President Donald Trump declined to fully rule out taxpayer-funded compensation for some people charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, including those accused of assaulting police officers, during a tense interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The exchange came as Trump defended what his administration has described as an “anti-weaponization” fund, a nearly $1.8 billion proposal intended to compensate people who claim they were unfairly targeted by federal investigations or prosecutions.
When host Kristen Welker asked whether people who assaulted law enforcement officers on Jan. 6 should be eligible for compensation, Trump said he would not be inclined to support that without reviewing the cases. But he also said that, if it were up to him, he would pay people what he believes they deserve.
Trump argued that many Jan. 6 defendants had been unfairly treated and said some pleaded guilty because they feared lengthy prison sentences. Critics say those remarks continue his long-running effort to recast the Capitol attack as political persecution rather than a violent attempt to disrupt the certification of the 2020 election.
TRENDING TODAY
The proposed fund has already become a major legal and political controversy. A federal judge temporarily blocked the administration from moving forward while a lawsuit challenging the fund is reviewed. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche also told lawmakers earlier this month that the administration was not moving forward with the fund “period,” according to reports.
Despite that, Trump continued to defend the idea during the NBC interview. The Guardian reported that Trump refused to categorically rule out using the fund to compensate some Capitol riot defendants, even as the future of the proposal remains uncertain.
The controversy stems from a settlement connected to Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the disclosure of his tax returns. The fund has been criticized by legal experts, Democrats and some Republicans as a possible “slush fund” that could benefit Trump allies or people pardoned by him.
Reuters reported that Trump planned to drop the fund “for now” after political backlash and a court order temporarily halting implementation.
The Jan. 6 issue remains politically explosive. More than 1,500 people were charged in connection with the Capitol attack, and more than 140 law enforcement officers were injured during the violence. After returning to office, Trump pardoned roughly 1,500 people connected to the attack, including some who had been convicted of assaulting police officers.
Supporters of Trump’s position argue that some Jan. 6 defendants received excessive treatment from prosecutors and that the Justice Department was politically weaponized. They say the fund was meant to compensate people harmed by federal overreach.
Opponents argue that paying Jan. 6 defendants — especially anyone who attacked police — would be an insult to law enforcement and taxpayers. They say pardons were already controversial, and financial compensation would go even further by rewarding people involved in one of the most serious attacks on the Capitol in modern U.S. history.
The interview also grew heated over Trump’s continued claims about election fraud. NBC’s Kristen Welker pressed him for evidence, and Trump eventually ended the interview, calling NBC a “one-sided crooked network,” according to multiple reports.
For now, the “anti-weaponization” fund remains legally and politically uncertain. Even if the administration does not move forward immediately, Trump’s comments show that the idea of compensating people he views as victims of political prosecution remains part of his broader message.
The question is whether Congress, the courts and even some Republicans will allow any version of the fund to survive — especially if Jan. 6 defendants could be among those seeking payments.
Why It Matters
The issue matters because it raises a major question about presidential power, taxpayer money and accountability for Jan. 6. Paying defendants connected to the Capitol attack, especially those accused or convicted of assaulting police, would trigger intense political and legal backlash.
It also matters because the controversy highlights the ongoing fight over Trump’s claim that the Justice Department was “weaponized” against his supporters.
What Comes Next
The fund is currently blocked by legal challenges and faces pressure from lawmakers. The administration may try to revise, delay or abandon the proposal.
Trump’s comments are likely to keep the issue alive, especially as Jan. 6 pardons, police assaults and federal prosecution claims remain central to the political debate.
🚨 WOW! President Trump EXPOSES the FBI carrying out an inside job on Jan. 6th to NBC’s Meet the Fake Press, Kristen Welker starts PANICKING
TRUMP: They had FBI agents ushering them in! They were being ushered in.
WELKER: There’s no evidence of that
TRUMP: They were DIRTY… pic.twitter.com/ZvGZTvnD9U
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) June 7, 2026
