Donald Trump’s allegedly demanding the Justice Department he now controls write him a check — a personal check — for nearly a quarter of a billion dollars. I wish I were joking.
Last week, while regaling reporters at The White House, Trump said something seemingly crazy. Of course, more or less everything he says is some stripe of crazy, which is why Americans are by now thoroughly desensitized to his ramblings, even while realizing he often means it.
Flanked by Pam Bondi and her No. 2, Todd Blanche, Trump made mention of a lawsuit which he said was “doing very well.” In itself, that was a meaningless statement. He’s party to enough lawsuits to sustain multiple law firms in perpetuity. He might’ve been referring to any of them. Then his cadence turned cryptic.
“When I [was reelected], I said, ‘I’m sort of suing myself,” Trump mused, before suggesting how one might go about settling a lawsuit against the Department of Justice if one controlled the department: “I’ll say give me X dollars.”
It’s elegant, I’ll give him that. But it’s also flagrant even by Trumpian standards for legal corruption. Surely — surely — Trump wouldn’t demand that Bondi or one of her deputies sign off on a settlement for any claims Trump might’ve made against the DoJ during the four years between his first and second terms. Because as he himself pointed out during the same monologue, that “sort of looks bad.”
But the risk of bad optics hasn’t historically been a deterrent for Trump, so it probably shouldn’t surprise anyone to learn that in fact, he’s pressing the issue. Bondi and Blanche may therefore be compelled (because what else are they going to do, tell him no?) to green light an enormous payout as compensation for what Trump described in a pair of claims submitted through a clerical process as violations of his rights in connection with the FBI’s Russia investigation and the bureau’s 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid.
In the same filings — which aren’t actually lawsuits — Trump complained about wrongful prosecution by the DoJ in the classified documents case.
As The New York Times, which broke the story on Tuesday, explained, Trump filed the complaints in 2023 and 2024 as a likely prelude to legal action. The DoJ gets to review the forms and then decide whether to settle or risk a federal lawsuit.
The implication is that a settlement’s a foregone conclusion. Because Trump’s “negotiating, in essence, with his subordinates” as the Times dryly put it.
If this settlement is in fact agreed and it’s anywhere near the $230 million payout the Times said Trump’s demanding, this’ll be derided by Trump’s critics as the most egregious abuse of power in modern American history. It’s so grotesque that even Trump seemed reluctant. “I don’t know,” he said a few days ago.
I don’t either. Because unlike, say, complex crypto schemes, any idiot can understand this for precisely what it is. This is a potential propaganda coup for Democrats. And while they’re quite adept at squandering such opportunities, this is a soft ball that even Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries should be able to knock into the cheap seats.
If you’re wondering where the money would come from to pay Trump in the event Blanche signs off on a settlement, the answer, according to the Times, is taxpayers.
Maybe they can pay him with his dollar coins. Just have the DOJ show up with a giant jar of them.
Personal military, personal DOJ and know he’s on to his personal bank, the good ole gullible American taxpayer. If it was a sitcom it would be a lot of laughs.
It really would. I’ve conceded over and over that he makes me laugh at least once a day, and usually several times. Part of it is that while he’s obviously apprised of the extent to which stuff like this is egregious, there’s a certain genuineness to it when his wheels are turning, and sometimes he turns them out loud. Like, “Hmm, I have these claims against the DoJ for $230 million, and I basically now run the DoJ, so how bad does it look on a scale of 1-10 if I just make them write me a check? Anybody’s welcome to weigh in here. You over there in the corner, what do you think?”
It’s the same sort of deal when he dials up The Kremlin to ask Putin’s opinion on Ukraine. Sure, he knows it’s ridiculous, but even there there’s this kernel of genuineness which I imagine is disarming even for someone like Putin: “Wait, he actually wants my opinion on whether he should send Tomahawks to Kyiv? I’m supposed to treat this as a real question and give him a reasoned analysis of why we don’t want that, no wink-winks? He wants me to take this question seriously?”
Andy Kaufman isn’t dead – he’s Trump in disguise. That’s the only logical explanation.
There was a great cartoon from Trump’s first term. First panel, Trump announces, “I’m retiring.” Second panel, a reporter asks, “From politics?” Third panel, he declares, “From acting!” and rips off the Trump mask to reveal Daniel Day Lewis.
I guess it’s a bit late to mention a “Constitutional Crisis”, isn’t it?
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
Doesn’t the taxpayer pay for anything, everything, the government spends?
Trump crypto and foreigners putting $2B into it seemed pretty bad.
The Qataris giving him a jet seemed pretty bad.
The Supreme Court giving him absolute immunity seemed pretty bad.
The voters electing a convicted felon seemed pretty bad.
Trump pardoning 1500 other convicted felons seemed pretty bad.
Trump parking nuclear secrets in his bathroom seemed pretty bad.
Trump tearing down the Greek-inspired architecture at the Whitehouse, and the 200 year old trees surrounding it, to make way for a hideous monument to himself, seems pretty bad.
What the hell. What’s one more thing?
He has pushed the envelope so far that it is surreal. Beyond parody. History will someday look back at these years and educated Americans will not believe all of it !
I hope that you are right about “educated Americans will not believe all of it!” – because that implies that in the future, this situation has been fixed such that we no longer have a president who oversteps his authority; nor do we have a congress who isn’t living up to its constitutional responsibilities.
Why settle for $230 million?
He’ll “settle” for $100M and claim he did all of us a favor.
A question my children’s cohort coined comes to mind.
W. T. actual F?!! Did Trump decide on the spur of the moment this morning to demolish the wing of the White House rather than just the facade? Did the Building Department weigh in? Aren’t there guidelines around tearing down historical structures?
Where I live in anarchist California converting a carport to a garage on a 20 year old tract home requires jumping through ridiculous Planning Department hoops. Much money and time required. No guarantee of success.
Baseball bat or not, Jeffries will f it up. Trump must have only raised $20 million for his ballroom