WASHINGTON – The top law enforcement official in the United States said the Justice Department won’t move forward with a so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund to pay President Donald Trump’s political allies. “We are not moving forward with the fund. Period,” acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a House committee hearing Tuesday.The Justice Department announced the $1.8 billion fund last week, calling it the result of a settlement between the government and President Donald Trump, who’d sued his own administration in January over an illegal leak of his tax information during his first term. As part of the settlement, Blanche signed a document saying the government would be “FOREVER BARRED” from pursuing tax enforcement against Trump, his family and their businesses over any past tax returns. Blanche said that part of the settlement would remain. The fund appeared designed to fulfill demands for restitution from Trump supporters prosecuted for attacking the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, many of whom said they were eager to file claims. A court temporarily blocked the department from setting up the fund or issuing payments last week, and news outlets reported the Trump administration planned to drop the fund altogether. But the administration declined to confirm the reports, saying only the government would comply with the court’s order. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) both said Tuesday they’d pressed Trump to drop the fund, which had angered Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate, making it harder to pass unrelated immigration enforcement legislation. Thune said earlier Tuesday Blanche would make a definitive statement about the fund’s future. Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) then asked Blanche about the fund at a House subcommittee hearing where he was testifying on the Justice Department’s budget. She seemed surprised by his answer and asked him again. He explained the fund hadn’t been set up, and wouldn’t be set up regardless of what happened in court. “So, yes, we’re not moving forward with the fund,” Blanche said.Blanche seemed uninterested in making it more official. When Meng asked if she could have Blanche’s statement in writing, he said the hearing transcript should suffice. But Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, which sued in federal court on behalf of several plaintiffs, suggested the Justice Department would have to make a more formal declaration of its intentions. “If you can say it on TV, you should say it in court,” Perryman said. Despite Blanche’s plans to drop the fund, he said the faux settlement ― which was not approved by a judge ― is still in effect. When Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) asked if Trump could keep his tax break, Blanche said he could. “Nothing has changed with that,” Blanche said. “There is a settlement that the IRS entered into with President Trump and others, his family and his companies, as part of that settlement.”While the settlement didn’t give Trump the $10 billion in damages he’d demanded as part of his initial lawsuit against the IRS in January, freeing him from any IRS enforcement over past tax returns, as the settlement does, could deliver a significant monetary benefit, since the leak of his returns revealed he owed as much as $100 million in unpaid taxes. “Simply put, you just gave the president and his family a tax immunity to the tune of about $100 million,” DeLauro said. Blanche said it wasn’t true, but only clarified that it applied to past tax returns and not future ones, which in no way refuted DeLauro’s statement. “It’s not a forward-looking document,” he said. It’s also possible that Jan. 6 rioters could still get payouts from the Justice Department. Hundreds filed administrative claims with the Justice Department long before the Trump administration decided to create a special slush fund for the supposed victims of government weaponization.