
Some see Trump weaponizing government in targeting of judge and Democratic fundraising site
On Thursday, President Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate Act Blue, the Democratic Party-aligned fundraising site that has fueled so many successful challenges against his own party.
The next day, amid a long-running feud with judges who have put some of his initiatives on hold because they may violate the Constitution, Trump's FBI
arrested a Milwaukee judge
, alleging she had helped a migrant evade immigration authorities.
The two acts sent shockwaves through the legal and political worlds, which already have been reeling as Trump has used his office to
target law firms
,
media outlets
and
individuals
with whom he disagrees. The investigations are the latest version of a clear pattern in Trump's second term: The president has
harnessed the power
of the federal government to punish his enemies and anyone he sees as standing in his way.
'This government has been consistent, from the moment it took office, in weaponizing the government and deploying it against critics,' said Steve Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and the coauthor of 'How Democracies Die.' 'This is not a surprise. Trump campaigned on it and he's been doing it since day one.'
The complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday accused Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge
Hannah Dugan
of ushering the man, who is accused of being in the country illegally, out the 'jury door' of her courtroom. The complaint alleges the judge became 'visibly angry' when told there were immigration agents in the courthouse.
Her arrest Friday morning was announced in a post on X by Trump's FBI director, Kash Patel,
a Trump loyalist
who before the election had compiled an
'enemies list'
to target during the president's second term. Patel later deleted the post.
Shortly after Dugan's arrest, a few dozen protesters marched outside the courthouse, chanting: 'Judge Dugan will be free, no justice, no peace.' Democrats across the country were alarmed.
'There are no kings in America,' Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said. He called the arrest 'a dangerous escalation, an attack on the separation of powers, and we will fight this with everything we have.'
During an appearance on Fox News after the arrest, Attorney General
Pam Bondi
sent a warning to judges across the country. She was addressing the case of Dugan and a retired New Mexico judge, whom the administration also is targeting for allegedly harboring someone in the country illegally. But her words carried extra weight given the administration's feuds with federal judges who have ruled against them in lawsuits challenging the administration's actions and executive orders.
'Some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law and they are not, and we're sending a very strong message today,' Bondi said.
Hours later, she
revoked
a Biden administration policy protecting journalists from having their records seized in leak investigations.
Trump himself lambasted judges Friday as he flew to
Pope Francis' funeral
in Rome, frustrated that they were stalling his deportation plans.
'These are judges who just want to show how big and important they are,' Trump told reporters on Air Force One. 'They shouldn't be allowed to do it. We have hundreds of thousands of people we want to get out of the country, and the courts are holding us back.'
The White House has mocked on social media an
order
,
upheld
unanimously at the U.S. Supreme Court, from a federal judge that it 'facilitate' the return of a Maryland man it admitted mistakenly deporting to a notorious prison in El Salvador. It mocked another federal judge who
ordered
planes full of immigrants turned around before they reached El Salvador. In
another case
, it acknowledged deporting additional migrants despite an order against it, arguing that the judge only forbade immigration authorities — and not the military — from removing the men from the country.
Trump's allies in Congress and online have
urged
that judges be impeached if they have ruled against his other initiatives to cut the federal government or unilaterally change elections, or even to ignore orders outright. With the Republican-controlled Congress silent as Trump tries to remake the federal government, the courts have emerged as the only branch of government that is actively challenging the president.
Trump also moved to kneecap one other force challenging him by targeting ActBlue. The website funnels small-dollar donations to predominantly Democratic candidates and has become a powerhouse in helping Democrats stay ahead of Republicans financially in many elections. The GOP set up a site to mimic it called WinRed, but Trump's order only directs a probe into the Democratic site, not the one run by his own party.
Trump asked Bondi to see if Act Blue was a potential conduit for illegal overseas donations. The site said it followed the law, and it and Democrats condemned the probe as politically motivated.
Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College, said Trump's targeting of Democratic Party infrastructure fits a pattern of many
authoritarians
around the world, who use government power to
cripple opposition parties
so they can
no longer
win elections.
'We're well past Watergate,' he said, referring to the 1972
scandal
that led to President Richard Nixon's resignation two years later. 'The investigation of Act Blue makes clear that we're not in a fully democratic country.'
'In a democracy,' Nyhan said, 'opposition parties don't have to fight uphill.'
___
Associated Press writer Lisa Mascaro in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
36 minutes ago
- Fox News
Lara Trump: China wants to replace us
All times eastern FOX News Saturday Night with Jimmy Failla FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: President Trump attends UFC event in Newark, New Jersey


USA Today
36 minutes ago
- USA Today
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts Show Caption Hide Caption Biden criticizes Trump administration's handling of Social Security Social Security overhaul sparks criticism from Biden over service disruptions, layoffs and automation as Trump defends changes as efficiency. Straight Arrow News Social Security is an important source of income for millions of Americans, but the program has a serious financial problem. Costs have increased faster than revenues in recent years because the aging population is growing more quickly than the working population. As a result, the trust fund, the financial account that pays benefits, is on track to be depleted within a decade. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. That would eliminate one source of revenue (i.e., interest earned on trust fund reserves), and the remaining tax revenues would only cover 77% of scheduled payments. That means a 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have several years to find a better solution. Here are four Social Security changes that could prevent deep, across-the-board benefit cuts. 1. Apply the Social Security payroll tax to income above $400,000 Social Security is primarily funded by a dedicated payroll tax, which takes 6.2% of wages from workers and employers. But some income is exempt from the payroll tax. Specifically, the maximum taxable earnings limit is $176,100 in 2025. Income above that threshold is not taxed by Social Security. Importantly, the Social Security program is projected to run a $23 trillion deficit over the next 75 years as it's strained by shifting demographics. But the deficit could be slashed by applying the payroll tax to more income. For instance, including income above $400,000 would eliminate 60% of the 75-year funding shortfall, says the University of Maryland. 2. Gradually increase the Social Security payroll tax rate to 6.5% over six years Under current law, the Social Security payroll tax rate is 6.2% for workers and their employers. But gradually raising that figure would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit. For example, increasing thetax rate by 0.05% annually over a six-year period would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Now that I've discussed two possible changes, let's step back and look at the big picture. There are basically three ways to resolve Social Security's financial problems: (1) increase revenue, (2) reduce costs or (3) some combination of the first two options. The changes discussed so far would increase revenue, but the next two changes would cut benefits. However, they are more subtle cuts than the 23% across-the-board reduction that would follow trust fund depletion. 3. Gradually increase full retirement age to 68 by 2033 Workers are eligible for retirement benefits at age 62, but they are not entitled to their full benefit — also called the primary insurance amount (PIA) — until full retirement age (FRA). Anyone that claims before full retirement age receives a smaller payout, meaning they get less than 100% of their PIA. FRA is currently defined as 67 years old for workers born in 1960 or later, but raising the figure would reduce the long-term deficit. For instance, increasing FRA to 68 years old by 2033, meaning it would apply to workers born in 1965 or later, would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. 4. Reduce benefits for retired workers with income in the top 20% Social Security benefits are determined as percentages of two bend points. Specifically, income from the 35 highest-paid years of work is adjusted for inflation and converted to a monthly figure called the average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) amount. The AIME is then run through a formula that uses two bend points to determine the PIA for each worker. Modifying the second (highest) bend point would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit by reducing benefits for high earners. For instance, the University of Maryland estimates that reducing benefits for individuals with income in the top 20% could reduce the 75-year funding deficit by 11%. Here's the big picture: The four changes I've discussed would eliminate 101% of Social Security's $23 trillion funding shortfall, which would prevent across-the-board benefit cuts in 2035. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »


Fox News
40 minutes ago
- Fox News
CIA chief: We released two Mandarin-speaking videos to the Chinese people to contact us over dark web
All times eastern FOX News Saturday Night with Jimmy Failla FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: President Trump attends UFC event in Newark, New Jersey