Grand theft government

President Trump is in the process of sending millions of dollars in taxpayer money directly to his political allies — and himself.

One of the biggest beneficiaries may be Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security advisor. Flynn was charged in 2017 with “knowingly and willfully making materially false statements” to the FBI regarding his conversations with Russian diplomats the previous year.

On the same day he was charged, Flynn “signed a Plea Agreement and Statement of Offense in which he agreed to plead guilty to the charged offense and admitted under penalty of perjury to the factual basis” of the charges. He subsequently testified in open court that he was pleading guilty because he was, in fact, guilty. The prosecution by Special Counsel Robert Mueller was part of a larger investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Flynn’s sentencing was delayed so he could cooperate with the government’s inquiry. In January 2020, Flynn requested to withdraw his guilty plea and filed a motion to dismiss the case. Then, in May 2020, Timothy Shea, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia during the first Trump administration, filed a motion to dismiss the case against Flynn. Shea essentially argued that any lies Flynn told the FBI were immaterial.

The move to dismiss the charges was widely viewed as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation. The judge did not immediately accept the motion. In November 2020, before the judge issued a ruling, Trump pardoned Flynn. The case was dismissed as moot.

Flynn now alleges he was the victim of “abuse of process and malicious prosecution.” He sued the federal government in March 2023, seeking at least $50 million.

In general, the United States Government is immune from civil lawsuits. Flynn filed his lawsuit under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which provides very limited exceptions to that immunity.

The suit by Flynn under the FTCA is extraordinarily weak. Among other things, a successful claim would require there to be an “absence of probable cause” for the charges. In Flynn’s case, he not only agreed there was probable cause but pled guilty to the charges. Further, a successful claim would require that the prosecution against Flynn be terminated in his favor. Securing a pardon does not resolve the case in his favor. Flynn’s case was dismissed as moot because of the pardon. There was no finding that the government failed to prove its case.

In December 2024, a federal judge dismissed Flynn’s complaint. The court found that, even accepting all the claims in his complaint as true, it did not meet the legal standard for malicious prosecution or abuse of process. The court gave Flynn the opportunity to refile a new complaint by January 2025.

After Trump took office for his second term, both sides repeatedly agreed to delays in Flynn filing an amended complaint. Flynn finally filed an amended complaint in June 2025. There is no indication that it resolves any of the legal issues that doomed the first complaint.

Nevertheless, Trump administration repeatedly requests delays to respond to the amended complaint. In September 2025, the government filed an unopposed motion to delay its time to respond to the revised suit, stating that “parties are currently engaging in settlement discussions, and the additional time will allow the parties to continue these discussions.” In November 2025, the Trump administration asked for another lengthy delay, saying the parties had “agreed to pursue neutral mediation proceedings in an effort to resolve this case without further judicial intervention.”

Flynn’s original attorneys have withdrawn, and he is now represented by Jesse Binnall, who has previously represented Trump personally. In a statement to Bloomberg News, Binnall said the charges against Flynn were part of “a soft coup against President Trump” that cost Flynn “millions in lost opportunities and legal fees.”

Obtaining a judgment against the federal government under FTCA is difficult in virtually every circumstance, and Flynn’s case is deeply flawed. So why is the Trump administration so eager to settle? Following his prosecution, Flynn ingratiated himself with Trump by being an outspoken proponent of the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

In the aftermath of the vote, Flynn suggested that “Trump could invoke martial law as part of his efforts to overturn the election that he lost to President-elect Joe Biden.” In a December 2020 appearance on Newsmax, Flynn said that Trump “he could take military capabilities, and he could place those in [swing] states and basically rerun an election in each of those states.” Flynn argued that declaring martial law is “not unprecedented.”

Flynn was closely aligned with lawyer Sydney Powell, who advanced some of the most outlandish conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. When Flynn was called before the January 6 Select Committee to testify, he “pleaded the Fifth to avoid self-incrimination.”

By all appearances, as a reward for his loyalty, the Trump administration is poised to pay Flynn millions of taxpayer dollars to resolve a case that, at present, he cannot even convince a court to consider on the merits.

Trump’s 9-figure taxpayer-financed settlement with himself

Trump is also seeking a large settlement from the federal government. Like Flynn, Trump argues that he was subjected to malicious prosecution during the Russia investigation. He also argues that his privacy rights were violated during a search of Mar-a-lago in 2022. But Trump is seeking a much larger payout of $230 million.

Trump said his lawsuit against the federal government “was doing very well” when he took office in 2025. Trump, however, has not even filed suit under the FTCA. Instead, he has submitted administrative claims that begin the process. These administrative claims are almost always rejected or ignored. After six months, the person who files the claim is allowed to bring a lawsuit but Trump has not done so.

Trump says that he will decide how much to pay himself. “I’m the one that makes the decision, and that decision would have to go across my desk, and it’s awfully strange to make a decision where I’m paying myself,” Trump said last month.

Justice Department regulations require Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to sign off on any settlement in excess of $4 million. Blanche is Trump’s former personal attorney who represented Trump in some matters that are part of his FTCA claim.

Republican Senators seek $500,000 in taxpayer cash

Tucked into the bill that ended the longest government shutdown was an unusual provision that would allow eight Republican Senators to be paid $500,000 in taxpayer funds.

The language, reported inserted by Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), allows Senators to sue the federal government and receive $500,000 if their electronic records are subpoenaed without notice.

According to reports, eight Republican Senators had their phone records subpoenaed as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the 2020 election and the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol. The records involved the phone records of the Senators – including the call time, duration and number – for a 4-day period around the January 6 attack.

In 2023, the Department of Justice changed its procedures to require notifying Senators about such subpoenas. But Smith’s actions predated the policy change.

Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) said he will take advantage of the provision and seek payment from the federal government. Other Republican Senators are less enthusiastic. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said he plans to introduce langage to repeal the provision. It is not clear whether the Senate would approve a repeal.