40 Comments
User's avatar
Jim (Bombguy24)'s avatar

The more I read about this subject, the more I believe the real purpose of this whole endeavor is to give Trump his Tax Immunity "Get out of Jail Free Card." The bright shiny object waived around ($1776B) is nothing more than a distraction from the real prize - the Tax Addendum. We knew it the moment it was filed - quietly, almost as an afterthought - following the Agreement notification. We also know by now, or at least should, that Trump's concern about awarding sycophants' money is not part of his character. He could care less if the "slush fund" is thwarted. He doesn't benefit from it. He (and his family) benefits from the Tax Immunity Addendum, perhaps indefinitely, and that is the real goal. It really concerns me that the media gives just passing attention to it.

JenneJ's avatar

Of course. It is all about a tax shelter. And, what we are no longer talking about. Like:

the Illegal withholding of the Epstein files

Illegal declaration of a war with Iran we never should have gotten in to.

2 million barrels, 10 oil tankers and 200 people taken off the coast of venezuela

The Ukranian war that was going to end on day one

Gas/food/housing prices

The absolute Trumpification of our Capital

I could go on, but after that last one I'm ill.

laurie miller's avatar

And its all done without a flinch, while we just look on open mouthed. If I did a fraction of what he does I'd be in jail for life ? or someone supporting Palestinians, deported.? lauriemillerjade.com

Flora McG's avatar

Good point the media gave him a pass again!

VALERIE MELUSKEY's avatar

As I just said above, I guess I learn about what concerns you (and me) on MSNOW throughout the day even though I'm attending to a number of other items.

Joseph Mangano's avatar

IDK, for me, the idea that the DOJ would abide by a judge's order to halt the fund is an immediate red flag. When not appealing decisions like these, they usually just violate them anyway. Very "sus," as the kids say.

Frau Katze's avatar

I was suspicious of the “not going forward.” Not right this moment but what about later?

TC Hardenbergh's avatar

You, unlike the news outlets, are a careful listener.

BTAM Master's avatar

Thank you PI for emphasizing what the MSM is not. Watch your back!

VALERIE MELUSKEY's avatar

All I watch is MSNOW (and tennis, and last night's KNICKS vs SPURS) and I knew every bit of what Noelle and Rebecca reported. I was waiting to add my two extra cents, and didn't need to--had watched and heard every detail.

BTAM Master's avatar

Thank you for pointing this out! It's good news. I also saw it mentioned here and there, but it wasn't emphasized like this article.

Tim Tucci's avatar

I don't get those lazy headlines. What would it have taken to add "refuses to commit to that in writing" after "Blanche says"...? And the audit immunity is still on a whole new level of sh!Thole country corruption

E-Dub's avatar

People complain about the Lib’rul Media, but I prefer the term Limited Media, as in they’re a bunch of generalists who don’t know how to verify claims and call b.s. in situations like these.

The Limited Media have struggled with Trump for the last decade and somehow haven’t upped their game much.

Adam's avatar

The Limited Media. Tracks for me and that turn of phrase is quite clever. Mind if I borrow this?

TC Hardenbergh's avatar

A person might come to believe that the Limited Media kow-tow to their owner-masters. Media consolidation and overlapping ownership have consequences. Someday maybe people will know that the correspondents working for major media are not free and independent to report truthfully and fully the people and events they cover. Scott Pelley reached this conclusion.

Nancy's avatar

Crime, crime, everywhere a crime.... I hope that any tax immunity won't hold up in court after this corrupt administration is gone. That's the most optimistic I can be this morning as our country floats around on a sea of cruelty, bigotry, and misogyny.

Katy Bolger's avatar

Whether it's the slush fund or Twump's feet, something has died and boy does it smell bad.

mark's avatar

trump is getting all he can while congress is his toady. If he loses congress he will spend his final 2 years trying to eliminate congress.

JenneJ's avatar

They will probably let him

Nancy's avatar

He'll send them home but still make sure we pay them, ostensibly working from home.

JenneJ's avatar

Oh those old shysters....they'll probably even get to collect from the grievance fund (which no one should get anything from until everyone has been heard.) How will they know how to divey it up until they know who is adjudicated to have a teensy weensy itty bitty share? Don't forget the 10s of millions of dollars of "free" legal work he has coming. See what's left of that fund for whom once it's all said and done. All the while, still no tax returns or Trump Empire Tax audits....what??? get out of taxation free card? Yes please!

Stephen Schiff's avatar

I really appreciate your monitoring of the US media for it enables me to avoid wasting time doing so. We can be sure that the Trump regime will leave no stone unturned in its quest for money and power.

Kate's avatar

The suckers got suckered…quelle suprise…

Karen Q's avatar

Time to go after the audit shielding, hard

The Fact And Just The Facts's avatar

Why would anyone take their word on anything. They are frauds and liars. Throw the head of Murder Inc. USA, his toadies and his silent enablers out. 86 47

Larry Carr (autocarr)'s avatar

Major News-break! “We won’t get fooled again!” Who? Them…

Politico, — headline, “‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ is dead, acting AG says.” Washington Post, “Trump administration abandons $1.8 billion payout fund after revolt by GOP.” The Wall Street Journal —Trump administration was “abandoning” the fund. Associated Press, TIME, and Guardian —headlines claiming the fund was scrapped, —Forbes, CNBC, NOTUS —headlines stating that Blanche said that the fund was “dead.”

Robert's avatar

Continued follow up…Thanks Judd. We must pass on to are friends!

Stephen Herbits's avatar

What if individual J-6ers sue the government for funds? Can the Justice Department just settle with them individually and pay them?

Jim Carmichael's avatar

Thanks for truth-telling.