This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

One of the massive chores facing President Donald Trump when he took office was to remove bias from the federal government, and its contractors.

The Democrats under Joe Biden openly had weaponized government, filing charges against Trump and his associates for matters that now have been dropped into the dustbin.

The anti-Trump ideology, often called Trump Derangement Syndrome, was rampant, extending even to Congress which orchestrated evidence and testimony to try to make it look like he was responsible for the Jan. 6, 2021, events at the U.S. Capitol.

Now those members of Congress who pursued that agenda are subject to investigation, as are Department of Justice officials responsible for the weaponization.

And Trump also has targeted those private law firms that appeared to have been part of that weaponization. He's ordered that federal contracts cannot be handed to those organizations that have been part of that weaponization.

Now, however, he is withdrawing his March 14 executive order concerning the bias at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a major Washington law influence, after officials there agreed to de-bias their operations.

The president wrote, on social media, that the law firm agreed to the following:

1. Paul, Weiss agrees that the bedrock principle of American Justice is that it must be fair and nonpartisan for all. Our Justice System is betrayed when it is misused to achieve political ends.
Lawyers and law firms play a vital role in ensuring that we live up to that standard as a Nation. Law firms should not favor any political party when it comes to choosing their clients. Firms also should not make decisions on whom to hire based on a person's political affiliation. To do otherwise is to deny some Americans an equal opportunity for our services while favoring others.
Lawyers abandon the profession's highest ideals when they engage in partisan decision-making, and betray the ethical obligation to represent those who are unpopular or disfavored in a particular environment.
2. Paul, Weiss affirms its unwavering commitment to these core ideals and principles, and will not deny representation to clients, including in pro bono matters and in support of non-profits, because of the personal political views of individual lawyers.
3. Paul, Weiss will take on a wide range of pro bono matters that represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints of our society, whether "conservative" or "liberal."
4. Paul, Weiss affirms its commitment to merit-based hiring, promotion, and retention, and will not adopt, use, or pursue any DEI policies. As part of its commitment, it will engage experts, to be mutually agreed upon within 14 days, to conduct a comprehensive audit of all of its employment practices.
5. Paul, Weiss will dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in pro bono legal services over the course of President Trump's term to support the Administration's initiatives, including: assisting our Nation's veterans, fairness in the Justice System, the President's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, and other mutually agreed projects.

The White House explained, "The president is agreeing to this action in light of a meeting with Paul, Weiss Chairman, Brad Karp, during which Mr. Karp acknowledged the wrongdoing of former Paul, Weiss partner, Mark Pomerantz, the grave dangers of Weaponization, and the vital need to restore our System of Justice."

Pomerantz was a key player in the weaponization of the courts against Trump.

He, in fact, left his position with the prominent legal team to step down to a line-level job in the Manhattan district attorney's office to "investigate" Trump's finances.

He was part of the groundwork of a lawfare attack on Trump, even though he later left his position and in his resignation letter, complained loudly that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg had not yet pursued an indictment of Trump.

Pomerantz claimed there was evidence against Trump.

He then wrote a book in which he likened Trump to a career criminal, drawing a threat of a defamation case.

Legal professionals determined Pomerantz violated professional standards by releasing a book about an ongoing case.

Despite the legal firm's admission that Pomerantz had done wrong, he still claimed he did not.

Bragg eventually brought a case against Trump, on strange charges. He obtained convictions from a leftist Manhattan jury on business records misdemeanors for which the statute of limitations had expired. He claimed, against Trump, those violations were felonies. The conviction is on appeal.