As this week got underway, the Trump administration made an unexpected announcement: It had agreed to back off plans for a $1.766 billion compensation fund, which had been condemned by members of both parties as a “slush fund.” A day later, during congressional testimony, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed that the scheme was no more.....

On Wednesday morning, The New York Post’s Miranda Devine released her latest podcast interview with Trump, including an exchange in which she asked whether the White House had “dropped” the fund. He initially replied, “No,” before suggesting that he continues to believe that Jan. 6 rioters “should be reimbursed.”

POD FORCE ONE: The anti-weaponization fund, have you dropped that?

TRUMP: No. A court ruled against it. But just so you understand, these are people that’ve been decimated. … I’m very proud to have given them pardons. And I think they should reimbursed for a crooked government.

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur.bsky.social) 2026-06-03T14:23:22.338Z

Hours later, during an unrelated Oval Office event, a reporter asked whether the fund was “dead.” Instead of answering directly, the president said the fund “was a beautiful thing” and “was the greatest thing.”

As part of the same Q&A, the Republican went on to say, in reference to the fund, “I love it. I think it’s so important.”.....

The first is that Trump clearly still intends to direct public funds to those who rioted in his name at the U.S. Capitol. The acting attorney general appears to be correct about the state of the $1.766 billion initiative, but the president also seems to realize that he doesn’t actually need the fund to write checks to rioters. Politico reported:

[D]espite the sweeping ring of Blanche’s assurances Tuesday, nothing forecloses payments from the Treasury to those who engaged in violence on that day.

Before the demise of the fund, DOJ officials emphasized that they already enjoy authority to order payments of essentially unlimited amounts to settle lawsuits and even legal claims not yet brought in court. That baseline authority hasn’t gone away.

Indeed, one leading official in Trump’s Justice Department signaled again this week that this avenue remains a priority for the administration.

The other angle to keep in mind is that the president isn’t doing himself any favors by professing his love for the “slush fund.” On the contrary, the more he endorses the scandalous scheme, the more members of Congress in both parties prepare to impose new legislative restrictions to make sure the fund does not, and will not, exist.