Senate Dems demand answers from Blanche ahead of July 15 confirmation hearing

[0:00] All right, let's talk about the broader Todd Blanch stuff, the broader Justice Department. [0:03] Again, that list, Jake, is so, so, so long. [0:07] Democrats obviously want a lot of answers. [0:10] Where do the Republicans stand on this? [0:12] I don't think any Democrat's going to vote for him. [0:14] I mean, he has met with Democrats. [0:16] I think we've reported that. [0:18] I think he gets confirmed, Katie. [0:20] I do. [0:21] I think that, you know, that's just my gut. [0:24] I think John Cornyn and Tom Tillis, while they are on the fence, vote for him. [0:28] I don't, do I know that for sure? [0:31] No, that's the general, you know, that's the conventional wisdom up here. [0:35] Does Susan Collins vote for him on the floor? [0:38] Does Lisa Murkowski? [0:39] I don't know the answer to that. [0:40] But I do think at the end of the day, he can get 50 or 51 votes. [0:45] And I don't think there'll be a tiebreaker needed. [0:49] I don't think anything like that. [0:51] I think that, listen, I think nominees basically say what they need to say to get confirmed. [0:56] Um, he, he said what he said about the, about the slush fund. [1:00] The Senate did not put it into law, did not cancel that thing, um, uh, from being ever, [1:06] you know, being implemented. [1:07] I don't know what he's saying about the, the tax deal, which a lot of people believe is more [1:12] egregious, but I mean, we've seen every, we've seen a million different times, Katie, [1:17] Republicans find their way to supporting his nominations, whether it's Bill Cassidy and [1:23] RFK, uh, at HHS and Bill Cassidy eventually lost because Donald Trump, um, campaigned [1:29] and nominated again and, and, uh, uh, you know, went for somebody else. [1:33] So I, I don't, I don't know for sure, but my gut is he still gets confirmed. [1:36] So I wonder what, what's the reasoning here, especially for folks like Cassidy or Cornyn [1:43] or, um, Tillis, they're all leaving, Scott. [1:46] So is it just that they think maybe the next person that Donald Trump nominates might be [1:53] worse? [1:54] I mean, that's what Bill Barr is arguing. [1:56] And it gotta, you gotta nominate him because he's the only reasonably competent person you [2:00] could put at DOJ. [2:01] What Tom Tillis said over the weekend, Katie, seemed to soften the ground ahead of him becoming [2:07] a yes, totally agree with Jake. [2:09] It seems like things are falling in line here. [2:12] What Tom Tillis said is he is satisfied about Todd Blanche's answers on January 6th, even [2:17] though Todd Blanche has been an apologist for January 6th defendants and championed the pardons. [2:21] He satisfied Tom Tillis on that issue. [2:24] The wedge issue does remain the slush fund. [2:27] Tom Tillis says he still wants better answers on what's been, become of that $1.76 billion [2:33] taxpayer funded handout to convicted crooks. [2:36] And if you look at that list of questions the Senate has for Todd Blanche, that's the [2:41] one that jumps out. [2:42] I mean, it's like a grocery list full of things they want to know about, but the slush fund [2:46] still lands the wrong way. [2:47] And Jake mentioned that overnight vote in the Senate a couple of weeks back where they [2:51] could have blocked the slush fund, but didn't. [2:53] I'm still struck by the contrarian votes on that. [2:56] Republicans in Florida, Ohio, and Alaska came out against the slush fund. [3:02] They're in tough reelections. [3:04] That slush fund is still an albatross. [3:06] He's got to figure that out before he's confirmed. [3:09] So Ken, how much worse could it get if it's not, if it's not Todd Blanche? [3:14] Could it get any worse than it already is? [3:16] I mean, that list is very long. [3:20] It could get worse, Katie. [3:21] And this is the thing. [3:22] Todd, Todd Blanche is a unique figure in American life right now. [3:25] He's, he's an experienced former federal prosecutor. [3:28] He was in the Southern District of New York and he had a good reputation before he joined [3:33] Trump world. [3:34] And even on the eve of his ascension to deputy attorney general under Pam Bondi, a lot of [3:39] people I talked to thought that he was going to be the reasonable voice in the room. [3:42] And on some issues he was, he did try to stop some bad things from happening, but he has [3:47] shown, particularly since he became acting attorney general, that he is willing to do almost [3:52] whatever Donald Trump wants. [3:53] He's willing to violate any DOJ norm and he's willing to go out and, and justify it in interviews [3:59] with reporters. [4:00] He's good on television. [4:01] So that's one thing that argues in his favor. [4:03] And so a lot of people are looking at this and saying, yes, he is going to do these bad [4:08] things that we don't like, but at least he's competent. [4:10] At least he understands how the justice department works. [4:12] And maybe he'll stop some things behind the scenes that could be even worse. [4:16] And if it's not him, it's going to be somebody like an Ed Martin or some other figure who [4:21] has no real experience running anything and who could be not only malevolent, but incompetent [4:28] and really put the country at risk. [4:30] That's the thinking. [4:32] It's amazing that this is where we are, but this is what it's come to, Katie. [4:36] It's hard to put the bar much lower than that. [4:39] It certainly is. [4:40] And that shouldn't be the standard. [4:41] Well, he's horrible, but someone else could be even more horrible. [4:44] And I hope they ask him, they meaning the senators, if he agrees with former Attorney [4:50] General Robert Jackson, that the most dangerous prosecutor is a prosecutor who picks people [4:56] he thinks he should get rather than cases should be prosecuted. [4:59] I think he should, with a straight face, answer that question. [5:03] And if he says, I agree with that, then start listing, you know, James Comey, Letitia [5:08] James, John Brennan, Cassidy Hutchinson. [5:11] And then, you know, that's how you get him to commit. [5:16] You have him answer questions that requires him to say yes or no and admit what he can't [5:22] deny. [5:23] I know senators can't help themselves and they pontificate rather than ask questions, but [5:28] I think it's important. [5:29] This is one of the most important jobs in the federal government. [5:32] There's questions about, like, what federal oversight or what congressional oversight will [5:36] look like if Democrats retake the House or retake the Senate, Jake. [5:40] I mean, I know that they're going to want to start investigating various things within [5:44] this administration. [5:45] They're going to probably want to subpoena Todd Blanch and get all sorts of records, the [5:49] questions that they have not gotten answered from him. [5:53] What happens with those? [5:54] And what do they do if this Justice Department continues to refuse to comply? [6:02] They'll hold them under in contempt, of course, which they've done before and when there's [6:08] divided government. [6:09] And I don't think, obviously, a Trump Justice Department would prosecute its own attorney [6:15] general for being in contempt. [6:17] But I think that's fair to say. [6:18] But listen, congressional oversight, even when it's not complied with, could still be incredibly [6:27] effective. [6:28] You could get whistleblowers. [6:31] We saw that a lot in the first Trump administration. [6:34] You could get people inside government and outside government who have heard things that they [6:39] don't think are right. [6:40] I mean, there's a lot of ways to go, which is why it's so stunning to me, Katie, that the [6:46] president does not appear, in my estimation, to be taking this election more seriously because [6:53] it will mean absolute hell for this administration. [6:57] It will tie them up on Capitol Hill all the time. [7:01] It will require them to have attorneys working all the time to comply with congressional requests [7:10] and demands. [7:11] So I think that's a real threat to this administration. [7:15] Yeah. [7:15] And one of the questions I have is, and I know this is kind of a dirty question here, but [7:21] Donald Trump used to his advantage, Scott, all of the investigations into him during his [7:27] last term and in the intervening time where he wasn't president. [7:30] He used it to paint himself as a victim. [7:33] And he won on the back of it in 2024. [7:37] There is a school of thought that believes that Donald Trump welcomes this because he knows [7:43] or he believes it helps him. [7:45] And there is an open question of whether it actually does help him and whether it is [7:51] a good idea for Democrats to be uber aggressive on the investigations or if they should, I don't [7:59] know, pick one or two or three or four and then focus everything else on cost of living. [8:05] Are those debates being had in Congress right now? [8:08] I think you're seeing it on the campaign trail, Katie. [8:11] If you look at some of the most prominent Democratic challengers trying to swing these [8:15] seats, they lead with an economic message. [8:18] They start with groceries, then get to Trump. [8:20] They start with fertilizer prices, then get to Trump and the vanity projects and the alleged [8:25] fraud that's taking place. [8:27] That's a good barometer, I think, of where they think the electorate is. [8:30] You start with costs. [8:32] The voters are unequivocal on this. [8:35] This is the first, second and third issue on the list. [8:37] But yes, they're going to have to fight these fights, especially these transparency fights [8:41] with these lists of things they think they need, from records on the killing of Renee [8:45] Good to records on the slush fund to records on the pardons. [8:49] They're going to get there. [8:50] But I think they start with prices and move there second.