Mike Pence Bears Responsibility for DOJ Weaponization and Should Not Oppose Victim Compensation
Source: Hans Mahncke. "Pence Enabled DOJ Lawfare And Opposes Restoring Its Victims." June 4, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Mike Pence is being hypocritical by opposing a fund to compensate victims of government weaponization. Pence himself helped create this problem by supporting the firing of Michael Flynn based on false claims, even after reviewing evidence that showed Flynn hadn't lied.
Conclusion
Mike Pence is hypocritical in opposing the Anti-Weaponization Fund because his own actions during the Flynn firing helped create the culture of institutional weaponization that made such compensation necessary
Premises
- Pence reviewed transcripts showing Flynn discussed expulsions, not sanctions, with the Russian ambassador but still supported Flynn's firing based on false claims
- Flynn's removal eliminated a key skeptic of the Russia Collusion narrative and enabled the broader Russiagate investigation to proceed
- The FBI's McCabe mischaracterized Flynn's conversation as being about sanctions when he knew it concerned expulsions
- Had Flynn remained in place, the trajectory of weaponized investigations and prosecutions might have been dramatically different
- Pence also made promises to Trump supporters before January 6th that he later abandoned without explanation
- The Anti-Weaponization Fund uses standard legal mechanisms (the Judgment Fund) to compensate victims of government misconduct
Assumptions
- The distinction between sanctions and expulsions is legally and diplomatically significant
- Flynn's presence would have meaningfully altered subsequent events
- Pence had the authority and responsibility to correct false narratives about Flynn
- The weaponization of government institutions caused genuine harm requiring compensation
- Public officials should be held accountable for their role in enabling institutional misconduct