President Donald Trump reportedly appears to be demanding the U.S. Department of Justice pay him $230 million in compensation after multiple investigations during his presidential campaign.

“The situation has no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must now review his claims,” The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported.

Noting that President Trump has installed his former personal lawyers at the top of the DOJ, the Times called it “the starkest example yet of potential ethical conflicts.”

Trump, according to the Times, in 2023, submitted a claim that “seeks damages for a number of purported violations of his rights, including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering and possible connections to the 2016 Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Another complaint, filed the following year, “accuses the F.B.I. of violating Mr. Trump’s privacy by searching Mar-a-Lago, his club and residence in Florida, in 2022 for classified documents.”

Bennett L. Gershman, an ethics professor at Pace University, told the Times it was “a travesty.”

“The ethical conflict is just so basic and fundamental, you don’t need a law professor to explain it,” Gershmann said. “And then to have people in the Justice Department decide whether his claim should be successful or not, and these are the people who serve him deciding whether he wins or loses. It’s bizarre and almost too outlandish to believe.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Does religion drive Americans to support or oppose economic inequality? That’s a question explored by a Ph.D. candidate at The Ohio State University who recently examined ten years of a megachurch’s sermons in a published paper: “‘I Thank God We’re Rich’: Justifying Economic Inequality in an Evangelical Congregation.”

“To investigate how evangelical leaders confront the conflict between inequality and egalitarian passages of the Bible, I conducted a sermon analysis study of New River, a Midwestern suburban megachurch,” wrote Dawson P. R. Vosburg.

“New River’s approach to inequality was one of clear justification of the status quo, centered on the justification of wealth accumulation and the minimization of inequality’s moral importance,” Vosburg added.

The church’s pastors, he found, “justified economic inequality in several ways: proclaiming that God did not condemn ownership of vast wealth; minimizing domestic inequality in comparison to global inequality; selectively spiritualizing economic passages of the Bible; and saying that God owns everything and thus the status quo distribution is justified.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist examined the paper. He writes that Vosburg found sermons “that discussed anything financial—by searching for terms like ‘rich,’ ‘tithe,’ ‘debt,’ ‘billionaire,’ etc.—and analyzed the results to see how this typical white evangelical megachurch minimized the wealth gap.” He also noted that Vosburg anonymized the name of the church.

Mehta looked at the four ways New River downplayed wealth inequality:

“They condemned ‘rich shaming’ anyone”
The pastor, Mehta found, “delivered an anecdote about a rich couple that left another church and came to his because they felt personally attacked when their previous pastor condemned wealth from the pulpit. (At their new home, of course, their tithes would go into New River’s coffers.)”

“They downplayed U.S. inequality by focusing on global inequality”
Essentially, pastors told congregants that compared to the world’s poor, they were doing quite well.

“They re-interpreted Bible verses about poverty—even the direct ones”
When it comes to preaching about the poor, Mehta wrote, the pastor was “not talking about financially poor people, he’s talking about spiritually impoverished people.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Vosburg told Mehta that pastors stressed tithing “over 150 times across 16 separate sermons.”

“They said God owns everything, anyway”
Ultimately, Mehta explained, the pastor’s point was to not be mad “at people with private jets and yachts and multiple summer homes.”

“The takeaway from all this,” Mehta wrote, “is that conservative policies that benefit the ultra-wealthy at the expense of everyone else in society are going to be supported by congregations like this one that are being brainwashed into thinking God loves the rich and the poor deserve their lot in life.”

Mehta also blasted the New River pastor.

“Pastors like this one hollow out Christ’s teachings until all that’s left is a gilded throne for the wealthy. In their hands, Scripture is a weapon to shame the poor, a shield to protect billionaires, and a drug to keep their congregations quiet while the cancer of inequality grows around them.”

READ MORE: ‘Existential Threat’: U.S. on Path to Authoritarianism Warn Ex-Intelligence Officials

Image by Mor via Flickr and a Creative Commons License

U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), a staunch ally of President Donald Trump, sought to downplay the impact that losing Affordable Care Act subsidies would have on millions of Americans, calling it not a “gut-wrenching” problem.

Health care premiums for about 20 million Americans are expected to more than double next year, according to the Harvard Kennedy School‘s Mark Shepard. The Urban Institute says about five million could lose coverage.

“I don’t think this is gonna be any kind of gut wrenching problem if these enhanced subsidies just go away,” Senator Johnson told CNBC on Tuesday. “We’ll probably have to weather the lies told by the Democrats. But again, we’re happy to work with Democrats and fix the broken Obamacare system.”

READ MORE: ‘Not Right in the Head’: Notorious Far Right Leader Fuentes Goes Off on ‘Weird’ Trump

“Millions of people are gonna die,” CNBC’s Joe Kernen replied. “They said millions of people will die if these subsidies aren’t renewed — the enhanced subsidies.”

“Democrats say all kinds of things that aren’t true,” Johnson charged. “I mean, I got that, and it does scare people because a lot of people in the legacy media carry their water, amplify their falsehoods. I got that.”

“That scares a lot of Republicans as well,” Johnson continued. “Doesn’t scare me. I’m just looking at the reality of the situation. We need to describe the reality.”

Polls show that 78 percent of Americans — including majorities across all political parties — want the subsidies renewed, according to KFF.

READ MORE: ‘Existential Threat’: U.S. on Path to Authoritarianism Warn Ex-Intelligence Officials

The 78% “is more than three times the share of the public (22%) who say Congress should let the credits expire,” KFF reported earlier this month. “Notably, majorities across political [parties] want Congress to extend the tax credits including nine in ten (92%) Democrats, eight in ten (82%) independents, and six in ten (59%) Republicans. A majority of Republicans who align with the MAGA movement (57%) also say Congress should extend these subsidies.”

Three-quarters of Americans (76%) would blame President Donald Trump or Republicans if the subsidies are not renewed,” KFF reported. Just 22% would blame Democrats.

Ron Johnson: “I don’t think this is going to be any kind of gut-wrenching problem if these enhanced subsidies just go away. We’ll probably have the weather the lies told by the Democrats. Democrats say all sorts of things that are untrue.” pic.twitter.com/yOoJqD23R4

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 21, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Image via Shutterstock