Trump gets “forever” immunity on his past tax affairs

Summary

---

Americast (BBC News)

Episode: Trump gets “forever” immunity on his past tax affairs

Date: May 20, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the unprecedented legal and political maneuvers undertaken by former President Donald Trump, focusing on two major stories:

• Trump’s landmark deal with the IRS that grants him blanket immunity from current and future tax audits and creates a controversial $1.8 billion fund potentially benefiting his allies.
• The results of a "mini Super Tuesday," spotlighting Trump's continued dominance in Republican primaries and his consolidation of power within the GOP by toppling internal party critics.

As always, the Americast team combines deep political analysis with on-the-ground reporting and first-hand interviews.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Trump’s IRS Deal and the $1.8 Billion “Slush Fund”

[19:32 - 26:41]

• Background of Legal Action:

  • Trump sued the IRS over leaked tax returns; sought $10 billion in damages.
  • Settlement resulted in a $1.8 billion (1.776 to echo America’s founding) fund within the Department of Justice.

• Controversy over the Fund:

  • The fund is designed to “compensate victims of partisan weaponization,” i.e., Trump allies prosecuted under the Biden administration—a concept heavily criticized as cronyism.
  • Final decisions on payouts will be made by a panel, appointed by the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche (Trump’s former personal lawyer).
  • Potential recipients include figures like Steve Bannon, and controversially, January 6 rioters pardoned after their convictions.

• Notable Exchange [21:48 – 22:31]:

  • J.D. Vance, VP: "We're going to look at everything case by case, ... I don't rule things out categorically when I know nothing about a person's individual circumstances."
    (In response to whether January 6 rioters would be eligible for compensation.)

• Serious Implications, Ethical and Legal:

  • Sarah: “It just seems so naked, doesn’t it, setting up a nearly $2 billion fund, which it's obvious are going to go to Trump friends and allies.” [26:04]
  • Congress may challenge the fund’s legality, as it arguably oversteps Congressional power over federal expenditures.

• The Immunity Clause:

  • The settlement text explicitly bars the IRS “forever” from examining Trump’s, his family's, or his company’s historical tax returns. All pending audits—known or unknown—are terminated.
  • Anthony: “Basically, the slate is wiped clean ... anything he’s done up until this point, apparently the IRS can’t touch.” [25:14]

---

2. Mini Super Tuesday: Further Proof of Trump’s Grip on the GOP

[03:12 – 18:09]

• Republican Primaries Overview:

  • Several high-profile primaries in six states saw Trump-backed candidates decisively defeat establishment Republicans.
  • Kentucky: Trump-endorsed Ed Gallrane ousted long-serving Congressman Thomas Massie.

• Aftermath and Reactions:

  • Thomas Massie’s Concession Speech:
    “Those SOBs in Washington tried to buy my vote. They couldn't buy it. ... They used a lot of dirty tricks, but we stayed the course. ... We ran a clean race.” [04:33 – 05:49]
  • Even high-profile, once-safe incumbents are at risk if viewed as insufficiently loyal to Trump.

• Voter Attitudes:

  • Allen, Kentucky voter: “He [Massie] does not represent Kentucky any longer. ... He takes pride in opposing Trump so that he can get interviews. ... Do you stand with Rohana or Donald de Trump?” [07:17]

• Anthony’s Analysis:

  • “It was a contest framed between Donald Trump and Thomas Massie, and voters in that district picked Trump.” [08:15]
  • The threat of being “primaried” is forcing Republican lawmakers into line; crossing Trump means career jeopardy.

• National implications:

  • Unpopular as he is in polling, Trump’s control of the party base is more solid than ever, even amidst divisive policies (such as the war in Iran and economic discontent).

---

3. The Ongoing Purge: Loyalty Tests and Party Dynamics

[12:52 – 16:32]

• Other High-Profile Losses:

  • Senator Bill Cassidy (Louisiana): Lost to a Trump-endorsed rival after voting to convict Trump in his 2021 impeachment.
    • Cassidy’s Concession: “When you participate in democracy, sometimes it doesn't turn out the way you want it to. But you don't pout, you don't whine, you don’t claim the election was stolen ... you thank the voters.” [13:11]
  • Upcoming Texas Senate Race: Trump endorsing Ken Paxton against incumbent John Cornyn, despite Cornyn's pro-Trump credentials.

• Strategic Risks for GOP:

  • Trump’s purges might create openings for Democrats—especially where he backs controversial or unpopular candidates and alienates well-connected party fundraisers.
  • The party risks trading established, broadly electable candidates for more extreme, Trump-loyal options.

• Anthony on “YOLO caucus”:

  • Purged or retiring Republicans might be less inclined to cooperate with Trump’s agenda, making legislative victories less certain.

---

4. Fallout and Looking Forward

[26:41 – 29:14]

• Potential Backlash:

  • Bipartisan concern, including from Senate Majority Leader John Thune, over the optics and ethics of Trump’s slush fund and blanket immunity.
  • The story could energize Democratic campaigns and possibly foster broader GOP resistance.
  • Anthony: “Their heads have been put on a pike... and it is a warning to all the Republicans who are wondering whether they should take a stand or whether they should go along to get along.” [28:44]

• Congressional Showdown Possible:

  • Parties could clash over the Justice Department’s authority to disburse the new fund.
  • Constitutionally, Congress controls federal spending, setting up a possible legal and political battle.

---

Memorable Quotes (with Timestamps)

• Sarah on unprecedented deal:
  “He’s done it again by creating a breathtakingly audacious slush fund...and granted himself immunity from tax audits…” [01:05]

• Thomas Massie on losing Trump’s favor:
  “We didn’t lose this race because we didn’t have enough money...They used a lot of dirty tricks, but we stayed the course. We did not kneecap anybody.” [04:33 – 05:49]

• Anthony on party discipline:
  “If they take stands that go against Donald Trump and if they attract his ire, they’re toast.” [10:25]

• Bill Cassidy’s concession:
  “But you don’t pout, you don’t whine, you don’t claim the election was stolen…you thank the voters…” [13:11]

• Sarah on the scope of Trump’s immunity:
  “There’s actually a part of the agreement says the government is forever barred and precluded from examining the tax returns of Donald Trump, his family, his company and related companies.” [24:40]

• Anthony on Trump’s legal clean slate:
  “Basically, the slate is wiped clean for Donald Trump in this agreement. And anything he’s done up until this point, apparently the IRS can’t touch.” [25:14]

• Sarah on the caution in GOP ranks:
  “Lawmakers learned—cross Donald Trump at your peril. So at the very point at which something like this is possibly going to come before Congress, it will do so at a time that they know exactly what the risk of voting against Donald Trump might be.” [28:05]

---

Noteworthy Segment Timestamps

• Introduction & Episode Theme: [01:05 – 03:12]
• Mini Super Tuesday Results & Analysis: [03:12 – 11:29]
• Discussion on Bill Cassidy and Trump’s Endorsement Power: [12:52 – 16:32]
• Ken Paxton vs. John Cornyn in Texas: [15:14 – 17:05]
• “Slush fund” and Tax Immunity Deep Dive: [19:32 – 26:41]
• Congressional and Political Backlash: [26:41 – 28:44]

---

Brief Lighter Moment

• Closing includes a fun viewer mail section about Bigfoot being a protected species in Washington state—a moment of levity before signing off. [29:54 – 31:16]

---

Summary

This episode paints a vivid portrait of Trump’s extraordinary consolidation of power—both within party politics and over the federal bureaucracy—raising fundamental constitutional, legal, and ethical questions. Through first-hand reporting and direct interviews, Americast illustrates how loyalty to Trump now trumps (pun intended) seniority and independence in the Republican Party, while simultaneously questioning the integrity of unprecedented self-serving legal settlements that shield Trump and his allies from scrutiny and sanction.

Listeners seeking clear-eyed, sharply reported analysis on the most defining maneuvers in American politics will find this episode essential.

---

Transcript

[Podcast Announcer]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.

[VRBO Advertiser]

Book a loved by Guest property with VRBO and you get a top rated vacation rental that's loved for all the right reasons like being in a great location or having great amenities.

[VRBO Enthusiast]

Ugh, I love my VRBO for the view.

[VRBO Advertiser]

Good reason.

[VRBO Enthusiast]

Ooh, and the sauna. Sweet.

[VRBO Advertiser]

Another good reason.

[VRBO Enthusiast]

And that it's one of those good saunas with the hot rock thing. Ugh. Love a good hot rock thing. Fancy.

[VRBO Advertiser]

That's also a reason. Don't worry about surprises. Book a verbo you'll love with the Love by guest filter if you know you verbo.

[Kai Wright]

I'm Kai Wright.

[Carter Sherman]

I'm Carter Sherman. Welcome to Stateside with Kai and Carter. We're a new show from the Guardian.

[Kai Wright]

We're talking to big thinkers and the best journalists just trying to understand the world through smart conversation and honest reporting.

[Carter Sherman]

We don't have billionaires telling us what to say.

[Kai Wright]

Stateside with Kai and Carter will come out three times a week, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, starting May 13.

[Carter Sherman]

Subscribe on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

You've heard us say many times before that Donald Trump's just done something unprecedented, that we've never seen a president behaving like this before. Well, he's done it again by creating a breathtakingly audacious slush fund, the proceeds of which can probably be spent on his friends and allies and granted himself immunity from tax audits, all as part of a deal he's done with the Internal Revenue Service. We will explain the ins and outs of that in this episode. And also we'll look at the electoral contest, the primaries where Donald Trump's candidates won and he's claiming victory even though his name wasn't on the ballot. He's knocked out opponents like long serving Congressman Thomas Massie in Kentucky.

[Thomas Massie]

Those SOBs in Washington tried to buy my vote. They couldn't buy it. Why did this, why did the race get so expensive? Because they decided to buy the seat and it. And it got real expensive for him.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

By knocking out candidates like Massey, Donald Trump shows us that he is strengthening his grip on the Republican Party, even at a time when his approval ratings and poll numbers are terrible. And by getting rid of these rebellious Republicans in Congress, he's showing lawmakers. Don't you dare, dare try and stand up to me. Welcome to AmericasT. AmericasT.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

AmericasT from BBC News.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

You hear that sound? Oh, I think when I hear that sound, it reminds me of money.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

We didn't start this war, but under President Trump, we are Finishing it.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

This is a big cover up and

[VRBO Enthusiast]

this administration is engaged in it.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

This guy has Trump derangement syndrome.

[Bill Cassidy]

I have four words for you. Turn the volume up.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Hello, it's Sarah in the BBC Washington bureau.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

And it's Anthony across the table from Sarah in Washington D.C. just back from a trip back from Kentucky at a big congressional race there, which we are about to talk about.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah, we will get onto the slush fund and this amazing deal that Donald Trump did with the IRS later. First, let's pick up on the fact that Yesterday, Tuesday the 19th, was a little kind of mini Super Tuesday in America with six different states having primary elections where they choose the candidates for, for the Republican and Democrat parties who will go into the midterm elections in November. And we're interested in these because in a lot of them inside the Republican Party there was a more establishment candidate and a Trump challenger. And in most cases, in fact, I think all cases, it was the Trump candidate who won, wasn't it, Anthony?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Yes, it was. And in Kentucky, most notably, it was Thomas Massie, the longtime iconoclastic, rebel, libertarian candidate, congressman who lost to a Trump backed political novice, Ed Gallrane.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

It was a good night for Donald Trump, really, wasn't it?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

It was a good night for Donald Trump. The marquee contest was that Kentucky race. And, well, was he able to stand up to Donald Trump? Was he able to win reelection despite facing the full force of Trump's financial and endorsement onslaught? No, he lost. And he actually lost by about 10 percentage points. So it wasn't even all that close. Let's listen Massie give his concession speech and maybe he could explain why he ended up coming up short.

[Thomas Massie]

We didn't lose this race because we didn't have enough money. You know, it is the most expensive race ever. I think when they add it up right now they can count 35 million. I think when they add it up, it's going to be a lot more than that because on our side, we know we spent more than 15 million and we were able to go toe to toe. There was never a week that we got outspent more than 22 to 1 in this entire race. Look, for 14, for 14 years, those SOBs in Washington tried to buy my vote. They couldn't buy it. Why did this, why did the race get so expensive? Because they decided to buy the seat and it, and it got real expensive. Expensive for him. Look, they used, they used a lot of dirty tricks, but we stayed the course. We did not. We didn't bend a knee. We didn't throw a foul ball. We didn't do any of those things. We didn't kneecap anybody. There were. We had lots of opportunities to try a lot of stuff like that and we never did it. We ran a clean race.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah. So that is very interesting that Thomas Massey is saying that it wasn't specifically about the money. Even though tens of millions were spent on what's now the most expensive primary race in America. He was being challenged by a Donald Trump backed candidate because he had voted to release the Epstein files, he had voted against extra spending that would have increased the national debt, and he voted against the war in Iran. All things he'd broken with Donald Trump on. But he said he was the one holding the flame of Trumpism because these were all things that Donald Trump campaigned on but just wasn't delivering in office and pointed out he'd been loyal to him 90% of the time, voting with him in Congress. So, Anthony, you were there talking to voters. You must have met people who in 2024 had voted for both Donald Trump and Thomas Massie and they're now being asked to pick between the two of them.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Right. And a lot of them were conflicted. I talked to some people who voted for Massie who was a little upset about the fact that Trump was campaigning against him. I've talked to some voters who voted against Massie but liked him as a person and felt they kind of admired his stand on principles. But that didn't matter. And when it came down to it, Matthew was making the case that he was standing on principles and that his voters should side with him because of these stands. And a majority of the voters, it turns out, did not like the fact that he was breaking with Donald Trump. I mean, as an example, this is Allen, a Republican I spoke with at a coffee shop in Union, Kentucky. And he laid it out pretty clearly why he was not supporting Thomas Massie

[Allen (Kentucky Voter)]

and he does not represent Kentucky any longer. All his, you know, and he make, takes pride in, of course, opposing Trump so that he can get all those interviews and stuff like that. And then, you know, so then what do you really stand for? I mean, you know. Yeah, so you have to decide. I mean, he, his buddies, Rohana. Do you stand with Rohana or do you stand with Donald de Trump?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Right. He's made his bed, so to speak. So you like Gallerain or is it just that he is the other?

[Interviewer / Questioner]

I do.

[Allen (Kentucky Voter)]

I've met him a couple times and I do like him and I think he's a principal person.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

Yeah.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Kind of guy who's going to get to Washington to support Trump's agenda.

[Allen (Kentucky Voter)]

Supports Trump's agenda and stand for the Kentucky values. Yeah, yeah. I mean, Trump's agenda doesn't always line up with. But, you know, he is the president, he was elected, so we have to. And he represents all 50 states, you know, so it's may not perfectly align with Kentucky, but it's closer than the other side.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

So, Ro Khanna, that's a reference to the Democrat from California that Massie worked with in getting those Epstein files released with a vote in the House of Representatives. But I think what you hear there is that Massie was too enamored by his press clippings, that Massie wasn't focusing on sticking with Trump and moving the ball forward and being a team player, and that was what sank him. So all of the explaining I heard on the campaign trail, all of this, I vote with Trump 90% of the time. All of this, you know, I'm really trying to just improve the bills, not destroy them. None of that mattered. It was a contest framed between Donald Trump and Thomas Massie, and voters in that district picked Trump.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah, that's fascinating. And if he had had Trump's backing, he would have won, presumably easily.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

He had.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

It's all about the president, even though he wasn't on the ballot.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Yeah, he had Trump's backing in 2024, and he coasted to victory. He was still the kind of guy who voted against some of the Republican priorities because they raised the deficit too much. He was always an anti interventionist. Another thing is that because the House has been so closely divided during Donald Trump's second term, where just a handful of votes or the difference between winning and losing a vote, there was a big spotlight put on Massie. So his quirkiness, his stands on principle, which could have been written off when he was in the comfortable majority at previous times, now became really pivotal. And that was what I think got under Donald Trump's skin.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

So this is fascinating, I think, for two reasons that take it way beyond Kentucky and make it a national issue. We're seeing polls that Donald Trump is the least popular he has been in this term at the moment, and yet he's winning these kind of electoral victories. And also when you see somebody who has rebelled a bit on principle, like Thomas Massie losing his primary, every other Republican in Congress is going to look at that and think, oh, that's what happens if you stand up against Donald Trump. He's not the first to lose a primary for going against Donald Trump, but he's probably the highest profiler, the one who maybe had the best chance of actually managing to hold on to Kentucky despite Donald Trump going against him. So I think there's a lot we can learn from this.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Yeah, that was the feeling that he had the best chance to stand up to Trump and to be the, the new normal going up against an unpopular president. That, as you mentioned, did not turn out to be the case. But he does join a long list of Republicans, including Senator Bill Cassidy from Louisiana who lost to a Trump backed rival, the primary contest in Louisiana on Saturday. Also we've talked about in the past those five Indiana state senators who wouldn't redistrict in accordance with Donald Trump's plans and the Trump campaign turned against them and they got voted out off. I think there is a feeling among Republicans who have any kind of long term hopes of sticking around and rising through the ranks of the party that if they take stands that go against Donald Trump and if they attract his ire, they're toast. They're not gonna be able to win, not only win general elections, but even just become the Republican nominee no matter how long they've been in office, no matter how many friends they have outside of Donald Trump, it just doesn't matter.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah, look at Lauren Boebert. Republican congresswoman used to be very, very MAGA and loyal to Donald Trump. We've talked about her on the podcast before she went down and was campaigning with Thomas Massie in Kentucky. And immediately Donald Trump started putting out In Truth Social that he was looking for somebody to challenge her in a primary who would stand up against Lauren Boebert. Because there she was daring to campaign for an opponent of Donald Trump's. Although it turns out that she was cleverly doing this after the filing deadline in her state. So nobody will be able to challenge her on that. But Donald Trump has also been posting on Truth Social a graphic saying that he had 37 wins on May 19 and zero losses and he's counting them across the six states that were voting in primary elections on Tuesday and saying that his candidates won it every single time. So it does make him look very, very preeminent in the party. But this is at a time when he is prosecuting a war in Iran that lots of die hard Republican certainly influencers, the people with loud voices in MAGA don't like. We know that everybody is feeling the price rises, particularly in gas in petrol, but that's feeding through into groceries and all sorts of other things. He's got a really low approval ratings in opinion polls that sample the whole American population. And yet here he is, apparently able to command the voters in these Republican primaries.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Right? And that is his remarkable ability. He has remade the Republican Party in his image. And even as he is struggling, he has been able to weed out people that he finds insufficiently loyal. Let's talk about Bill Cassidy again a little more. He's at Louisiana, Senator. This is him in his concession speech talking about why he lost.

[Bill Cassidy]

You know, I've had the privilege of representing the state of Louisiana for 12 years. I've been able to participate in democracy. And when you participate in democracy, sometimes it doesn't turn out the way you want it to. But you don't pout, you don't whine, you don't claim the election was stolen, you don't find a reason why. You don't manufacture some examples. Excuse you thank the voters for the privilege of representing the state or the country for as long as you've had that privilege. And that's what I'm doing right now.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

So an incumbent senator doesn't get the backing of Donald Trump and goes down to defeat. We've got another one actually, just in. On Tuesday, Donald Trump endorsed a challenger to John Cornyn, the incumbent senator in Texas. He endorsed Ken Paxton, the state attorney general. That contest is on Tuesday. I know we talked about it in the past, but here's another chance next week for Donald Trump to oust an incumbent. And the thing about Cornyn is he's not even really that anti Trump. He never had a clear break. Cassidy's thing was he voted to convict Donald Trump during his 2021 Senate impeachment trial. We talked about all the various transgressions that Massie has had. But Cornyn tried to win Donald Trump's favor. He was about to name a highway after Trump in Texas. He had proposed a bill to do that. He had been campaigning with photos of him next to Trump. And Trump nevertheless came out with a true social post endorsing Paxton, saying that Paxton was the true loyalist, that he was real maga. And Paxton had gone to New York to support Trump when he was on trial. He was one of the people who were leading an effort to overturn the 2020 election. So Trump rewarded that loyalty. He said that Cornyn was a nice guy, but that he wasn't there when times were hard, which I assume means is post defeat time out of office in 2021, 2022, and that that was just not good enough.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

That sounds like a very good reason to Be going to Texas, Anthony. And I know you never turned down the possibility of a trip to Texas.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

I know there's some barbecue waiting for me. I might have to do that. It is interesting in this case because Cornyn didn't have that break. Cornyn is very popular in Congress. He has a lot of friends in the Senate, a lot of Republican friends in the Senate. He's a former member of the Republican leadership, for crying out loud. He was the majority whip. That's the guy who organizes and tries to get people to vote all together in the party. He is an active fundraiser for a lot of his fellow Republicans. So when Donald Trump came out in favor of Paxton, it really, really angered a lot of Senate Republicans who felt like Trump was betraying someone who was a team player. So I think that hints at some of the downside of what Donald Trump is doing here. He may be purging disloyal or quasi loyal members from his party, and next year they may be replaced by real die hard MAGA faithful. But in the meantime, he's making a lot of enemies in Congress and in the Senate. And he's also creating a lot of freewheeling members who are retiring either forcefully or by choice, who may not be willing to march in lockstep with Donald Trump's legislative agenda for the rest of this year.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yes. Plus also, I think in Texas, it's particularly interesting, isn't it, that what they might be doing is selecting a candidate who is Trump approved, but who might be less popular with the voters because, to put it politely, Ken Paxton has quite a lot of baggage, whereas the Democrats have actually selected. Well, a lot of people think it's one of their most electable candidates for the Senate, James Talarico, somebody that we should definitely be watching. And so that might make it a much, much tighter race for the Senate seat. That would be astonishing. As a result of this, what Donald Trump had achieved was turning Texas blue.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Yeah. I mean, Democrats have been waiting for that for decades. And this, they feel, is maybe their best chance. At the very least, Republicans have to spend a lot more money on this race than they would have if Cornyn, with his deep pockets and fundraising prowess, they would have had to done so. It's a risk. It's a big risk by Donald Trump. And the other thing is, I mentioned these kind of freewheeling votes now, these freewheeling members, the YOLO conference, the YOLO caucus in the Senate. Cassidy just yesterday came out against funding Donald Trump's ballroom through Senate appropriations. He voted in favor of limiting or advancing a measure to limit Donald Trump's war powers on Iran. He was critical of this weaponization fund that the Justice Department has set up, a $1.8 billion fund to pay off people who feel like they were victims of anti conservative weaponization. So all of a sudden he now is a free agent. And you could see Cornyn do the same thing. All of a sudden, things might get a little more complicated for Trump.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yes. And you're being very polite there, saying, the YOLO crowd. I've seen you in some of our shared group texts calling them the YOLO DGAF crowd.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

We won't explain what that acronym stands for.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

They can Google it. I doubt very much that any American casters don't know what that means, but if they don't, the intern there for them. But let's pick up, Anthony, on what you were talking about there. This new fund that was announced yesterday, it's not quite $1.8 billion, it's 1.776 billion to commemorate. I see what they did there, America's 250th birthday. What better way to commemorate it than setting up a fund that looks as though it's there to reward Donald Trump's friends and allies? Because it's going to sit within the Justice Department and anyone who thinks that they were the victim of weaponized lawfare, as Donald Trump always calls it. Basically, the people he would say are eligible for this are those who were needlessly and wrongfully prosecuted under the Biden administration. They can now apply to be compensated for that. And it will be decided by a panel of five people not been appointed yet, but will be appointed, in fact, by one of Donald Trump's appointees, Todd Blanche. And so the criticism is that this is just there to re his friends. But the reason it came about was also kind of astonishing, wasn't it, Anthony?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Yeah. Donald Trump was suing the irs. The president was suing his own IRS for the unauthorized release of his tax returns, years of his tax returns that took place. They were leaked to the New York Times in September of 2020. So just before that 2020 presidential election that Donald Trump lost. And he was seeking damages, $10 billion in damages from the IRS. It turns a contractor who got ahold of them and leaked them, it wasn't some sort of an IRS official. So Donald Trump still was saying that this was the IRS responsibility and he should be compensated. But then Donald Trump dropped it, striking a deal with his own justice department and this $1.8 billion slush fund is the result of it.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah, it's amazing, isn't it? So you've got a judge who wasn't sure that she would allow the case to proceed because basically you've got Donald Trump in the White House, but you've also got Donald Trump in charge of the ir. So it's not right that they should be engaged in a legal battle together, but it's absolutely fine for them to make a cosy little sweetheart deal behind the scenes and come to a settlement. It doesn't really seem to me like that's certainly any more ethical, even if it might be a little bit more legal. So, yes, you've now got this fund and not total clarity on who is going to be able to apply to it or what the criteria would be to get compensation. Because if it is the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, who of course used to be Donald Trump's private personal lawyer as well, very loyal to Donald Trump, he's going to appoint the panel that will make the decisions here. And I guess the people applying could include Steve Bannon, for instance. He went to jail for a few months during the Biden administration for refusing to testify in front of Congress. But really controversial would be if January 6th rioters, who, some of whom were convicted and imprisoned but then were pardoned by Donald Trump on day one, they might not just be taking those pardons, they now might be looking for compensation. And that caused a bit of a fuss. Yesterday. I was in the White House briefing room when the vice president, J.D. vance, came to talk to us and he was asked several times about this and whether or not it would be right if January 6th rioters who had attacked police officers were to be compensated out of government money.

[VRBO Enthusiast]

You previously told me that anyone who assaulted a police officer on January 6 should go to prison. So why not rule out giving them taxpayer funded money?

[J.D. Vance]

Well, Kaitlyn, what I said is we're going to look at everything case by case, rule it out. Because, Kaitlyn, there are people who, I don't know their individual circumstances and I don't rule things out categorically when I know nothing about a person's individual circumstances. Let's say a person is accused, let's just say hypothetically a person is accused of doing something that they never actually did, that they got a kangaroo court, that they had a judge who mistreated them. I think that we should look at those things case by case.

[Todd Blanche]

Case.

[J.D. Vance]

We're not making commitments to give anybody money. We're just making commitments to look at things case by case.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Their vice president wasn't the only person being asked about this fund. Todd Blanche, who, as we've said, was Donald Trump's own personal attorney. Now, the acting Attorney general was giving evidence in front of Congress also yesterday. So he too was being asked about this, this slush fund. And he said he couldn't rule out money being used to compensate January 6 rioters. Here he is being questioned by the Democrat, Jack Reed.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

This all seems to be an obvious abuse of power by the Department of Justice, by the President. He negotiated essentially himself. You're his appointee. The IRS are his appointees. He's the plaintiff. And the American people, I don't think is surprised that suddenly all this money is going to his friends or people that he in his orbit. Will you ensure that none of this money goes to anyone convicted on the January 6 attack on the Congress?

[Todd Blanche]

Well, the commissioners will determine who is eligible to receive the money.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

And who. Who are the commissioners?

[Todd Blanche]

They're not named yet.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

Who will name them?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

I will.

[Todd Blanche]

Or the Attorney General. It's not me.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

So with the suggestion of the President, United States. Excuse me, with the suggestion of the American. Of the President, United States, your boss.

[Todd Blanche]

I do not make suggestions.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

I will.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

No, no, he will make suggestions.

[Todd Blanche]

I have no idea if he will or not. I really don't. I have no idea if he will or not.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

I would be shocked if he didn't tell you exactly who to put on. And I'd be more shocked if you did not put them on. This is a travesty of the law in the United States and the Constitution. You know, this whole hearing, I think, is exposing something which is, to me, very frightening. You're a very gifted lawyer, but from my perspective, you have very little faith to the Constitution and the people of America, and you're the President's consigliere.

[Todd Blanche]

Your perspective is completely wrong, Senator. Respectfully.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

Well, I think the facts will prove me right. Thank you.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah. And then, Anthony, the bit that really blew me away was when a bit later in the evening on Tuesday, it was announced that there's another provision in this agreement which is protecting Donald Trump and his family from irs. There's actually a part of the agreement says the government is forever barred and precluded from examining the tax returns of Donald Trump, his family, his company and related companies. And we know that actually there were audits going on that could possibly have actually ended up with hundreds of millions of dollars being owed to the irs. And does that mean the Trumps are off scot free?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

All those audits apparently are gonna go away. And anything pending, which there were pending audits, known or unknown. So that means that even if there's something that comes up about his past tax that wasn't currently pending that the IRS didn't know about, right now, they still cannot prosecute Donald Trump for it. So basically, the slate is wiped clean for Donald Trump in this agreement. And anything he's done up until this point, apparently the IRS can't touch. It's kind of funny. I'm looking at the actual document here, and at the very top, it has the date May 19, 2026. It has May. And then there's like a little blank space. And then it's clear that they typed the date in into that blank space with the underscore to make it yesterday's date. Makes you wonder how long this document had been floating around. And then they're like, okay, let's do it today and put the May 19 date in there.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Interesting. Yeah. So you can imagine that it is something that Trump has had on his agenda for quite a while. And it just seems so naked, doesn't it, setting up a nearly $2 billion fund, which it's obvious are going to go to Trump friends and allies. And yet we're talking about this as the same episode as we're talking about how Donald Trump has secured his hold on the Republican Party, how voters will reject congressmen, senators that they've been with for years and years if Donald Trump tells them to. And despite his poor polling ratings across the country, he really still does have his loyal supporters. As loyal as ever.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Right. He's tightening his grip on the party. But I do think it's interesting that with these Republican incumbents who are going to be leaving office at the end of the year, they may be willing to take a stand. And it's a narrow Senate, it's a narrow House of Representatives. You could see them siding with Democrats to block this deal or to block it in a way that can be challenged in court, because the Constitution says that Congress has the power of the purse. They're the ones who have to authorize money being spent. So I'm not sure the grounds for which the Justice Department is accessing these funds and what their justification is for doing it. But if Congress steps forward and says, no, you can't pay this out, they would be pretty solid legally in cutting all of this off. So this story, one, I think it's politically toxic for Trump because I think a lot of people, I mean, remember the whole Tea Party started out about bailouts for auto companies and for banks and financial companies in 2009. Here we have another slush fund, another bailout, this time for Donald Trump's friends and family. Is that gonna be something the public's gonna go along with? I think it could become a very big issue for Democrats on the campaign trail. And that also could be a legal issue because of all of these congressmen and not just Democrats, but certain Republicans who are willing to take a stand and say, no, you can't do this.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yeah. And you don't have to be a renegade Republican in revolt who's been primaried in order to stand against this. Even John Thune, the Senate Majority leader, the Republican leader there, has been saying he's not in favor of this. He doesn't think it looks good. So it may very well mean that it'll come up against quite a lot of political opposition. But shows you how all of these things are so intermeshed. Because yet again, what happened in this little mini Super Tuesday was lawmakers learned cross Donald Trump at your peril. So at the very point at which something like this is possibly going to come before Congress, it will do so at a time that they know exactly what the risk of voting against Donald Trump might be.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Right. You don't want that black mark on your record if you are hoping to have Donald Trump's support when you run for reelection in November or you run two years from now when you're running seeking a Republican nomination again, you don't want to add up like Bill Cassidy or Thomas Massie or John Cornyn, any of these. Their heads have been put on a pike and they're on display outside the White House. And I think it is a warning to all the Republicans who are wondering whether they should take a stand or whether they should go along to get along.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Okay, before we go,

[Interviewer / Questioner]

I pledge allegiance to the United States of AmericaSt.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

The United States of Americast. Pterodactyl cry now.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Huge thank you to everyone who's been sending us photos, emails, videos, voice notes. As we build our very own United States of Americast, we are building our own map of America state by state. And we want to hear from all 50 states. Now, you don't need to live in America, you just need a connection. Maybe you used to live there or you've visited like Jason in Northumberland.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Alright, so Jason writes, hello, AmericasT. I'm a politics teacher. I am originally from Tacoma, Washington and spent much of my childhood in the Cascade Mountains hearing stories of Bigfoot in two counties in Washington state, Skamania and Whatcom. Bigfoot is a protected species. You can be fined up to $1,000 and or sentenced to a year in prison for killing a Bigfoot as they are considered endangered despite not being proven to exist. Have you heard of Bigfoot, Sarah?

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

I've heard of Bigfoot. I haven't seen any evidence. I love that idea though, because the only way you could really prove that Bigfoot existed would be if you did have a dead Bigfoot that you could turn and whereupon you'd be fined $1,000 or sentenced to a year in prison. And that would seem like a light sentence, actually, I think for Bigfoot murder.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Oh my gosh, you would think so. Especially if they are so rare. You know, my mom lived in Washington state for a long time on the Olympic Peninsula and she had a bumper sticker on her car saying I break for Sasquatch. So she would not be the one who would run over Bigfoot. But I suppose there are other people who might be looking for a prize and I don't know, is $1,000 enough to deter them?

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

People really do believe in him, do they?

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Oh yeah. My mom has books about him. They think he exists. Up in the mountains. There's that one grainy video of a big furry beast walking, loping along, but you know, we'll have to see. I want to believe.

[Sarah (BBC Washington Bureau)]

Yes, well, tell us what's going on in your state. Maybe it is another fun fact or matters to you, no matter how big or small your claim. Do please get in touch. You can send us a message or voice note via WhatsApp to [phone] or email americastbc.co.uk and until then, we'll just say bye.

[Carter Sherman]

Bye.

[Anthony (BBC Correspondent)]

Bye, y'.

[Todd Blanche]

All.

[Podcast Announcer]

If you've liked what you've heard today, please do consider subscribing to AmericasT. That way, of course, you'll never miss an episode and you can do this wherever you get your podcasts. If you want to get in touch, we read every single message that we get. You can send us an email americastbc.co.uk. the WhatsApp is 443-301-239480 and you can get involved as well in the AmericasT Discord server. The link to that is in the description. Until next time.

[Interviewer / Questioner]

Bye.

[Kai Wright]

I'm Kai Wright.

[Carter Sherman]

I'm Carter Sherman. Welcome to Stateside with Kai and Carter. We're a new show from the Guardian.

[Kai Wright]

We're talking to big thinkers and the best journalists just trying to understand the world through smart conversation and honest reporting.

[Carter Sherman]

We don't have billionaires telling us what to say.

[Kai Wright]

Stateside with Kyan Carter will come out three times a week, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, starting May 13.

[Carter Sherman]

Subscribe on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.