Trump BETRAYS POLICE & faces backlash: Ari on why THUG FUND is 'too far' for GOP, How it ENDS

Added: 2026-05-22

[00:00:00]Donald Trump is trying to seize your taxpayer dollars for a thug fund. That's what I call it. Uh to basically further reward violent criminals, seditionists, and others potentially from the January 6th insurrection. It's a huge deal. It's already starting to get some attention and some Republican push back. This is a breakdown video where I'm going to talk about why this is worse than other scandals, poses a real threat to future democracy, and there are things that can be done about it. In fact, coming up, I'll have Andrew Weissman, who was in the Müller Probe, a DOJ vet, to talk about it. But let's go through what this is and what it isn't. Even some critics of this news. It first broke in a ABC report and I do I do the news here in MS Now and we were like covering it as a leak and then it became officialized.

[00:00:41]But even critics have called this a IRS settlement or something for Trump to help people who face problems with the government. That's the cover story.

[00:00:50]That's not what this is. I mean that's really kind of propaganda. This is a fund for violent thugs and it's to try to continue to rebuild the architecture of Trump's failed insurrection and coup from last time. And that's really bad.

[00:01:03]And when you look at why Trump wants a thug fund, it's it's not to help people with money. I mean, this is someone who famously stiffed his own lawyers and employees. Um, we covered covered this and you have Michael Cohen and others who said out loud, "Hey, he was completely stiffing me." Right? Right.

[00:01:21]So, this isn't someone who's even if it's not his money, say it's taxpayer money who wants to help people that way.

[00:01:26]This is about the fact that last time he lost a presidential election, Donald Trump in 21 tried these different plots.

[00:01:32]And I'm not going to do all of them in this breakdown, but you might recall they filed lawsuits. They wanted the vice president to say that the election wasn't certified so that there would create some extra controversy. They hoped that might be like a bank shot.

[00:01:45]They asked state legislators to overrule the votes in states where Trump lost, which no politician was going to do.

[00:01:53]Republicans stood up to him on that.

[00:01:54]They asked DOJ to make fraud claims.

[00:01:56]There was a bunch of things. In the end, when a lot of those failed, they turned to the mob that Trump gathered in Washington that turned violent. And so now to not only pardon those people with Trump did, but to fund them is a huge attack on the rule of law that poses danger for future elections.

[00:02:16]>> Hey, it's Arian 50. Don't forget to subscribe.

[00:02:19]>> Subscribe.

[00:02:21]>> And now I am joined by Andrew Weissman, of course, a very seasoned lawyer who's been a prosecutor. He's been at DOJ. He worked with Bob Müller. What are the ways to actually stop this if it is as unconstitutional and potentially unlawful as experts say?

[00:02:35]>> So, it's because you have me on as a lawyer, but one of the ways to stop this is just politically um because there's so many people pushing back and at some point if the administration realizes that is going to be a hit they do not want to take. Um, one of the things I've been talking about is another thing that I'm not sure Donald Trump realizes, which is they not sure they figured out what are the tax consequences to him because there's a good argument that the $1.8 billion is income to him. The fact that he chooses to spend it on a fund is kind of irrelevant from a tax perspective >> because they and this is a ploy so it may all be but they claim >> the word >> they claim that this is for his suit as a plif and your point is that then if that were even true then this would be his benefit as a plainif.

[00:03:27]>> Exactly. So if the whole sort of construct is it's a settlement know you and I might be like that's ridiculous construct is a very diplomatic term but you're a classy guy.

[00:03:37]>> Yeah. So right I I was with you on I think what was that is the Yeah. I mean it's like a law school term. Um so you know that's yet another sort of this is all sort of what I'll call the non-legal route. This is all sort of things that might lead politically the administration to be like, you know what, we're going to back off in the same way that you know what this happened with the Federal Reserve where there were lots of things that were happening outside of court, not just in court, that protected the Federal Reserve.

[00:04:09]>> And you say non-legal, if this were a law school class, it could also go under the separation of powers section.

[00:04:14]>> Absolutely. But just to take it now into my lane. Sure. Um so one of the things that you could see is um you could see people who are victims of this administration's weaponization. I think I might categorize myself in that in that >> you you and other government veterans have faced baseless probes and attacks from the president.

[00:04:37]>> Right. I have an executive order that a federal judge struck down that's saying it violated my personal first amendment rights. So, um, if you end up seeing that this fund is used to pay out money to people who've been convicted of crimes, including, uh, attacking police officers, but, and I'll take myself out of it so I can just report on this, but it's not given to, uh, let's say Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve or them six members of Congress who they sought to indict for their free speech rights.

[00:05:11]um then the courts are going to get involved and say that that is a violation.

[00:05:15]>> Um but there also are there already is one lawsuit you're going to see I think a lot more challenging this. It's also to go to your separation of powers argument. Congress if they were not say some ambulant um could actually do something because guess who has the power of the purse? Congress right? And so they can say what do you mean you're spending $1.8 8 billion dollar of taxpayer money um on a frivolous lawsuit. Um this is I think there's a reason the IRS general counsel resigned which is that the IRS is fighting these same kinds of um arguments these the plaintiffs who brought the same kinds of cases day in and day out and suddenly for Donald Trump that it's this is you know this sort of protextual settlement.

[00:06:05]Well, and that they're if they're just using that as a lie to seize a billion, you could seize 10 billion or 100 billion. So, Congress, that's the thing that was in the Constitution to begin with because the big concerns from the founding document was that you're going to use government powers for tyranny, right? That's why it's corpus and whether you have the right to protest and object to your >> custodial interrogation, to your being held, to your being executed even, right? Those were all things that they were worried about with the king. But the money was the other one. Also, somnabulant means sleepy.

[00:06:38]>> Yeah, I like that.

[00:06:38]>> Okay, >> I like that. Um, so >> that was right on the line. You got to ask sometimes.

[00:06:44]>> Um, I was accused when I first started, somebody introduced me and they said, "Andrew Weissman's our guest and take out your thesaurus." Um, I'm not >> Well, the test and since we're casual, we're here with YouTube. We have the extra time I don't have on television.

[00:06:58]The thesaurus issue is only a problem if it's the exact same meaning and then it feels like a fancy word.

[00:07:05]>> If the other word adds something, I'm here for it.

[00:07:09]>> Yeah. Okay. I'm glad for that.

[00:07:11]>> So, I don't know how you feel.

[00:07:12]>> Yeah. You So, it's funny.

[00:07:14]>> So, nabulent probably is I think it it adds something more than just tired. It tell us what more it adds.

[00:07:21]>> Not Not a lot.

[00:07:23]>> Okay. I was trying to set him up. Well, >> you were trying to help me out, but it's just >> Well, because sometimes I hear with our Congress people will say sclerotic, which doesn't just mean old. Nothing wrong with being old. It means to be so old as to be infirm or unable to do the thing, >> but sometimes words it's like what is anamanopia? It's like there's another big word.

[00:07:41]>> Shout out because no, they're words that that just the sound of it gives you more like so of like >> All right, so finish the point you were making. Okay, another point which is okay, we saw what happened with our own eyes on January 6. We then witnessed mass pardons of those people. So you have people who have been convicted >> which I was discussing.

[00:08:04]>> Then you have mass >> problem. Yeah.

[00:08:06]>> Now add in the following. These people now don't have to worry about criminal prosecution because they have a pardon and they have a president who's saying I have your back.

[00:08:18]It's more than that. they now can be thinking, not only do I not have to worry about criminal prosecution, but I actually may get paid for doing someone's business.

[00:08:28]>> Right. And that's why and we've reported that Congressman Raskin calls it funding a militia. Yes.

[00:08:33]>> And a private lawless militia. And so if you have a past pardon, you get a blanket pardon for the future and you have money. Right. That's what it looks like. And the fact that this is going to these thugs when, as I've pointed out, Donald Trump never cared about paying his own lawyers and employees. It's not like he's just randomly trying to compensate. This looks illicit. So my final uh question to you and then I'll plug your book is the the civil lawsuits are the standard thing we hear about. Police are already doing it. I think there are folks withstanding. We'll see. Do would you expect not only the courts but the Supreme Court to say, "Well, yeah, obviously this has to have court review because the Trump position is they found a trick to evade any review."

[00:09:13]Okay. So, here's something that's not good in the law and that gives lawyers a bad name. Um, which is even though I think every single taxpayer in this country is a victim of what is going on, >> there is no such thing in the law as taxpayer standing. Right.

[00:09:33]>> So, I can't be like, you know what, I'm a taxpayer. I've been victimized. I have the ability standing is that I have enough of >> to get into court. Exactly. police and members of Congress.

[00:09:44]>> So members of Congress would but not just one or two. Um so in an immalance case, one of the courts said, you know what, just having a few congressmen is not enough. We so >> because otherwise their view and this would be above the bar, but their view to to play it out is well then we'd be the courts would be flooded with this because there's 400 plus members of Congress and everyone would be suing over everything.

[00:10:06]>> Exactly. So they they look for a majority. So if people out there think this is outrageous, good reason to vote >> to vote and to also contact your member of Congress because now right now you had we've tracked one House Republican saying they're going to try to kill it.

[00:10:22]Senator Thun kind of toothless but saying he doesn't like it. So yeah, you could be in a place where again I don't tell people what to do, but people sometimes ask, "Do these things work?"

[00:10:31]Well, we've seen protest work. We've seen calling Congress works. This is a live issue, right? With a minute to go, you have a book, Liars Kingdom. We have a lot of folks here who you can always like and subscribe on our YouTube. I know folks are interested in learning about the law. The real question, the tough question is they see you on the news, get to hear you for free, basically. Why should someone spend their hardearned cash on your new book?

[00:10:55]Tell us.

[00:10:55]>> I love that. So, you know what? This is a much more sustained argument. So I can give like you know what's called the elevator speech but um I would say two things. One there is a a real legal argument here about a structural change to hold political leaders who lie to us to account. The other which Nicole was saying to me is um I really don't like on air talking about things personally because I feel like I'm here to get that give a diagnosis of something and it is a very personal book >> and the because you in ways that you didn't choose although you've dealt with the sacrifice which I do think is respectable in the same way people who volunteer to be police or or military uh there's heat that comes on you and lately it's been more and so I I I think that's a great answer people. Again, make up your own mind, but uh you know, I rely on Andrew uh for a lot. Legal knowledge and more. This is the book.

[00:11:49]I'll close with a Rick Ross quote.

[00:11:53]>> 20 million in cash. I know you want to look print and paper boy. I even wrote a book.

[00:12:00]>> So funny. I was going to say >> he was