On Wednesday night, the Senate Judiciary Committee delayed a vote on Todd Blanche's nomination as attorney general after two Republican members raised concerns about President Donald Trump's flagrantly corrupt "settlement" of his bogus lawsuit against the IRS. Blanche, currently the acting attorney general, signed off on that cozy arrangement, which included $1.8 billion in taxpayer money for the president's supporters and a sweeping promise of immunity from liability for tax violations and any other federal offenses that Trump or his family may have committed.

By itself, Blanche's central role in that jaw-dropping scam would be enough reason to reject his nomination, since it shows he is so eager to please Trump that he is willing to abandon legal ethics, shirk his official duties, and make a joke of the civil justice system while pretending all of this is business as usual at the Justice Department. But Sens. John Cornyn (R–Texas) and Thom Tillis (R–N.C.), whose objections derailed the committee vote, seem willing to forgive those egregious lapses, provided Blanche agrees to constrain the huge favors he approved for his boss.

The "settlement agreement" that Blanche announced on May 18 included an "Anti-Weaponization Fund" that was designed to reward Trump's friends and followers by offering compensation to people who claim they suffered from politically motivated abuses of power during the Biden administration. That provision provoked a bipartisan backlash so intense that Blanche abandoned the scheme two weeks after announcing it. Cornyn and Tillis want Blanche's written assurance that the fund will not be revived, which he so far has refused to provide.

The Anti-Weaponization Fund "is not popular," Tillis noted on Thursday. "The president's not winning on this issue. It is killing some of our candidates because they can't explain it. And now it looks like they weren't being honest when they said it was inoperative."

Cornyn and Tillis are also troubled by the immunity deal that Blanche revealed on May 19, which he presented as an addendum to the "settlement agreement." As Cornyn noted during Blanche's July 15 confirmation hearing, that promise of protection is breathtakingly broad. It says "the United States" is "FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED" from pursuing "any and all claims" against Trump or his relatives regarding "any matters currently pending or that could be pending" before the IRS, the Treasury Department, or "other agencies or departments."

By itself, the waiver of potential IRS claims could save Trump more than $100 million in back taxes, interest, and penalties. Cornyn wants Blanche to limit the scope of that unprecedented immunity promise by clarifying who is covered by it and specifying that it does not apply to future conduct.

Blanche's order protects "the Plaintiffs," meaning Trump, two of his sons, and the Trump Organization. But it also applies to "related or affiliated individuals" and "parties." Those categories, it says, include "families or others filing jointly," plus "trusts, parent, sister, or related companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries." It is not clear what "related or affiliated" means or whether the list of examples is exhaustive.

As for the time period covered by Blanche's order, it refers to IRS claims that "have been or could have been asserted" as of May 19. But the broader language about "any matters currently pending or that could be pending," which purports to bind every federal agency, is more ambiguous.

Cornyn "said he had received no written assurances from Mr. Blanche that the audit shield would not apply to future tax liabilities or be extended to a wider circle of people," The New York Times reports. He "repeatedly expressed astonishment on Wednesday that the administration did not simply comply with what he regarded as a narrow request to place limits on a deal."

Tillis seemed more optimistic that Blanche will eventually agree to satisfactory revisions. "We're trying to work just to get the language," he told reporters. "I really do believe it's just a drafting exercise. I don't believe that we're apart in terms of the objective."

Tillis is not seeking reelection this year, and Cornyn lost the Republican primary after Trump endorsed his opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. In a Truth Social post on Thursday, Trump attributed their resistance to the fact that they did not get his endorsement. "If they do not do the right thing," he said, "I have no objection to temporarily withdrawing Todd's name" and "putting him back after Cornyn and Tillis are out of office."

Trump seems to think the senators' concerns are totally unreasonable. But by limiting their demands to language tweaks, Cornyn and Tillis glide over the flagrant fraud that Blanche has perpetrated by presenting the favors for Trump and his family as part of a "typical" settlement. In reality, no plaintiff has ever received benefits like these after suing the IRS.

Trump's lawsuit preposterously alleged that an IRS contractor's illegal disclosure of the plaintiffs' tax returns had caused "at least" $10 billion in damages. It was legally doomed right out of the gate because Trump missed the statutory deadline for filing such claims. And even if he had filed the lawsuit on time, he would have had to argue that an IRS contractor qualifies as an "officer or employee of the United States"—a point that the Justice Department has disputed in other cases involving similar claims.

Despite all that, the lawyers charged with representing the IRS never bothered to put up a fight. That is not surprising, since they serve at Trump's pleasure. And in case there was any chance that they would nevertheless do their jobs, Trump foreclosed that possibility by decreeing that they were not allowed to take legal positions at odds with his.

In a scathing ruling two days before the Senate Judiciary Committee began weighing Blanche's nomination, the federal judge who oversaw Trump's case against the IRS concluded that the lawsuit was phony from the beginning. The plaintiffs and the defendants "worked in tandem and were never actually adverse," U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams wrote, saying the lawsuit was nothing more than a pretext for "a 'settlement' that had no viable basis in law or fact."

As Williams noted, Blanche's conduct made it clear that he was simultaneously acting as the head of the Justice Department and as Trump's personal lawyer. He unilaterally ditched the Anti-Weaponization Fund without bothering to obtain the plaintiffs' written consent to that dramatic revision of the "settlement agreement." He granted broad immunity to Trump and his family with an order signed only by him, even though that provision supposedly was part of the settlement.

Williams also noted that Blanche's order "directly contravenes" federal law. Under 26 USC 7217, it is "unlawful" for an executive-branch official to "request, directly or indirectly, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to conduct or terminate an audit or other investigation of any particular taxpayer with respect to the tax liability of such taxpayer."

By haggling over the details of this arrangement, which Trump has accurately described as "a settlement with myself," Cornyn and Tillis give a pass to Blanche's blatantly unethical and illegal conduct. If they ultimately vote to approve his nomination, the result will be analogous to letting a bank robber off the hook if he agrees to give back some of the money he stole.

The post Todd Blanche's Nomination Is in Trouble. It Should Have Been Doomed From the Beginning. appeared first on Reason.com.