Senate Judiciary sets potential Blanche AG nomination vote, as standoff between Trump and GOP holdouts continues
Healfromzero.com – The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a meeting Tuesday for a possible vote on Todd Blanche’s nomination to become attorney general. The initial vote earlier this week was called off after two key Republican senators voiced concerns over the nomination. A committee spokesperson said in a statement late Friday, “Chairman Grassley wants Todd Blanche’s nomination to be successful.
Noticing the markup gives more time for the White House to secure the votes for the President’s nominee. Grassley would like to see Blanche confirmed before the August recess as he has an excellent record restoring law and order and keeping Americans safe.” The statement suggests a deal has not yet been reached — after Trump earlier Friday further complicated negotiations by saying that a controversial fund behind the holdup is “dead” but that “I wish it weren’t.” White House and Justice Department officials have been working to unstick Blanche’s nomination for attorney general. Sens.
John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina have indicated they’ll withhold their needed votes to confirm Blanche until they get written assurances that the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund won’t be resurrected, along with certain commitments about tax investigations. Trump defended the fund at length during a Cabinet meeting Friday, echoing comments posted on Truth Social earlier that day in which he called for Blanche to “be immediately approved” as his permanent pick for the role. Just a day earlier, the president had said he wouldn’t object to “temporarily withdrawing” Blanche’s nomination until Tillis and Cornyn leave Congress early next year.
Tillis responded on X Friday morning that Trump’s comments were reaffirming why he and Cornyn needed the assurances in writing. “The President made it clear today that the so-called Anti Weaponization Fund is still alive, which is exactly why we are attempting to formally end it,” Tillis wrote. Blanche has already said the controversial fund is “dead” and the Justice Department told courts the program was abandoned, but officials have previously declined to put the commitment in writing.
The fund, originally established by a settlement agreement between the Internal Revenue Service and Trump’s personal lawyers, would have offered taxpayer money to those who claimed they were victims of weaponization by the federal government — including those involved with the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot. Cornyn has been adamant that he also wants Blanche to clarify an addendum to that agreement that offers the president and members of his family tax immunity. The senator wants Blanche to explicitly acknowledge that it only applies to past tax investigations against the president and those listed in the lawsuit that was settled.
The demands have left Blanche in a difficult place since putting limits on the tax addendum could anger the president. At the Cabinet meeting, Trump repeated his claims that Cornyn is “very angry” that he snubbed him in the Texas primary and endorsed his challenger, Ken Paxton — an assertion the GOP senator has denied. “I don’t blame him, to be honest with you,” Trump said.
“The man that lost, the man that I didn’t endorse, has become very angry, and that’s okay. But I understand that. I probably would do the same thing.” In both the Truth Social post and the meeting, the president again insisted that the fund would not have benefitted him personally.
Rather, he said it was intended for those “whose lives were unfairly and illegally destroyed” by the Biden administration. “I felt that they should be given compensation for what has been done to them,” Trump said. While he stopped short of calling for a renewal of the fund, Trump in the post defended its imposition and claimed that Cornyn “never had a problem” with it.
The Texas Republican has said he’s not looking for another attorney general nominee but wants the assurances in writing that he asked for. “I think the DOJ needs a Senate-confirmed attorney general, and Todd Blanche is probably about as good as we’re going to get, and so I just think they need to do what Todd Blanche swore that this deal meant. They need to put that in writing so it’s enforceable.
And so far, they have been unwilling to do that,” Cornyn said on Thursday. As Trump was muddying the issue from the White House, his private attorneys were escalating the legal battle over the controversial IRS settlement in question, with court filings that doubled down on the tax immunity deal that is now imperiling Blanche’s nomination. Trump is appealing an order from a judge earlier this month.
US District Judge Kathleen Williams’ July 13 opinion said Trump had sought to “manipulate the judicial process” with the case, and her ruling aimed to block any attempt by Trump to use the settlement as a defense if the federal government brought claims against him, his family or his business in the future. In a new filing Friday, Trump’s lawyers wrote that her opinion violated the First Amendment and that it “unconstitutionally disables the Parties from asserting legal rights in future proceedings.” Trump’s lawyers — who are also contesting sanctions against them — are asking Williams to pause her ruling while their appeal of it plays out at the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals. This story and headline have been updated with additional developments.
CLARIFICATION: This story has been updated to reflect the Senate Judiciary Committee will meet on Tuesday for a potential vote on Todd Blanche’s attorney general nomination. CNN’s Tierney Sneed contributed to this report.
Related Reading
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Senate Judiciary sets potential Blanche AG nomination?
Senate Judiciary sets potential Blanche AG nomination is the main topic of this guide. The article explains the context, practical details, and next steps readers should understand.
Why does Senate Judiciary sets potential Blanche AG nomination matter?
Senate Judiciary sets potential Blanche AG nomination matters because readers are looking for a useful answer, not just a short summary. Good content should match search intent and help them decide what to do next.