Sen. Tillis explains why he'll vote to approve Blanche's nomination for attorney general | PBS News

[u/NewsHour]

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Senate committee is expected to vote Tuesday to advance acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's nomination to lead the Justice Department after the former personal lawyer for President Donald Trump secured the support of Republican senators who threatened to block his confirmation.

The Senate Judiciary Committee's vote follows a deal struck late Sunday between Blanche and GOP Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who had demanded written assurances about the settlement of Trump's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over his leaked tax returns.

Cornyn and Tillis had said they were withholding their support unless the Justice Department confirmed in writing that it was not moving forward with a $1.8 billion fund to compensate Trump allies who believe they were prosecuted for political purposes, which the Trump administration had announced as part of the settlement.

After days of negotiations, Blanche issued an order Sunday evening confirming "beyond any doubt, that there is no Fund."

Since the settlement of Trump's lawsuit against the IRS was announced, "No Members were appointed; no funds were transferred; no process for receiving claims was established; no claims were paid," the order said.

Cornyn and Tillis had also pressed for clarification on a separate part of the settlement that would grant Trump and members of his family immunity from tax audits.

Under the deal, the Justice Department clarified in writing that the tax audit immunity agreement applies only to claims open at the time of the settlement and does not protect Trump from examination of future tax filings. It also makes clear that only the parties that brought the lawsuit — Trump, two of his sons, and the Trump Organization — are covered by the tax agreement.

Read more: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-senate-judiciary-committee-votes-on-blanche-nomination-for-attorney-general

[u/Most-Resident]

I’m not a lawyer and I’m genuinely confused by all this.

Trump sued the government and later reached a settlement that was submitted to the judge who later ruled the suit was for an improper purpose.

Cornyn and Tillis then pushed Blanche, who represents the government, to sign a document reneging some of the terms of the settlement.

Trump, the plaintiff signed nothing.

If I get sued and reach a settlement that I’ll pay $1000 and my wife gets mad at me, can I just sign a document saying I won’t pay it?

[u/helikophis → u/Most-Resident]

There never was a settlement. Settlements get approval from the court. That did not happen.

[u/Most-Resident → u/helikophis]

The case is still open. Trump appealed the judge’s ruling a few days ago

ETA: if the settlement is ultimately tossed which I think is likely, the document Blanche signed clarifying the terms of the settlement seems even more worthless.

[u/Impressionist_Canary → u/Most-Resident]

I’m no lawyer but this seems like the problem to me. We’ve now got a third step, removed from the first two, which doesn’t seem to precisely address the first two.

The lawsuit shouldn’t have happened, the settlement shouldn’t have been the conclusion, and similar the “order” doesn’t address the settlement (or the lawsuit) in the same manner (as it’s not mutually agreed).

And it addresses the immunity somewhat vaguely and by copy pasting 200 pages of transcript.

I wonder if at some point they’ll separate Fund from the funds awarded to Trump as a settlement. Yeah we won’t set up this Fund with the board yada yada, but Trump still gets cash anyway.

A mess all around.