this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2026
82 points (97.7% liked)

politics

30625 readers
2202 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump said Thursday he may pull acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination for the full-time post to avoid conceding to Senate Republicans’ demands over a sweeping tax audit immunity deal benefiting the president and members of his family.

After failed negotiations forced the delay of a committee vote to advance Blanche’s nomination, Trump suggested he was holding firm against pressure from Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Thom Tillis. They have expressed concerns about the controversial settlement of Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, which a judge denounced as an exercise in self-dealing.

The senators said the Justice Department seemed interested in reaching an agreement with them, but the White House wouldn’t budge to aid the confirmation of Trump’s loyal former personal attorney, who has aggressively pursued the administration’s priorities as acting attorney general. Instead, Trump said in a social media post that he might pull Blanche’s nomination and resubmit it after Cornyn and Tillis leave office next year.

top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eurodyne@piefed.world 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Trump‘s brain is so broken that he thinks that admitting he lost is a negotiating tactic, lol, as if “floating“ the idea is some sort of threat

He believes that because he’s withdrawing the nomination rather than failing to pass a Senate confirmation vote, he is somehow still winning because he lost on his own terms. This is the purest form of narcissism.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I view it a bit differently than "he doesn't want to lose".

The Senators asked Blanche directly to limit the scope of the audit settlement specifically to the parties in the original suit (Trump and his family), and to already filed returns, not new ones. Blanche verbally agreed, but the Senators want it in writing.

That is what Trump is arguing about - he wants the freedom to commit tax fraud with impunity in the future. It's important enough to him that he wants to gamble on Republicans retaining the Senate after the election to preserve it.

This kind of gambit has worked for Republicans in the past. It's how they stacked the SCOTUS, after all. McConnell pulled that off because he was politically shrewd, and knew it was a good gamble to take. But let's face it, McConnell is probably never coming back to the Senate, and Trump has managed to bankrupt several casinos, so I doubt he is a good gambler.

[–] eurodyne@piefed.world 11 points 2 days ago

Exactly… And this is part of my bigger point: Trump thinks that he’s somehow gonna wait out the midterm elections and come out on the winning side by re-introducing Blanche’s nomination afterward, but it’s likely he’ll have even a worse chance of getting him confirmed then.

[–] PurpleHawkeye619@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

Hopefully Blanche enjoys the view from under the bus.

Typical result for Trump toady...get fucked over

[–] KnitWit@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

So, he’ll pull the nomination, but Blanche will still remain as acting AG anyways. Fantastic system we’ve set up here.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago
[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Aren't those "concessions" court ordered at this point? Why would they go away if he pulls the nomination?

[–] santa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Exactly. The law isn’t based on a person; new nominee would likely have to meet same demands.

Despite recalling three words, T is not bright.