Miranda Devine: Dems can cry corruption all they want – the DOJ’s anti-weaponization fund has precedent and purpose
Miranda Devine argues that the DOJ's 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' is a legitimate rebranding of an existing legal settlement fund. She contends that the fund is not unprecedented or corrupt, despite criticism from Democrats. Devine highlights that both parties have utilized similar funds for legal settlements in the past.
- ▪The DOJ's 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' is a rebranding of the existing Judgment Fund authorized by Congress decades ago.
- ▪Critics like Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden have accused the fund of being a slush fund for political purposes, which Devine disputes.
- ▪The fund aims to compensate individuals who have been wronged by the DOJ and FBI, contrasting with payouts made to anti-Trump figures.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Miranda Devine Opinion Miranda Devine: Dems can cry corruption all they want – the DOJ’s anti-weaponization fund has precedent and purpose By Miranda Devine Published May 31, 2026, 10:31 p.m. ET The Biden DOJ paid off FBI anti-Trump plotters Peter Strzok (pictured), Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe, for instance, along with numerous convicted criminals, who alleged bad treatment by the Bureau of Prisons. REUTERS See more of our coverage in your search results. Add The New York Post on Google The rollout of the DOJ’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” may have been botched, but the fund remains a good idea, and the hysteria from Democrats like the hypocritical Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden and allied media is absurd.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
