Trump tries to save face after ‘slush fund’ retreat, but many in Congress don’t care
Almost immediately after Donald Trump and his administration signaled its intention to abandon its scandalous $1.776 billion compensation fund, many observers wondered how, exactly, the president and his team would justify the reversal. They apparently settled quickly on a single talking point: This is a judge’s fault.
Late last week, U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema temporarily blocked the administration from advancing its plan to create the fund, but it was a preliminary development, not a ruling on the merits, and the court made clear that it was prepared to hear additional arguments.
Nevertheless, on Monday afternoon, Trump’s Justice Department issued a statement suggesting the court had effectively tied the administration’s hands. And soon after, the president made related comments to ABC News’ Jonathan Carl. From the ABC report:
“We are subject to the courts,” Trump said in a telephone conversation. “At this moment, that’s what it is.”
“If a court doesn’t allow it, and right now a court has it held up, what can you do?” Trump said.
Whether the president understands this or not, the court did not rule that the fund had to be permanently shut down, and even if the judge had, the White House could’ve appealed the ruling.
In other words, what we have here is a political dynamic in which Trump, unaccustomed to ferocious and bipartisan pushback from Capitol Hill, was forced to retreat. But instead of acknowledging this simple reality, the administration is pretending that a judge necessitated a retreat, which plainly did not happen.
What’s more, if the White House’s apparent abandonment of the fund, widely condemned by members of both parties as a “slush fund,” was intended to satisfy lawmakers’ concerns, it wasn’t much of a success. MS NOW reported on Monday night:
Almost no one on Capitol Hill is convinced by the White House’s offer to drop its plans for President Donald Trump’s nearly $1.8 billion settlement fund, a pot of money that is fueling a growing crisis for GOP leaders.
Instead, Democrats want to address the issue legislatively and Republicans may have no choice — and may also want some congressional clarity.
The list of related legislative proposals is not short. A trio of Senate Democrats — Arizona’s Mark Kelly, California’s Adam Schiff and Michigan’s Elissa Slotkin — on Monday unveiled the Drain the Slush Fund Act, which was designed not only to deny all public funding to Trump’s scheme, but also would also prohibit the creation of similar funds going forward.
Recommended
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
Latest Post
