutorial overreach. Wonder how this will land.
So the bottom line is two police officers who clashed with rioters at the US Capitol during the January 6 insurrection in 2021 have sued Donald Trump over plans to create a $1.776bn “anti-weaponization” fund. Wonder how this will land.
Basically the fund, which critics have argued is essentially a slush fund, is set to compensate allies of the US president who he claims were victims of prosecutorial overreach. What matters is whether anything changes because of it.
The bigger issue here is the fund, which critics have argued is essentially a slush fund, is set to compensate allies of the US president who he claims were victims of prosecutorial overreach. That changes the calculation.
In other words “In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J. Curious to see how this develops.
1.776 billion is hard to ignore, no matter which side you are on.
So the bottom line is it was created as part of an agreement in which Trump and his sons dropped a $10bn long-shot lawsuit against the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Wonder how this will land.
In other words it was created as part of an agreement in which Trump and his sons dropped a $10bn long-shot lawsuit against the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Curious to see how this develops.
Think about it: two police officers who clashed with rioters at the US Capitol during the January 6 insurrection in 2021 have sued Donald Trump over plans to create a $1.776bn “anti-weaponization” fund. That speaks volumes.