New Frontiers in Venality, Graft, and Abuse of Power

A lot has happened. Here are some of the things. This is the TPM Morning Memo.

How bad it really is

Even usually moderate legal experts and political observers are dismayed by how the “Anti-Arms Fund” deal – and the widespread dissemination of complaints against Trump, his family and his businesses – is entering new territory of venality, corruption and abuse of power (even for Trump).

• Jennifer Ricketts, former DOJ: “I’ve never heard of a department willing to grant total immunity. It seems blatantly corrupt. It’s a shocking gift to the president.”
• Barbara A. Perry, presidential expert at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia: “Presidents have had corrupt, even criminal, family members. But none of them has come close to matching the Trump family in terms of the level of corruption they have achieved. … They won the presidency twice, emasculated Congress, created a supportive High Court, and reshaped the law and institutions to absolve them of wrongdoing, all while making billions of ill-gotten dollars.”
• Steve Vladeck, Georgetown law professor: “I am, by training and disposition, a doctrinal writer. I try (sometimes, with significant criticism) to avoid emotional appeals. But I ask you, today, to engage with this story in a way that may well be disproportionate to the amount of media coverage it will receive.”

Why challenging it in court is so difficult

The police officers who defended the Capitol on January 6 filed a lawsuit in Washington federal court yesterday challenging the “Anti-Arms Fund,” and the case was assigned to iconoclastic U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon. But the path to obtaining legal recourse remains obscure and difficult, say most lawyers:

• Samuel R. Bagenstos, a law professor at the University of Michigan: “It’s really difficult to think about how to legally challenge what the president has done here. That doesn’t mean people aren’t trying, and it doesn’t mean something might fail.”
• Lawfare: “What makes this particular episode so troubling is that it is unclear how it could be stopped. The legal avenues to challenge it are untested and the obstacles are formidable. Meanwhile, the legislative will to act – at least within this Congress – is not yet apparent. By the time a future Congress can try, nearly $2 billion in taxpayer money could be largely gone, dispersed to recipients whose identity may never be publicly known.

Don’t hold your breath

Rumors are swirling on Capitol Hill that Senate Republicans, increasingly concerned about the GOP’s prospects in the midterm elections, may impose some restrictions on the “Anti-Arms Fund,” Punchbowl reports:

But it’s unclear exactly how Republicans plan to impose eligibility restrictions on the “arms” fund. They are particularly concerned about potential taxpayer-funded payouts to Jan. 6 rioters convicted of violence against police officers, as well as the fund’s overall political optics. This was a big topic of discussion at the Republicans’ working lunch on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, in the Republican-controlled House, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee rejected Democratic efforts to subpoena Trump administration officials involved in creating the “Anti-Arms Fund.”

Like pigs in the trough

Among the various charlatans, scoundrels, pardoned criminals and others eyeing the $1.776 billion “Anti-Armament Fund”:

• Former Trump I official Michael Caputo became the first person to attempt to file a claim, for a whopping $2.7 million.
• Mark McCloskeythe gun-toting pro-Trump lawyer who comically defended his St. Louis home during the George Floyd protests is considering applying.
• Representative expelled. George Santos (R-NY), whose sentence was commuted by Trump, doesn’t want compensation, just an apology.
• Accused pardoned on January 6 Yvonne St-Cyr: “I’m hoping to get $10 million but the dollar is collapsing like it should.”

It’s only just beginning.

Polis Censored for Freeing Tina Peters

By an overwhelming vote, the Colorado Democratic Party censured Gov. Jared Polis (D) for commuting the prison sentence of Big Lie purveyor Tina Peters.

‘Bundt_Cake_Recipe.pdf’

Trump’s DOJ has secured the indictment of a former Florida federal prosecutor for allegedly stealing an electronic copy of the still-sealed Volume II of special counsel Jack Smith’s report on the Mar-a-Lago investigation.

Carmen Mercedes Lineberger’s four-count indictment was returned May 19 and unsealed May 20 in the Fort Pierce Division of the Southern District of Florida, where U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon is the sole judge. It was Cannon who corruptly sealed the report and hid it from the public before the 2024 election. His decision is currently under appeal.

Lineberger allegedly emailed DOJ files, including the sealed report, from his business account to his personal account last year, using file names such as “Chocolate_Cake-Recipe.pdf.” The file name of the sealed report would have been “Bundt_Cake_Recipe.pdf.”

The case against Lineberger, who pleaded not guilty yesterday, was brought by lawyers from outside the Southern District, where Lineberger had previously worked.

Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart, originally assigned to the case, recused himself in an order issued this morning. He did not give a reason, but he approved the search warrants for Mar-a-Lago.

Judge orders compliance with PRA

U.S. District Judge John Bates of D.C. ordered White House aides to continue to follow the Presidential Records Act despite a DOJ memo declaring the law unconstitutional. Bates, who is not known for being a show horse, began his opinion with a quote from Orwell: “He who controls the past controls the future; whoever controls the present controls the past. »

Trump’s obsession with colossalism

Good news and bad news regarding Trump’s efforts to remake the nation’s capital in his garish image:

• The Good: Senate Republicans are fleeing Trump’s vanity ballroom project and are on the verge of cutting necessary funding. The funding was included in the reconciliation bill, but the Senate parliamentarian ruled over the weekend that it violated reconciliation rules. Rather than rework the wording, the provision will be scrapped, largely due to a lack of support from the Republican Party, even to get to just 50 votes.
• The bad: The Trump administration plans to proceed with construction of the president’s monumental 250-foot arch to commemorate the nation’s 250th birthday without congressional approval. In a sign of some desperation, the administration cites a century-old law authorizing a project in Washington, D.C. that was never built, as already giving it congressional authority to build the ark.

Any hot tips? A juicy scuttlebutt? Any interesting ideas? Let me know. For sensitive information, use encrypted methods here.