Controversy Erupts as Trump Suggests "Compensation" for Pardoned Jan. 6 Ri.o.ters

In a moment as revealing as it is jarring, former President Donald Trump, never one to retreat from controversy, has now turned his attention back to the events of January 6, 2021 — this time with an extraordinary proposal: financial compensation for those he pardoned for their roles in the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Appearing in a Tuesday interview on Newsmax with host Greg Kelly, Trump entertained the idea of establishing a compensation fund for the individuals he pardoned earlier this year — a sweeping clemency move that wiped clean the legal slates of nearly 1,500 people involved in the attack.

The former president’s remarks have reignited fierce debate across the political spectrum. At the heart of it is a question that touches on the very soul of American democracy: Should individuals convicted of storming the Capitol, attacking police officers, and attempting to subvert a certified election be financially rewarded?

It began with a question from Kelly: “Is there any talk of — cause they lost opportunity, they lost income — any kind of compensation fund or anything like that?”

Without hesitation, Trump responded: “Well, there’s talk about that. We have a lot of people … a lot of the people that are in government now talk about it because … really like that group of people.”

“They were patriots as far as I was concerned,” he added.

The exchange, captured and circulated widely online, has drawn praise from Trump loyalists and deep concern from many across the political aisle, including moderates and even some conservatives. While Trump didn’t announce a formal plan or funding source, his openness to the idea marks another flashpoint in his ongoing campaign to reframe the events of Jan. 6 — a day that led to multiple deaths, over 100 injuries among law enforcement, and a deep scar on the nation’s civic memory.

Earlier this year, just hours after returning to the White House for a second term, President Trump stunned the country by issuing a blanket pardon to nearly all individuals charged in connection with the Capitol riot — including those convicted of violent acts. In doing so, he fulfilled a controversial campaign promise that had become a rallying cry among his base.

The pardon list included individuals convicted of assaulting police, destroying federal property, obstructing justice, and, in 10 particularly alarming cases, sedition.

“What they’ve done to these people is outrageous,” Trump said at the time, accusing federal prosecutors of political targeting. “They were treated like terrorists. They were not terrorists. They were patriots.”

His use of the presidential pardon — particularly to absolve violent offenders — drew immediate condemnation from Democrats and some legal scholars, who warned it could set a dangerous precedent for the abuse of executive clemency powers.

Senate Democrats quickly passed a non-binding resolution condemning the mass pardons, calling them “an affront to justice” and “a betrayal of the Constitution.”

Polling conducted after the pardons showed a sharp divide: while Trump’s core supporters applauded the move, a majority of Americans opposed it. Among independents, nearly 70% said they believed the pardons undermined the rule of law.

Now, with the embers of that decision still smoldering, Trump’s latest comments suggest he may not be content with merely freeing the Jan. 6 participants from legal consequences — he may also seek to reward them financially.

The idea of a compensation fund, even floated informally, is unprecedented. While presidents have historically used pardons to correct miscarriages of justice or to offer clemency in cases of rehabilitation, never before has a president or former president proposed monetary compensation for individuals involved in an act widely condemned as an assault on democracy.

“This is not just rewriting history. It’s paying people to be a part of it,” said one former federal prosecutor who worked on several Jan. 6 cases.

Critics argue that such a fund would not only legitimize the violence but incentivize future political extremism. They also note that many of the pardoned individuals were not merely passive participants — some played central roles in planning, coordinating, and executing the assault on the Capitol.

But for Trump, the Jan. 6 rioters have long represented more than just a political liability — they are, in his words, “incredible people,” victims of what he sees as an oppressive and corrupt system. His repeated praise of those involved, often painting them as heroes and martyrs, is part of a broader strategy to solidify his base and rewrite the narrative of that fateful day.

“They were treated so unfairly, so horribly,” Trump said again in this week’s interview. “Some of them didn’t even go into the building.”

Statements like these play well in Trump’s media ecosystem, where many continue to believe the election was stolen and that Jan. 6 was, if not justified, then at least understandable.

The suggestion of compensation also fits into Trump’s larger effort to contrast himself with President Joe Biden, who has faced criticism for issuing last-minute pardons of his own — including for family members and members of the House committee that investigated Jan. 6.

Trump, never one to hold back, recently declared Biden’s pardons “VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT” because they were signed using an autopen — a mechanical device used to sign documents in a president’s absence.

Whether or not Trump ever follows through with creating a compensation fund, his words matter. In the post-truth political landscape, suggestions can be as powerful as actions.

His comments fuel ongoing efforts among far-right groups to recast Jan. 6 participants as political prisoners — a label dismissed by courts, law enforcement, and most Americans, but deeply embraced within segments of the MAGA base.

What makes this development especially significant is the timing. With a new presidential election on the horizon, Trump appears committed not just to running — but to rerunning the playbook that got him to the Oval Office the first time.

That includes appealing to grievance, promoting loyalty over law, and leveraging spectacle as strategy.

If Jan. 6 was, for many, a national tragedy, Trump increasingly portrays it as a misunderstood moment of patriotism — one worthy not of shame, but of gratitude.

The implications of that worldview go beyond campaign rhetoric. They challenge foundational ideas about accountability, justice, and the rule of law. And if compensation for rioters ever does come to pass, it will mark a radical shift in how America responds to insurrection — not as something to prevent, but perhaps something to prepare for.