Trump's DESPERATE SELF-PARDON Scheme EXPOSED as He RUNS SCARED!!!

The Trump administration, through acting Attorney General Todd Blanch, issued a document described as an 'immunity pardon agreement.' This letter, part of a 'settlement' for a lawsuit Trump and his sons filed against the IRS, declares that the IRS and the government are 'forever barred and precluded' from prosecuting or pursuing Trump and his family for past financial matters. Jeffrey Toobin argues this extends beyond taxes to any financial matter, covering both criminal and civil liabilities, which goes beyond what a presidential pardon typically covers and the scope of 'official acts' immunity.

Jeffrey Toobin states, 'I think it's actually broader than that. I think it's a promise that he will not be investigated or prosecuted for anything regarding events that took place in the past. I think if you read it carefully, it is actually beyond simply taxes, but any sort of financial matters are now off limits to the government... It also goes beyond what a presidential pardon can do because presidential pardons only excuse criminal behavior. This Blanch letter goes beyond both Trump of the United States and a pardon because it includes potential civil liability as well.'

Alongside the immunity letter, a $1.8 billion 'weaponization fund' was established. This fund is ostensibly for individuals whose rights were violated by the Justice Department. However, hosts and Toobin suggest it's intended to provide money to 'convicted violent felons of January 6th' and their organizations, potentially allowing them to 'reanimate their militias.' This use of funds, drawn from the Justice Department's 'judgment fund,' has caused significant outrage among Senate Republicans.

Sydney Blumenthal notes, 'the whole first part of it in the anti-weaponization fund spec you know will will give money to the convicted violent felons of January 6th and their organizations like the proud and they and they can use the money however much he gives to reanimate their militias.' Toobin adds, 'This is a completely different legal legal setting. And um I I and there is something clearly Congress can do about it.'

The legal standing of the 'Blanch letter' is questionable. While the Justice Department has discretion not to prosecute, the letter's enforceability by a subsequent administration is uncertain, especially because it was not approved by a judge. Lawsuits challenging the 'weaponization fund' are unlikely to succeed due to strict standing requirements. However, Congress holds the 'power of the purse' and could pass legislation to forbid the fund's expenditure, though this would likely face a presidential veto requiring a supermajority override.

Toobin explains, 'The only question I have about it is if a subsequent administration comes in and uh withdraws and somehow files its own document withdrawing it. One of the many curiosities about um this so-called settlement of the lawsuit is that in in in the normal course of business when you settle a lawsuit the judge in the case has to approve it. here very conspicuously. They have not gone to the judge... and ask for her her authority to um sanction the settlement.' Regarding the fund, he states, 'The most straightforward way of stopping it is simply Congress using its power of the purse.'