Trump backs $1.776B anti-weaponization fund, mocks ‘angry’ Cornyn for holding up AG confirmation

This story raises questions about governance, accountability, and American values.

Source: New York Post
1 min read
Why This Matters

$1. 776 billion, not a penny more or less, aimed at what Trump calls an "anti-weaponization" push. That's not a budget line, that's a bumper sticker with a dollar sign on it.

New Republican Times Editorial Board

Trump backs $1.776B anti-weaponization fund, mocks ‘angry’ Cornyn for holding up AG confirmation
Image via New York Post

The president mocked Sen. John Cornyn for being an "angry person" after having lost a Texas Senate GOP primary race in May.

Original source:

Read at New York Post

How We See It

New Republican Times Editorial Board

$1.776 billion, not a penny more or less, aimed at what Trump calls an "anti-weaponization" push. That's not a budget line, that's a bumper sticker with a dollar sign on it. Whether the money does anything to stop DOJ and FBI leadership from turning federal law enforcement into a political cudgel is a separate question from whether it makes a good headline. We've watched this administration talk about weaponization for years now. Fine. But a fund with a patriotic number attached to it is a message, not a fix, and the difference matters if you actually want the next FBI director to leave political opponents alone.

Then there's Cornyn. Holding up an AG confirmation is a real Senate tool, used by both parties for decades, sometimes for good reasons and sometimes as leverage theater. Maybe Cornyn's objection is substantive, maybe it's petty. We don't know yet because Trump didn't bother making that case. Instead he went straight for the man's primary loss, calling him "angry" as if getting beaten in a Texas GOP primary disqualifies someone from doing his job as a sitting senator.

That's the part worth sitting with. Cornyn is still in office. He still has a vote. Mocking him for losing a race back in May doesn't answer whether his hold on the nominee is legitimate, it just changes the subject to something more satisfying to post about. If the administration wants the Senate to move faster on confirmations, taunting a senator who represents millions of Texans isn't a strategy, it's a mood. Voters who want the weaponization problem actually solved deserve a real argument for the nominee, not a nickname for the guy standing in the way.

Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.