Trump’s slush fund reflects concentration of power in the executive, collapse of constitutional guardrails Adler

One of the grave consequences for American constitutionalism of the untrammeled concentration of power in the hands of President Donald Trump — the putative goal of Project 2025 — is his total control over the Department of Justice. There is no separation between President Trump and his Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, his former criminal defense lawyer, no independence between the White House and the DOJ. What Trump wants, Trump gets — the governing principle of authoritarianism.

This arrangement, cemented by Blanche’s craven ambition to please Trump at every turn, regardless of legal and ethical concerns, has produced an unprecedented level of corruption in the executive branch, for the sole purpose of serving Trump’s pursuits — financial, political and personal — and those of his children and his business interests. Trump’s latest exercise in self-dealing, the creation of the DOJ’s “anti-weaponization” fund, a $1.8 billion dollar theft from American taxpayers, is a cynical, Orwellian euphemism for a brazenly illegal and unconstitutional slush fund for him to pay off his political supporters, including those who rioted at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and engaged in an insurrection to overthrow the presidential election and thwart the will and voting rights of the sovereign people.

The Trump-Blanche caper makes Richard Nixon and his criminal counterpart at the DOJ, Attorney General John Mitchell, look like choir boys. This slush fund represents a staggering betrayal of the public trust, American democracy and the rule of law. It is made worse by the inclusion of a “Release of Claims,” a protective bubble for Trump, his family, his associates and his businesses, unlike any in our history. The government agrees in this document, signed by Blanche, that it will never prosecute or pursue any civil claims against any of the Trumps, “whether presently known or unknown” that could have been brought as of the date of the document, May 28. The IRS, which, like the DOJ, Trump also directs, is “forever barred and precluded” from pursuing “examinations” of Trump, “related or affiliated individuals,” and related businesses and trusts. Proceedings against Trump, over tax returns or crimes committed before the date of the document, are off limits.

In combination, these historic acts of corruption, represent both platform and cover for what California Gov. Gavin Newsom has rightly called a “criminal enterprise.” If not stopped by Congress or the courts, Trump will loot the U.S. Treasury through his newest version of the Golden Fleece of American taxpayers and, along with his children and business interests, enjoy the fruits of an unconstitutional preemptive pardon.

Trump’s slush fund for the Jan. 6 rioters, and new conscripts for his “private militia,” violates the congressional power over appropriations. The fact is, Congress has never appropriated funding for Trump’s program. Without the appropriation, Trump may not proceed, legally or constitutionally.

In the name of James Madison and the fading doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances, Congress must act to defend its institutional integrity and stop Trump’s illegal project. A majority in either the House or the Senate will likely prove sufficient to protect the public fisc, block Trump’s theft of taxpayer dollars and prevent his access to the Treasury Department’s discretionary Judgment Fund as a means of circumventing congressional power over the purse.

Congress, it must be emphasized, is prohibited by Section 4 of the 14th Amendment from appropriating funds for insurrection or rebellion. Thus, any money that Trump wishes to give to any of the 1,600 rioters and insurrectionists, whom he infamously pardoned, would violate the Constitution. That prohibition also prevents congressional resort to enactment of a private bill to support the insurrectionists. The eyes of the nation and the judgment of history are upon Congress. At long last, Americans ask, will members defend their institutional integrity?