The Department of Justice is setting up a $1.8 billion fund to compensate “victims of lawfare.” It is likely that the fund is intended to “compensate” individuals prosecuted for the January 6th insurrection that sought to upend our constitutional order. In other words, we law-abiding taxpayers are going to pay off would-be insurrectionists.
As the New York Times has reported, there are, as yet, very few details about how the disbursement of the money will work or who will be eligible. Here are a few issues and possible solutions.
First, the Department of Justice will have to determine who will be “compensated.” It’s pretty obvious that only some “victims of lawfare” will receive compensation. These would primarily, if not exclusively, include Trump supporters, especially those who sought to overturn the 2020 election. They demonstrated their loyalty to Trump.
It should go without saying that people who have faced generations of structural discrimination and/or have been victims of politically-motivated differential treatment in the administration of justice, such as African-Americans and Latinos, immigrants, and homeless people, would not be eligible. Not all “victims of lawfare” need apply.
Second, the Department would have to determine how much to award each “victim.” Obviously, the Department will not dole out equal awards to each claimant. Equality is not this Administration’s thing. Although the “victim’s” legal costs and the prison sentence he or she served could be a basis for determining the amount of each award, it would be simpler and more in keeping with Administration priorities just to peg awards to the damage that each claimant managed to inflict. Greater awards would go to “victims” who assaulted police officers or shat on Democrats’ desks (or in their offices). The people who erected gallows to hang Pence and other miscreants would also be entitled to larger awards than the run-of-the-mill rioters who merely broke windows or milled around in the halls of Congress, or, heaven forbid, stood around outside the Capitol.
Third, the Department would need to make some decisions about gratuities for Trump. Should the Department merely “suggest” that each awardee favor the President with a gratuity, or should such gratuities be imposed, like the restaurant “service charges” that so many patrons find themselves paying nowadays? And what amount of gratuity should be suggested or imposed?
If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion here, I think it might be a little heavy-handed to require a Presidential gratuity. It would appear marginally less greedy for the Department to suggest that each awardee consider giving a 20-25% gratuity to Trump (based on the pre-tax amount awarded, of course). Given the January 6th rioters’ loyalty to Trump, we can assume that they’ll give Trump whatever tip is suggested.
If, however, this is not sufficient assurance that Trump will get what he thinks he is entitled to, the Department can always include a question on the award application about the prospective awardee’s willingness to tip Trump. If someone says they aren’t willing to give Trump a gratuity, he or she wouldn’t get an award.
In the spirit of helpfulness, here, then, is a possible questionnaire:
Did you march to the Capitol on January 6th?
Did you go into the Capitol?
Did you break one or more windows or batter down a door to get into the Capitol?
Did you punch, kick, swing a flag pole at, or otherwise beat or attempt to beat any police officers?
If so, how many?
Did you poop or pee in the offices of any Democrats?
Did you poop or pee on the desks of any Democrats?
Did you help to build gallows for hanging Pence and/or other officials?
Did you just stand around and/or chant in the Capitol?
Did you just wait outside the Capitol?
If you get an award, will you be willing to give a tip worth 20-25% of the award to our dear leader, President Donald J. Trump?
***
Obviously, the form itself would not spell out the implications of the answers to the questions suggested above. But an answer key could easily be devised so that even the mediocre lawyers who remain in the Department of Justice wouldn’t have any trouble determining the awards.
You’re welcome.