"I'm guessing I'll be in line," former FBI Director James Comey quipped after Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced a "settlement agreement" between President Donald Trump and the IRS that included $1.8 billion in taxpayer money for targets of "lawfare and weaponization." Comey's joke encompasses two reasons why the Senate should not confirm Blanche as attorney general: a flagrantly unconstitutional prosecution and a brazenly corrupt arrangement that delivered huge favors to Trump, his family, and his followers at taxpayers' expense.
Blanche's participation in both of those scams demonstrated his eagerness to please his boss, which explains why Trump nominated him to replace Pam Bondi. But that same tendency should alarm anyone who thinks the attorney general should pursue justice rather than the president's personal agenda.
In a scathing ruling on Monday, a federal judge described Trump's lawsuit against the IRS as a pretext for "a 'settlement' that had no viable basis in law or fact." Kathleen Williams, who oversaw the case in the Southern District of Florida, concluded that it never involved a genuine controversy between adverse parties, since both sides were controlled by the president.
Trump's lawsuit, which was joined by two of his sons and the Trump Organization, preposterously alleged that an IRS contractor's illegal disclosure of their tax returns had caused "at least" $10 billion in damages. In addition to offering an improbable estimate of the injury he had suffered, Trump filed the lawsuit more than two years after learning about the leak, exceeding the time limit set by the statute he invoked.
That law covers unauthorized disclosures by "any officer or employee of the United States." So even if Trump had filed his lawsuit on time, he would have faced the challenge of arguing that a contractor employed by a consulting business fit into that category—a point that the Justice Department has disputed in other cases involving similar claims.
Blanche's participation in both of those scams demonstrated his eagerness to please his boss, which explains why Trump nominated him to replace Pam Bondi. But that same tendency should alarm anyone who thinks the attorney general should pursue justice rather than the president's personal agenda.
In a scathing ruling on Monday, a federal judge described Trump's lawsuit against the IRS as a pretext for "a 'settlement' that had no viable basis in law or fact." Kathleen Williams, who oversaw the case in the Southern District of Florida, concluded that it never involved a genuine controversy between adverse parties, since both sides were controlled by the president.
Trump's lawsuit, which was joined by two of his sons and the Trump Organization, preposterously alleged that an IRS contractor's illegal disclosure of their tax returns had caused "at least" $10 billion in damages. In addition to offering an improbable estimate of the injury he had suffered, Trump filed the lawsuit more than two years after learning about the leak, exceeding the time limit set by the statute he invoked.
That law covers unauthorized disclosures by "any officer or employee of the United States." So even if Trump had filed his lawsuit on time, he would have faced the challenge of arguing that a contractor employed by a consulting business fit into that category—a point that the Justice Department has disputed in other cases involving similar claims.
17 days ago
