And good evening from the newsroom, topping our scene in global coverage. After two courts ruled against it and some Republican lawmakers all but mutiny over it, President Trump hits pause on his so-called weaponization fund.

Now, some of those Republicans are saying pause won't be enough. They want reassurances that it's not going to come back to life and are not satisfied with the Justice Department statements today, which reads in part, this fund was open to anybody who was so weaponized,

targeted, or persecuted, whether they were Democrat, Republican, conservative, independent,

or otherwise, the department will abide by the court's ruling.

One of those rulings froze all operating aspects of the fund until the judge hears evidence on its legality.

Now the other revisits the lawsuit and settlement that gave rise to the payout scheme.

This was, you'll recall, the president while in office suing the IRS, which he oversees,

and then settling with lawyers from the Justice Department, which he also oversees.

He sued for $10 billion taxpayer dollars, money he said that would be going to good causes.

I think what we'll do is do something for charity. We can make it a substantial amount. Nobody would care because it's going to go to numerous, very good charities.

Well, it wasn't, and people did care.

Instead, we learned that money from the settlement he negotiated essentially with himself,

of the lawsuit he essentially filed against himself, would be almost $2 billion with absolutely

nothing stopping it from going to violent felons.

And it wasn't just us saying it.

It was the acting attorney general of the U.S.

Will individuals who assaulted Capitol Hill police officers be eligible? us saying it. It was the acting attorney general of the U.S.

Will individuals who assaulted Capitol Hill police officers be eligible for this fund?

Well, as it makes plain, anybody is... Just let me know if they're eligible for the fund.

As was made plain yesterday, anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they were a victim weaponization. Mr. Attorney General, let me ask you this. Are there going to be rules that say that if you've assaulted a Capitol Hill police officer or committed a violent crime, you will not be eligible? Why not make that a rule? I expect that, well, because I'm not one of the commissioners setting up the rules.

I expect that there will be rules set up.

You're appointing four of the five members, aren't you, Mr. Attorney General?

...