Sen. Luján ERUPTS at Bessent Over Trump's Secret IRS Deal: 'This Is Lawless'

[00:00:02]Scott Bessent just sat in front of the United States Senate and told us with a straight face that he had no idea his own department handed Donald Trump a tax immunity deal.

[00:00:11]Not a pardon, not a court ruling, a secret addendum buried inside a DOJ settlement that shields the president, his family, and everyone who has ever done business with him from IRS investigation.

[00:00:23]And the man responsible for collecting your taxes claims he never saw it coming.

[00:00:28]Senator Lujan held up the document live on camera and asked one simple question.

[00:00:33]Did you know?

[00:00:34]The answer told you everything you need to know about who this government is actually working for.

[00:00:39]This is that moment.

[00:00:42]>> Thank you, Senator Lujan.

[00:00:44]>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Bessent, should Americans who illegally evade their taxes be investigated and prosecuted?

[00:00:53]>> Uh Yes.

[00:00:57]>> Secretary Bessent, should people and organizations facilitating money laundering for Iran, North Korea, or Hamas be prosecuted?

[00:01:06]>> Uh yes.

[00:01:07]>> What about laundering money for Mexican drug cartels?

[00:01:11]>> Yes.

[00:01:12]>> Should a person who traded and profited on insider information be prosecuted?

[00:01:17]>> Uh According to the law, they should.

[00:01:20]>> Appreciate that. Uh Mr. Secretary, as a result of President Trump's $10 billion lawsuit, the Department of Justice, on behalf of your department, settled with President Trump by creating a $1.776 billion slush fund to pay for his supporters and criminals. Were you either directly, or through your staff, asked to sign the original agreement?

[00:01:41]>> Uh I Again, uh Senator, you were not here at the early part of the meeting.

[00:01:45]>> you on TV.

[00:01:46]>> Well, congratulations, and you would know that I'm unable to answer those questions, and they should be referred to the Attorney General's office.

[00:01:52]>> what about the addendum to this agreement? Are you familiar with what the addendum is?

[00:01:56]>> Uh I'm not sure what you're referring to.

[00:01:58]>> Are you familiar with this giveaway from the IRS that says President Trump and anyone that knows him or does business with them or part of a business, they get off scot-free. Are you aware of this?

[00:02:08]>> Uh I I again I refer you to Attorney General Blanche.

[00:02:13]>> Are you Attorney General Blanche's client?

[00:02:16]>> The IRS and Treasury are a client of the Department of Justice.

[00:02:22]>> So is that a nice way of saying yes?

[00:02:24]You're a client. He's He's your lawyer.

[00:02:26]>> Uh he represent >> You're the secretary Are you the Secretary of Treasury?

[00:02:31]Yes is the answer.

[00:02:32]>> The Department of Justice >> [laughter] >> The Scott Vincent. Let me ask you this question, sir. Are you the secretary >> In my personal capacity, Tom Blanche is not my attorney.

[00:02:42]>> Correct, sir.

[00:02:42]>> The as >> Are you Sir.

[00:02:45]>> For for the United States >> Scott, let me ask you this way. Scott, are you the Secretary of Treasury for the United States government?

[00:02:52]>> Yes.

[00:02:53]>> Appreciate that. The Department of Justice represents the IRS and the Department of Treasury in this lawsuit, correct?

[00:02:59]>> Correct.

[00:02:59]>> Are you aware of this addendum? Did Did You're telling me DOJ gave the president this without you knowing about it?

[00:03:07]>> A- again, they settle on our behalf.

[00:03:10]>> That's not how the law works, sir. I'm not a lawyer, but you have a bunch of them behind you. You should see the faces they're making at me behind you.

[00:03:16]They're all scowling at me back over here.

[00:03:18]>> Well, I I think that's a different reason, sir.

[00:03:20]>> Well, for whatever it is, they're doing it. Um Mr. Secretary, my concern is that this addendum has not been getting a lot of attention. There's colleagues on this panel that think this slush fund is a bunch of And they've called out to say get rid of it.

[00:03:36]Now, people need to say, are you okay with one person in America because the Secretary of Treasury, I'm guessing, conferred with the Department of Justice because your name's on this lawsuit, sir.

[00:03:49]These are all the transactions from the president as well that I'm going to ask you this next question as well.

[00:03:55]You were bragging to one of my colleagues that you've been sanctioning people doing bad things in America.

[00:04:01]People that get sanctioned like Iran or terrorists, they're told not to do business in the United States with partners. Is that your understanding, sir? Me as a layman?

[00:04:11]>> It is.

[00:04:11]>> You hold these bad people accountable. I congratulate you for that.

[00:04:15]So, this little giveaway to President Trump and his family gets them off scot-free. Does every American become part of this addendum? If if someone didn't pay their taxes or violated tax law or did bad things, are they told, "Can't prosecute. You're good." Everyone going back to the date of this or is this only for President Trump and his affiliates?

[00:04:39]>> Senator, do you have specific knowledge of President Trump being audited?

[00:04:43]>> Sir, I have specific knowledge of this addendum that you don't know a damn thing about that is for the Department of Treasury that your lawyer at the Department of Justice signed you up for.

[00:04:54]The reason I'm asking this question is because President Trump's sons signed a deal, as you know, with the World Liberty Financial with a bunch of folks you sanctioned.

[00:05:10]And now, as part of this, there's an addendum that says President Trump and his kids and anyone affiliated with him, I don't know if it's current wives, former wives, people that just did transactions with him, they're off scot-free. That you know, that has a new way a new ring to it, this thing.

[00:05:28]Scot-free because the Department of Treasury, the IRS is not going to go after him, sir. This is wrong. This is lawless. I hope our colleagues will look at this addendum, if I could offer this into the record, Mr. Chairman, for those that haven't seen it yet.

[00:05:41]>> Without objection.

[00:05:43]>> Come on, man.

[00:05:45]There's a better way of doing this, sir.

[00:05:46]That's all we're saying here. So, look, I appreciate it. If you don't want to talk about a lawsuit, that's your prerogative to answer that way.

[00:05:53]But, to say that you as a client, as Secretary of the US Treasury, does not know what the Department of Justice is giving away to people, come on, man. That That's just not on the up and up, sir. I I hope we can do better.

[00:06:06]>> understand the way the the protocol works, and we the we receive advice and accept their settlement.

[00:06:13]>> You're telling me as a Secretary of US Treasury, you don't know that the President of the United States, who I think you work for, got a sweetheart [clears throat] deal from the Department of Justice with your lawyer. You're You're in line for the presidency, Scott.

[00:06:27]>> I I do know that the President of the United States and 400 many of his employees had the largest tax leak in history, and >> I know here's his filing, sir, of all the insider trading. Right here.

[00:06:37]>> Do Do you want to apologize on behalf of the American government, sir?

[00:06:40]>> Scott, you should apologize to the American people for fleecing them and giving this away to Donald Trump, man.

[00:06:45]That's what you should do.

[00:06:47]All right.

[00:06:47]>> We We can agree to disagree.

[00:06:48]>> Senator Warnock.

[00:06:50]>> That we'll agree on.

[00:06:51]>> Okay, let me just validate something before we get into this. If you watch that hearing and felt like something deeply wrong just happened, but couldn't quite name it, you're not overreacting.

[00:07:01]Because what Senator Luján just put on the congressional record is not a talking point. It is a document. And that document, if it says what Luján says it says, is one of the most audacious acts of legal self-dealing I have seen in a very long time.

[00:07:16]So, let me slow this down and actually explain what happened because the back and forth in that room moved fast, and the details got buried under the noise.

[00:07:24]Start here. The President of the United States sued the IRS for $10 billion.

[00:07:29]Let that sit for a second. $10 billion over the leak of his tax returns.

[00:07:35]Now, look, the underlying lawsuit had a defensible premise. The IRS leak was real. It was a violation, and the government has settled tax privacy cases before. That part is not the scandal.

[00:07:46]Here is where it turns. As part of the settlement, the Department of Justice agreed to create a fund of 1.776 billion dollars to resolve Trump's claims.

[00:07:55]And then, tucked inside that agreement, there was an addendum. Not a headline, not a press release, an addendum.

[00:08:02]For those who aren't familiar with how legal settlements work, an addendum is essentially a side document attached to the main agreement that modifies or expands its terms. It is the kind of thing that gets buried on page 47 of a filing that nobody reads until a senator holds it up on camera. Lujan held it up on camera. And what he says is in that addendum is this. President Trump, his family, and anyone who has ever conducted business with him is effectively shielded from IRS investigation related to these transactions. Not a pardon, which is public and constitutional and can be challenged. Not a court ruling, which requires both sides to argue and a judge to sign off. A quiet legal addendum drafted by the Department of Justice, signed on behalf of the Treasury and the IRS. Without, and this is the part that should make your jaw drop, apparently without the knowledge of the Secretary of the Treasury himself. I want you to think about the logic of that for a moment. The Department of Justice is the legal representative of the IRS and the Treasury.

[00:09:02]When your lawyer signs something on your behalf, you are bound by it. That is not a technicality. That is how the law works. So, when Bessen sat there and said he did not know about the addendum, he was not actually escaping accountability. He was either admitting that the institution he runs was used to cut a deal for the president without his knowledge, or he was performing a very carefully rehearsed version of, "I wasn't in the room."

[00:09:26]Neither of those is a good answer.

[00:09:29]And Lujan knew exactly which thread to pull to make that visible. Earlier in the very same hearing, Bessen had been asked a series of simple questions.

[00:09:36]Should Americans who illegally evade their taxes be investigated and prosecuted?

[00:09:41]Yes.

[00:09:42]Should people laundering money for drug cartels be prosecuted?

[00:09:46]Yes.

[00:09:47]Should insider traders be held accountable?

[00:09:50]According to the law, yes.

[00:09:52]He gave those answers confidently, like a man who believes what he is saying.

[00:09:56]And then, minutes later, when LuJan asked whether Bessant knew that his own department had handed the president what amounts to a tax immunity deal, suddenly Bessant could not answer that.

[00:10:06]Suddenly he needed to refer things to the Attorney General.

[00:10:10]Suddenly the Secretary of the United States Treasury did not know what the Department of Justice had done in his name.

[00:10:16]Here's a simple way to think about what just happened.

[00:10:19]Imagine you hire a lawyer to handle a dispute with your neighbor. Without telling you, your lawyer settles the case, and as part of that settlement, quietly agrees that you will never be allowed to call the police if your neighbor's dog destroys your yard again.

[00:10:31]You are now bound by that agreement, even though you never saw it.

[00:10:34]And if someone asks you whether you knew your lawyer did that, and you say no, the agreement still stands.

[00:10:40]That is the legal reality Bessant cannot escape, no matter how many times he points at the Attorney General.

[00:10:46]The Treasury is a party to this settlement. The IRS is a party to this settlement, and that addendum is now in the congressional record.

[00:10:54]Now, let me tell you why this matters beyond the politics, because I think this is the part that gets lost in the noise.

[00:11:00]The IRS collects nearly $5 trillion a year, and almost none of that is collected by force.

[00:11:06]Think about that for a second.

[00:11:08]The entire American tax system runs on something closer to a social contract than a legal mandate.

[00:11:13]The widespread belief that if you cheat, you will get caught, and that the rules apply to you, and to the billionaire, and to the president in equal measure.

[00:11:23]The moment that belief cracks, you do not just have a fairness problem. You have a structural crisis.

[00:11:29]Because if ordinary Americans start believing that the president and his associates can get a quiet legal carve out from tax enforcement while they cannot.

[00:11:37]The question becomes very simple.

[00:11:39]Why should I play by rules that do not apply to everyone?

[00:11:43]And that question, multiplied across millions of people, is not a philosophical problem. It is a fiscal catastrophe.

[00:11:50]But here is what actually got me watching this exchange. It was not the addendum itself.

[00:11:55]It was the whiplash. Bessent was bragging earlier in the same hearing about how aggressively his department sanctions bad actors. Iran, North Korea, drug cartels, terrorist organizations.

[00:12:07]He named them like a man proud of the work.

[00:12:10]And then Lujan pointed out something uncomfortable.

[00:12:13]Trump's sons had been doing business through a crypto venture called World Liberty Financial.

[00:12:18]And some of the parties involved in those transactions were individuals and entities that the Treasury Department itself had sanctioned.

[00:12:25]So let me get this straight. Bessent's department sanctions foreign actors for doing exactly the kind of business that people connected to the president appear to have been doing.

[00:12:34]And the addendum in this settlement potentially shields those same connected people from IRS scrutiny.

[00:12:39]I'm not saying that is what happened. I am saying that is the question Lujan was asking.

[00:12:44]And Bessent's answer, which was not really an answer, is the reason that question is not going away. Here is what I keep coming back to at the end of a hearing like this.

[00:12:53]The document is in the record. Lujan put it there.

[00:12:57]But documents in congressional records do not enforce themselves. They do not trigger investigations on their own.

[00:13:03]They do not compel inspectors general to act.

[00:13:06]They do not force journalists to read page 47 of a DOJ settlement filing.

[00:13:11]What they do is create a public record that either gets followed up on or gets forgotten.

[00:13:17]And which one of those happens depends almost entirely on whether enough people pay attention.

[00:13:22]The Secretary of the Treasury told the Senate he did not know.

[00:13:26]Maybe he genuinely did not know.

[00:13:28]But here is the thing.

[00:13:30]Someone drafted that addendum. Someone reviewed it. Someone signed off on it.

[00:13:35]Someone at the Department of Justice decided that this was an acceptable term to include in a settlement on behalf of the American taxpayer.

[00:13:43]And we do not yet know who or why or exactly what the scope of that protection covers. Those are not rhetorical questions. Those are the questions that oversight exists to answer.

[00:13:53]If this raised something for you that you want to understand better, share this.

[00:13:57]The addendum is in the record now. It deserves more than a news cycle.