Quick Takes (v74): What I'd Ask Todd Blanche

Todd Blanche, a key FOTUS personal attorney (FPA) and current acting Attorney General of the US, is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee today as it considers his nomination to lose the 'acting' tag and assume the AG role for real.

I expect he'll get many questions about the Epstein files; that's fine. After all, his predecessor (and fellow FPA) Pam Bondi said all things Epstein were in his portfolio.  And, as we all know, the one thing our highly partisan DC politicians can agree on is that all publicity is good, and asking Epstein questions will guarantee them the attention they crave.

Me? With very few exceptions, I'm much less interested in questions about Epstein (I'll tell you why in another post) than I am in hearing him differentiate his work as an FPA from his work in the DOJ. Here's what I'm interested in as far as Epstein goes:

• The Federal Bureau of Prisons maintains strict rules that generally disqualify sex offenders from serving time in white-collar-crime type 'prison camps. Do you agree with those rules, yes or no?

• You interviewed Ghislaine Maxwell, who had been sentenced to 20 years in prison, for nine hours. Shortly after, she was transferred to a prison camp in Texas, putting her closer to family members. Her transfer appears to go against the rules.

Yes or no, did you promise her a transfer in return for her testimony?

Yes or no, did you ask that she be transferred or considered for transfer?

Yes or no, did you approve her transfer?  If you didn't approve her transfer, who did?

• How many other convicted sex offenders has the DOJ transferred to be closer to their family members?  Were you involved in any of those decisions?

• Yes or no, did you make any promises to Maxwell for her testimony?

• Yes or no, did you have any discussions with the FOTUS in advance of your interview with her? If yes, what was the nature of those discussions?

• Yes or no, have you been involved in any discussions regarding a potential pardon for Maxwell? 

Other questions I'd love to have answered, regarding the FOTUS lawsuit against the IRS:

• Generally speaking, in your current role as Acting AG, who is your client, the United States or the president?

• Do you believe there is enough separation between the president as an individual and the president as head of the Executive Branch - and your boss - that a lawsuit such as his against the IRS can meet the requirement that the plaintiff and defendant must be truly different parties?

Based on your answer to the 'who is your client' question, do you believe it was appropriate to be personally involved in settling the president's IRS lawsuit, yes or no?

Why did you not wait until the Courts determined the legitimacy of the lawsuit before proposing the settlement you did? 

Did you believe, or do you believe, that the fund you proposed to award taxpayer money to people not involved in the settled lawsuit was in the best interests of the United States?

Did you believe, or do you believe, that barring the IRS from completing any open audits, or opening any new audits on taxes filed before May 2026, was in the best interests of the United States?

Would you have approved either settlement provision with any other taxpayers?

• When the president's taxes were leaked by an IRS employee, how many other individual or corporate taxpayers also had their information released - was it hundreds of people? Thousands of people? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands?

Not counting corporate taxpayers, how many of those whose taxes were released, including the president, sued the IRS for the unauthorized disclosure?

How many of those who sued were successful?

And how much money, on average, did each receive as a result?

How many of those suits were you personally involved in?

• Yes or no, are you aware of The Judgment Fund, established by Congress in 1956, to pay people who have successfully sued the government and been awarded a monetary judgment? 

Since that Fund already exists, and doesn't place any cap on payments, why was it necessary to create a special fund as part of the deal with the president?

You have said that the DOJ will not be moving ahead with the so-called 'Anti-Weaponization Fund,' but you've refused to put that in writing. Why is that?

Yes or no, is it your intention to use The Judgment Fund to handle payments to the alleged 'weaponization' victims?   

 If that is the intention, yes or no, will you require that the alleged victims follow the process and obtain a court judgment before releasing any funds?

I would not waste more than a few seconds thanking him for appearing before the Committee before diving into this list, and I'd likely have to reclaim the couple of minutes of my time he would have wasted in his efforts not to answer me. 

And then, hopefully I'd be turning it over to a colleague who'd ask different questions, so the American people can see and hear for themselves how awful a choice he is for this position.

What would you want to ask him? Drop a comment! 

Breaking Fake News Update (v20)

Fake News Broke on September 19, 2025!

It seems we're going to be in for a continuing bumpy ride with the Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting in the coming weeks or months. Well, truth be told, it's already a bumpy ride there, as the FOTUS told us the numbers we'd received this week were bad and he fired a BLS official, or the fault of the Federal Reserve, and that we have to wait a year for the good numbers. And now, we have new concerns that have led to today's fake news update.

Since the shocking murder of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk - just the latest episode of political violence in the US - there's been a concerted effort on the part of the FOTUS and his administration (JD Vance, Stephen Miller, Marco Rubio, Pam Bondi, and others), Republican elected officials, talking heads (including Miller's wife), and just regular Joes to root out so-called 'haters' of Kirk and 'celebrators' of his murder, and get them fired for comments they made primarily, but not exclusively, on their personal social media pages. 

Between the folks doing the doxxing and those getting doxxed, there's lots of lost productivity, fewer people in the workforce, and a potential for the unemployment rate to increase.

Educators, reporters, editors, analysts, moms and dads, government employees, employees of private companies, comedians, medical professionals - pretty much across the board, folks are being doxxed and blasted for ALLEGEDLY making negative comments. Some clearly did, according to reports. But others? Not so much. People are being investigated, disciplined, or fired simply for quoting Charlie Kirk's own words. A favorite? His comment about some gun deaths being OK to protect the Second Amendment.

And it goes further than that - tourists may be refused entry to the US; a Congressman has suggested anyone who speaks ill of Kirk's death be banned from all social media platforms, and that media companies can be shut down if they don't comply. 

It's out of control, folks, it truly is. Again, there's no question some people have reacted with joy at Kirk's death, as is their right. Many others, though, have merely expressed an opinion that's not to the liking of the powers-that-be. I have no idea when this will stop; it likely won't until everyone in the universe who is not celebrating the life of Charlie Kirk or mourning his death in a manner deemed appropriate by folks who haven't issued any guidelines on what exactly we're allowed to think or say about this issue.  

Honestly? it's a #goodthingimretiredtheycantgetmefired

Who knows how many will lose their jobs, and who knows what kind of celebration will be hosted at the White House when the scope of this effort is realized? I suspect we won't know that until next year, when the "good numbers" are issued.

In the meantime, when fake news breaks, we'll have it here. 

Highlights from the RNC: Day Two

Yep - I'm back, with a few brief  but carefully curated highlights (and commentary) from Day Two of the Republican Convention, starting with Kentucky's junior senator, Rand Paul.

Donald Trump and I met many years ago, before he was running for anything. When I first met him, I recall being struck by how down to earth he was. He seemed like just a normal guy. Okay, a normal guy with his own plane and helicopter, but who’s counting?  A few years later, we were opponents, both running for President. We all know how that turned out. ("The truth telling is bluster, the truth-telling is non-sequitur, self-aggrandizement, but is there really anything substantive coming out of saying that people are fat, people are stupid?"  "The question for conservatives is whether Donald Trump is a real conservative or not. I think he's a fake conservative." "While some people are excited by fat jokes and stupid jokes, there are a lot of people in the general election— independents as well as women voters — are not that entertained by this.What we'll end up with is a reality-TV star as a nominee if we're not careful." "If no one stands up to a bully, a bully will just keep doing what they're doing."  I do believe, Senator Paul, with your help, that's exactly what happened.)

Pam Bondi, Registered Foreign Lobbyist

As a career prosecutor and former Attorney General of Florida, I fought corruption, and I know what it looks like, whether it’s done by people wearing pinstripe suits or orange jumpsuits.  (But not orange hair? Remember when Bondi refused to investigate Trump University for fraud, when other state AGs were doing exactly that, after she received that $25,000 campaign contribution from Trump? Oh, wait - the contribution didn't come from Trump, it came from his charitable foundation - you know, making it illegal, leading to a fine? Yeah, that foundation, which he basically shut down after agreeing not to take any more contributions. And let's not forget the value of having a registered foreign lobbyist - a swamp-dwelling career, if there ever was one - speaking on behalf of the American president.)

Tiffany Trump.

As a recent graduate, I can relate to so many of you who might be looking for a job.(is she looking for a job, or is being a Trump enough of a career?)  People must recognize that our thoughts, our opinions, and even the choice of who we are voting for may, and are being manipulated and visibly coerced by the media and tech giants. If you tune into the media, you get one biased opinion or another, and what you share, if it does not fit into the narrative that they seek to promote, then it is either ignored or deemed a lie, regardless of the truth. This manipulation of what information we receive impedes our freedoms, rather than allowing Americans the right to form our own beliefs, this misinformation system keeps people mentally enslaved to the ideas they deem correct. (And yet, somehow, the freedom-impeded, manipulated-information recipient knew about #blackouttuesday and#justiceforgeorgefloyd, hashtags that were not likely to be used by any other Trump family members.) Oh - a few more things: my father my father my father my dad my father my father. 

Eric Trump. 

My father my father my father my father my father my father my father my father my father my father my father my father Dad I love you.

Mike Pompeo.

I’m speaking to you from beautiful Jerusalem, looking out over the old city. I have a big job. (“Senate-confirmed Presidential appointees may not even attend a political party convention or convention-related event.” “In my case, as a Senate confirmed Department official, I will be sitting on the sidelines of the political process this year, and will not be attending any political events, to include the national conventions.” “Presidential and political appointees ... are subject to significant restrictions on their political activity; they may not engage in any partisan political activity in concert with a partisan campaign, political party, or partisan political group, even on personal time and outside of the federal workplace.“ The secretary of State’s appearance at the Republican convention also comes as he faces an ongoing inspector general’s investigation into whether he and his wife, Susan, have improperly used State Department resources for personal purposes. Pompeo’s successful move to engineer the firing of State Department Inspector General Steve Linick amid this still-ongoing probe has led to more scrutiny about his role as secretary from Democratic lawmakers.)

Melania Trump. 

Like all of you, I have reflected on the racial unrest in our country. It is a harsh reality that we are not proud of parts of our history. I encourage people to focus on our future while still learning from our past. We must remember that today, we are all one community comprised of many races, religions and ethnicities. Our diverse and storied history is what makes our country strong, and yet we still have so much to learn from one another. (Now, if she can convince her husband about our diversity being a strength...)

Night three highlights coming your way tomorrow.