Along with a Senate confirmation hearing, it’s customary for nominees to submit written answers to questions asked of them by the senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee considering their nomination. They’re called “Questions for the Record” (QFRs), and they allow senators the opportunity to ask questions they can’t get to in their allotted time. They can be used to at least attempt to put a nominee on the record on specific issues.
In February of 2025, Todd Blanche submitted QFRs following his confirmation hearing to be the Deputy Attorney General. They ran to 76 pages of questions and answers. The name “Epstein” does not appear in the document. Blanche was confirmed on March 5, 2025.
Fast forward to the QFRs he submitted last Friday, two days after his confirmation hearing for the position of Attorney General. The document is 404 pages long. The word Epstein appears in it 216 times, surfacing in the very first question.
Blanche’s answers to some of the difficult questions posed to him are about what you would expect, vowing DOJ will uphold the rule of law while kowtowing to Trump. They exemplify what happens when DOJ leadership commits its allegiance to the president, not the Constitution.
If Republicans on the committee had any spine, they would vote down the nomination.
Blanche flunked even the most basic test of fitness to serve as attorney general. When I wrote to you about his confirmation hearing, I noted that he was not asked who won the 2020 election. But in the QFRs, Senator Richard Blumenthal asked Blanche, “Who won the 2024 election?” Blanche responded, “On January 6, 2025, Congress certified that Donald Trump won the majority of electoral votes.” It is, of course, the dogma demanded of those who would serve Trump, and Blanche delivered it.
Asked about his May 17, 2026, statement on Fox News that there is a “ton of evidence” the 2020 election was rigged against Trump, Blanche affirmed that he still believed that was true and that his “proof,” despite more than sixty court cases to the contrary, is “several outstanding investigations” that he cannot discuss because it would be “inappropriate” for him to “comment on outstanding investigations.”
Jeffrey Epstein
When it came to the Epstein Files, Senator Dick Durbin asked why DOJ missed the deadline for releasing the files. He got a non-answer. He also asked who gave agents reviewing the files the order to flag any documents with Trump’s name in them. Blanche denied that ever happened. “Reviewers,” Blanche wrote, “were instructed to not redact the names of politically exposed persons ‘on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity’”—that’s what the language in the Epstein Files Transparency Act required. But in July 2025, news reports emerged that an FBI whistleblower had revealed agents were working in shifts to flag every document where Trump’s name was mentioned. That was around the time reports surfaced that “Trump wrote a letter to Epstein in 2003, accompanied by a drawing of a naked woman, that was included in a leather-bound birthday album gifted to Epstein for his 50th birthday,” which the president denied.
Blanche returned to non-answers when asked about Ghislaine Maxwell’s transfer to a low-security federal prison camp after her interview with Blanche.
Question: Did you or anyone from your office approve Ghislaine Maxwell’s transfer to FPC Bryan or otherwise approve her transfer to a facility other than FCI Tallahassee?
Answer: The Office of Deputy Attorney General oversees the day-to-day operations of the Department, including all components and agencies. This includes oversight of the Bureau of Prisons. Ms. Maxwell was transferred after the DOJ and BOP learned about threats made against her at FCI Tallahassee.
In a courtroom, a prosecutor, like Blanche, might ask the Judge to strike that answer as non-responsive and direct the witness to answer the question. Here, the only possible response is for senators, fed up with repeated instances like this of evasion, to vote against confirmation. Blanche said he was not involved in any conversations “with BOP” (the Bureau of Prisons) about Maxwell’s transfer and that he learned about it “through public reporting.”
The Slush Fund
Senator Durbin asked Blanche, “Will you officially rescind your May 18 memorandum instructing the Treasury Department to direct a payment of $1.776 billion into an account for the Anti-Weaponization fund?” Blanche again dodged the question and didn’t give a direct answer, resorting to the passive voice and saying, “the Fund is dead,” echoing his verbal responses in the hearing.
Durbin questioned Blanche about a private meeting they had: “In our meeting this week, you said, ‘I made a mistake’ by creating this slush fund … Do you stand by this characterization of this slush fund?” Blanche’s response: “I contest the accuracy of this statement,” calling Senator Durbin a liar. And there was yet another dodge when Blanche was asked, “Whose idea was it to create the slush fund?” Blanche wrote in response: “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on internal deliberations that may or may not have occurred in conjunction with any official act by the Department of Justice.”
In response to questions posed by Senator Alex Padilla, Blanche declined to answer questions about the number of claims filed by former January 6 defendants under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the number of those claims filed by individuals who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers, and the number of claims that have been settled so far.
Senator Thom Tillis also asked about the slush fund. But again, Blanche refused to provide information, noting it would be “inappropriate” to discuss “internal deliberations” that “may or may not” have taken place. Even when it came to a question about how DOJ came up with the $1.776 billion figure for the fund—clearly a 1776 reference akin to ones made by election deniers—Blanche stuck to his guns.
Tillis had said Blanche had to answer questions about the fund if he wanted his vote. But these dodges hardly pass muster, even if they purport to be answers.
Senator Durbin also asked Blanche about the settlement agreement, the document that Blanche signed on behalf of the Justice Department. “Do you believe it was appropriate for you to sign a document that attempted to grant criminal immunity to your former client and his family?” the senator asked. Blanche’s nonresponse: “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on internal deliberations that may or may not have occurred in conjunction with any official act by the Department of Justice. The document speaks for itself and does not extend to potential criminal charges.” The document itself suggests otherwise, as we noted at the time.
Blanche adopted the same line when asked why he didn’t recuse in a matter involving his former criminal defense client. “Inappropriate for me to comment.” It’s hard to see how Senator Tillis could be satisfied by these “answers.”
Succumbing to the Demands of the Unitary Executive President
Senator Chris Coons asked if Blanche stands by a comment he made on Steven Bannon’s podcast in April 2026, that DOJ, like every other executive branch agency, is under the control of the president.
The senator asked, “In a February 2025 memo to all Department of Justice employees, former Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that Department attorneys who refuse to advance arguments ‘deprive[] the President of the benefit of his lawyers.’ I want you to focus on the part of this statement that references Department attorneys as President Trump’s lawyers. Do you agree with this characterization of Department attorneys by former Attorney General Bondi?”
Blanche responded, “Article II of the Constitution gives the President the Executive power, making him the head of the Executive branch. The Department of Justice is part of the Executive branch.” Blanche also maintained his oath was to the Constitution, but when a president can direct prosecutions based on personal animus, not the evidence, and the man who wants to be attorney general has carried them out, it’s hard to support a claim of loyalty to the law and not to the man in office.
“Does the President,” Senator Coons asked, “under the terms of his oath, the Constitution, and applicable law, have the authority to order the FBI to initiate an investigation into a specific individual?” Blanche’s response made clear that the president runs the show. “Article II of the Constitution gives the President the Executive power, making him the head of the Executive branch. The Department of Justice, including the FBI, is part of the Executive branch. All decisions regarding investigations are made consistent with long-standing Department of Justice policy.”
No Other Nominee
Presidents have seen their attorney general nominations rejected for far less. Bill Clinton wanted to nominate federal judge Kimba Wood as AG, but she withdrew after it came to light that she had implied a woman without legal immigration status as a nanny, despite the fact that it was legal to do so at the time and she paid taxes on her employee’s wages.
Even when he could just as easily respond on an even keel, Blanche took advantage of opportunities to pander to Trump. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse asked, “Yes or no: Are you confident Director Patel has not had any ‘episodes of excessive drinking and unexplained absences’ during his tenure as FBI Director?”
Here’s the response: “I am not going to certify, on a yes-or-no basis, matters that are the subject of liberal media reporting.” A simple “yes” would have worked. But when you’re only playing to one person, you have to keep doing it over and over to make sure you stay in their good graces. And that’s the whole point here: no attorney general should be in that position.
The big question, of course, is whether there will be a Republican vote against Blanche, which would force the question of advancing his nomination for a floor vote into the discharge process. Speculation has centered on Senators Thom Tillis and John Cornyn, neither of whom will be returning to the Senate next term. Interestingly, Senator Cornyn does not appear to have submitted any written questions to Blanche. It’s unclear what that signals.
A number of senators submitted written questions to Blanche about Senator Cornyn’s verbal questions during the hearing itself, even though Cornyn asked no follow ups.
The committee vote is scheduled for July 30, although there has been some talk that Republicans want to move it up. Ben Franklin cautioned, “A Republic if you can keep it.” One hopes those words are echoing in the ears of senators faced with a vote on Blanche’s nomination.
Thanks for being here with me at Civil Discourse. Your support and paid subscriptions make the newsletter possible, and I’m grateful that you’re a part of this.
We’re in this together,
Joyce
