Senators put Blanche on defense over $1.776B ‘anti-weaponization’ fund
Blanche appeared Tuesday before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee for a previously scheduled hearing about the Justice Department’s budget request. But the $1.776 billion fund announced on Monday was the top focus of Democrats, as well as Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) and subcommittee Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who asked a series of questions about who would qualify and how the money would be dispersed. The hearing offered new details about the fund, which was announced as part of a settlement after President Trump agreed to drop his $10 billion suit against his own Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
- ▪Blanche appeared Tuesday before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee for a previously scheduled hearing about the Justice Department’s budget request.
- ▪But the $1.776 billion fund announced on Monday was the top focus of Democrats, as well as Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) and subcommittee Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who asked a series of questions about who would qual
- ▪The hearing offered new details about the fund, which was announced as part of a settlement after President Trump agreed to drop his $10 billion suit against his own Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Senate Senators put Blanche on defense over $1.776B ‘anti-weaponization’ fund Comments: by Rebecca Beitsch - 05/19/26 12:35 PM ET Comments: Link copied by Rebecca Beitsch - 05/19/26 12:35 PM ET Comments: Link copied NOW PLAYING Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Tuesday had to go on defense over the Justice Department’s new “anti-weaponization” fund, a coffer he told lawmakers would be available to Trump campaign donors and those convicted of attacking police. Blanche appeared Tuesday before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee for a previously scheduled hearing about the Justice Department’s budget request.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Hill.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Hill
