Over the 4th of July, we learned two astounding facts:

• Since the beginning of his term, Trump has made $2.2 billion, over half of which came from his dealings in cryptocurrency

• One of these ventures resulted in the buyers of his $Trump meme coins losing $3.81 billion, while Trump profited to the tune of $636 million.

The facts cry out for federal investigations by the Justice Department (the FBI and the U.S. Attorney Offices), and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

These agencies controlled by Trump will never investigate these crypto rip-offs. However, the 5-year statutes of limitations for these potential frauds do not expire until well over 2 years into the next president's term.

What the press and Congress have ignored is that Trump, in the so-called settlement of his bogus lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury Department, has given himself, his family, and his affiliates full immunity from prosecution for any of these crypto transactions.

The document that grants this immunity is the Second Agreement in the IRS settlement, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and innocuously titled “May 19, 2026,” is attached below:

May 19, 2026 Settlement

40.4KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

The agreement does not limit its grant of criminal and civil immunity to IRS or Treasury matters relating to taxes. Instead, paragraph C(3) extends immunity to “any matters currently pending or [that] could be pending (including tax returns filed before the Effective Date) before Defendants [the IRS and Treasury] or other agencies or departments.” — entities that have no role in tax-return disputes.

The phrase “including tax returns” does not limit the provision to tax returns. It merely confirms that tax returns are included with respect to the IRS and Treasury, while leaving room for other matters within Treasury’s jurisdiction, such as money laundering and then goes on to encompass the rest of the federal government by referencing “other agencies or departments.”

The purpose of this part of the settlement is straightforward: it protects Trump from tax-related and other personal criminal exposure that would not fall within the “official acts” covered by the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Trump v. United States.

In addition to civil and criminal tax liabilities, it shields Trump from other federal agency or department investigations, such as a Securities and Exchange Commission inquiry into potential insider cryptocurrency sales, or Justice Department investigations into self-dealing with foreign countries. These matters also are “personal conduct,” not “official acts,” covered by presidential immunity.

THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION. Pass this post on to your congressmen and women, Senators, and the press.

Someone has to let the public know what Trump has done to insulate himself from any accountability.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

This past week, I reported on the status of the allegations that Jane Doe 4 related to the FBI that Trump had sexually abused her in the 1980’s when she was a teenager.

On June 25, 2026, federal Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued a preliminary injunction in a case brought against Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche by attorney and independent journalist Katie Phang. The purpose of the lawsuit was to force Blanche to release more of the Epstein files.

Judge Sullivan directed Blanche by July 2nd, to, among other things, produce to the public the underlying FBI interview notes that formed the basis for the four FBI interview reports of Jane Doe 4, or to show cause why the notes should not be produced.

Blanche’s July 2nd response to Judge Sullivan’s order is classic stonewalling.

In formal papers filed with the court, Blanche stated:

“The Department has not produced underlying handwritten notes for FD-302 interview reports because, by their nature, the underlying notes are substantially similar to the ultimate reports, and have accordingly been deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews. Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim PII - including because of technical limitations on the Department’s ability to run meaningful quality control checks for victim PII across handwritten materials.”

What a bunch of bull designed to protect Trump.

Blanche claims the notes “by their nature” are “substantially similar to the ultimate reports,” and thus he states they are “deemed duplicative.”

Notice he does not say the reports contain all the same information in the notes. He instead says “by their nature,” they are “substantially similar to the ultimate reports.” There is no indication that Blanche or anyone else compared the notes to the final four FBI reports.

The only reason for Blanche to hold them back is if the FBI agents omitted key information about Trump from their final interview reports. How surprising.

Equally nonsensical is Blanche’s assertion that the “handwritten nature” of the notes “complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of” personal information of Jane Doe 4.

How much effort can it possibly take to remove Jane Doe 4’s name and information that would identify her?

Keep in mind this is the same Todd Blanche who

• represented Trump in his New York State trial in which Trump was convicted of 35 felony fraud counts.

• did not intially produce the four FBI interview reports alleging Tump committed sexual assault, and

• spent two days with Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, taking her statement in such a way as to exonerate Trump and trash the victims.

Let’s hope Judge Sullivan will break though the Epstein coverup?

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Jane Doe 4, over the course of four FBI interviews provided details about being sexually abused in the 1980’s by Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump when she was a teenager. The Guardian reported today that she is “living in fear of retaliation.”

Here is what we know so far:

• The release of the Epstein files relating to Jane Doe 4 contained reports of four FBI interview conducted between approximately July 24, 2019, and October 21, 2019.

• These four interviews present credible allegations against both Trump and Epstein. These reports can be read here.

• The Justice Department initially produced only one of the four interview reports that did not mention Trump by name. After it was revealed a numerical identifier suggested the existence of additional FBI interview reports, the Justice Department released the three remaining reports, which do contain Trump’s name.

• The FBI Agents’ notes of the interviews were not produced.

• The FBI never pursued Jane Doe 4’s allegations against Trump.

• The only difference between Trump’s assault of E. Jean Carroll and his assault of Jane Doe 4 is the independent evidence supporting Carroll at the time of her assault.

• Shortly after Trump assaulted Carroll in the Bergdorf Goodman department store, she confided the facts of the assault to two friends. Both individuals testified at Carroll’s civil trial against Trump for sexual assault and defamation.

• Jane Doe 4 told the FBI she had confided in her mother about the assault shortly after it happened. However, Jane Doe 4’s mother has since died.

• The Post and Courier, a South Carolina newspaper, has confirmed various details of Jane Doe 4’s statement but not the allegations relating to Trump.

New development — On June 25, 2026, federal Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued a preliminary injunction in a case brought against Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche by attorney and independent jounalist Katie Phang.

Judge Sullivan directed the Justice Department by July 2nd, to, among other things, “produce to the public the underlying FBI interview notes that formed the basis for the” four FBI interview reports of Jane Doe 4 or to show cause why the notes should not be produced.”

There is an obvious explanation why Blanche, Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer, has not released the underlying notes of the FBI Agent — they contain more incriminating information on Trump that was not included in the four FBI reports.

Will this sexual assault on a minor from the 1980’s ultimately take down Trump?

What else is hidden in the Epstein files relating to Trump?

What do you think?

Leave a comment

Share Legal Politics by Nick Akerman

Subscribe now

Today, I published an opinion piece on MS NOW, entitled “I was a Watergate prosecutor. Here’s what JD Vance missed.”

I directly address JD Vance’s uninformed statements that “if Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story,” and that “the deep state took down Richard Nixon.”

Like Trump, Vance totally ignores historical facts — the Watergate scandal was an ongoing news cycle that lasted over two years and did not end, even after Nixon left office. Should a similar scandal emerge today, we shouldn’t expect it to play out much differently.

The “deep state” did not take Nixon down. Rather, Nixon was personally responsible for his own downfall and tried to use the “deep state” to further the cover-up of his criminal involvement in the Watergate break-in and other serious crimes.

The full piece can be read here.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Let’s look at Trump at age 46 and Obama at 47.

Trump at 46

Obama at 47

Need I say more?

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

The Iranians have Trump in a political box.

The agreement with Iran is a 60-day ceasefire opening the Strait of Hormuz, during which the United States and Iran will negotiate Iran’s nuclear program, frozen Iranian assets, and the future status of the Strait of Hormuz.

The Iranians have increased their bargaining power by concluding the 60-day ceasefire right when the midterm elections are in full throttle. The Iranians will squeeze Trump for every last advantage. Trump will be desperate not to undermine the American and world economies any further with early voting and election day right around the corner.

This is not exactly the art of the deal. This is what happens when you lose a war.

Share

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Big news last night in Trump’s bogus lawsuit and settlement against the IRS.

Trump filed his response to Judge Kathleen M. Williams directing the “Plaintiffs . . . to file a response . . . on or before June 12, 2026, detailing their positions on”:

“(1) the charges of collusion and whether the parties are truly adverse;

(2) the assertion that the dismissal was premised on deception by the Parties; and

(3) the question of whether the case should be reopened because the court was the ‘victim of a fraud.’”

Trump did not respond to the adversity issue that, as president, he controlled the two defendants, the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

Trump’s papers, without any factual support, claimed that “allegations of collusion rest entirely on inference and speculation.”

However, Trump, who is the person in the best position to know if there was collusion, did not submit an affidavit under oath addressing facts relating to collusion or any of the court’s other questions —no factual explanation as to why the parties were adverse, why the settlement was not publicly announced until after Trump dismissed his lawsuit, or whether the court was a victim of fraud.

Trump ignored the central issue; there was a fraud within a fraud. He did not address whether he used the court system to create a $1.776 billion slush fund to pay taxpayer funds to insurrections and Trump sycophants. He did not address whether he used the lawsuit to provide himself and others with broad civil and criminal immunity from the IRS and “other agencies and departments.”

Instead, Trump just addressed non-issues directed at the 35 judges who moved the court to reopen the case. Trump claimed they had “no standing” in the lawsuit when they were filing as friends of the court, not as parties.

Trump further claimed that he had the right to dismiss the case before the settlement was announced, without acknowledging that the court has the inherent power to investigate whether his lawsuit was a fraud on the court system designed to defraud the government.

Without a sworn factual statement from Trump, the next step is for Judge Williams to hold a hearing on her four questions.

The star witness at the hearing will be Trump.

Here is Trump’s filing in response to Judge Williams’ order:

Trump Response

280KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Subscribe now

Share Legal Politics by Nick Akerman

Leave a comment

Today, I published an opinion piece in the New York Daily News, entitled “No free pass for Trump and his pals.”

My article explains how Trump has pulled a fast one by granting criminal and civil immunity to himself, his sons, Don Jr., Eric, and unnamed extended family members and friends. That immunity is not limited to just the IRS. It extends to crimes under the jurisdiction of all federal “agencies or departments.”

That immunity is provided in the second agreement, which is part of his so-called settlement with the IRS, in response to his $80 billion suit against the IRS for releasing his tax information during his first term.

Trump has not only protected himself and his bevy of ne’er-do-wells from any civil or criminal IRS matters, but he has also negotiated with himself for immunity for his own potential insider stock trading, suspect crypto deals, and his relatives’ use of federal funds and influence to enrich themselves.

This is by far the most egregious self-dealing fraud ever perpetrated by any high-ranking public official. This is a blatant effort by Trump to provide himself with immunity from personal crimes that are not “official acts” covered by the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision.

Here is the link to the full opinion piece, or download a copy below:

No Free Pass For Trump And His Pals

1.45MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Stay tuned.

Share

Leave a comment

MS NOW published my opinion piece today entitled, “Even if Trump kills his $1.8 billion slush fund, his IRS lawsuit headache isn’t over.”

In that article, I discuss how federal Judge Kathleen M. Williams will likely expose and nullify Trump’s fraudulent settlement agreement following the dismissal of his lawsuit against the IRS and the U.S Department of the Treasury.

Despite Trump’s response to pressure from Republican Senators to drop the $1.776 billion slush fund for his January 6th insurrectionists and cronies, Judge Williams will likely continue her investigation into the efficacy of the alleged settlement.

Last week, 35 former federal judges filed a motion urging Judge Williams to reopen Trump’s case against the IRS. The former judges argued that the lawsuit and settlement were a “manipulation of the judicial system” and “a fraud on the court.”

As a result, Judge Williams ordered Trump, the IRS, and the U.S Department of the Treasury to respond to her questions by June 12th.

This inquiry may result in Trump being ordered to testify in Judge Williams’ court. I look forward to seeing Trump on the witness stand, where he may ultimately face potential criminal prosecution.

The full article can be read here.

What do you think?

Leave a comment

Share

Share

Subscribe now

I published an opinion piece in TheHill entitled “A Florida court holds the key to stopping Trump’s slush fund in its tracks.”

Federal district court Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami, who presided over Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, should hold Trump in contempt of court for his corrupt use of the court system to defraud the government of taxpayer funds.

By virtue of his bogus lawsuit, Trump negotiated the settlement with himself, a classic self-dealing fraud, thereby creating the $1.776 billion slush fund and conferring immunity upon himself, his family, and his businesses for civil and criminal tax violations, worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Leave a comment

Share

The Presidential Records Act (“PRA”) requires a president to maintain and preserve all presidential records.

On April 1st, Donald Trump prevailed upon T. Elliot Gaiser, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, to release a written opinion that the PRA “is unconstitutional, and the President need not further comply with its dictates.”

This opinion from one of Trump’s prime sycophants flies in the face of a Supreme Court opinion unanimously upholding the constitutionality of the PRA’s predecessor statute.

On April 6, 2026, the American Historical Association and American Oversight, both non-profit organizations, sued Trump for a declaration “the PDA is constitutional,” that the Justice Department’s “Opinion is contrary to law and cannot be relied upon by” Trump, and that Trump “remain[s] bound by the requirements of the PRA.”

The lawsuit also sued Trump to enjoin him “in his personal capacity after the conclusion of his term in office, from retaining, destroying, disposing, or otherwise handling Presidential records in a manner not in accordance with the PRA, and to turn over all Presidential records in his actual or constructive possession to NARA [National Archives and Records Administration] as required by the PRA.”

On May 20, 2026, United States Judge for the District of Columbia John D. Bates issued an opinion and entered a preliminary injunction against Trump ordering him, among other things, to comply “in full” with the PRA, “[p]reseve and not destroy or delete presidential and vice presidential records,” and to “[e]stablish or reestablish records retention policies to preserve and maintain presidential records in full compliance with the” PRA.

Judge Bates’ preliminary injunction and full opinion are attached below:

Prelim Injunction And Opinion

492KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

The big question is, why did Trump go to the trouble of directing the Justice Department to give a bogus opinion that the PRA is unconstitutional?

Several likely motivations:

First, if it were true that Trump owned his presidential papers, it would give him the basis to argue that his Jack Smith indictment for stealing classified documents from the White House after his first term was invalid.

Second, knowing Trump, he will stop at nothing to erase any documents from the White House that make him look bad.

Third, it is not beyond Trump to sell his presidential papers for a mega profit. Just imagine how much his buddy Vladimir Putin would pay for these records.

What do you think?

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share Legal Politics by Nick Akerman

Yesterday, we learned that Donald Trump ripped off the taxpayers to the tune of precisely $1.776 billion for a slush fund to pay his cronies, sycophants, and January 6th maurauders.

This was all because he, his family members, and his company committed fraud against the taxpayers by suing the IRS for releasing his confidential tax information during his first term as president. Trump’s lawsuit sought at least $10 billion.

This was not a normal lawsuit. Trump is not only the plaintiff, but he also controls the defendant IRS, which reports to him as president. He also controls the Department of Justice, which represents the IRS.

The Department of Justice official representing the IRS in this lawsuit is Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer and his current Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche. As such, Trump entered into the settlement agreement with the government official who reports directly to him.

Today, we learned that Trump’s crime spree was not just limited to the $1.776 billion slush fund. Trump, in conspiracy with Blanche, ended all IRS tax audits into Trump, his family, his extended family, his trusts, and his business.

In a provision to the settlement agreement released today and signed by Blanche, the IRS agreed to the following broadly sweeping provision to forgive Trump, all his relatives, and his company from any taxes owed up until today:

“The United States RELEASES, WAIVES, ACQUITS, and FOREVER DISCHARGES each of the Plaintiffs from, and is hereby FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED from prosecuting or pursuing, any and all claims, counterclaims, causes of action, appeals, or requests for any relief, including injunctive relief, monetary relief, damages, examinations or similar or related reviews, appeals, debt relief, costs, attorney’s fees, expenses, and/or interest, whether presently known or unknown, that-as of the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement—have been or could have been asserted by Defendants against any of the Plaintiffs or related or affiliated individuals (including, without limitation, family or others filing jointly), or parties including trusts, parent, sister, or related companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries, by reason of, with respect to, in connection with, or which ariseout of (1) any matters that were raised or could have been raised in the Case or the Pending Agency Claims; (2) Lawfare and/or Weaponization; or (3) any matters currently pending or that could be pending (including tax returns filed before the Effective Date) before Defendants or other agencies or departments.”

Translated from legalese, this provision means that up until today, Trump, his family, and his company owe no federal taxes to the IRS — the taxpayers be damned to the tune of billions of dollars.

Share

Leave a comment

This morning, Trump’s lawyers filed a notice of dismissal with the federal court in his 10 billion dollar lawsuit against the IRS, voluntarily dismissing the action with prejudice.”

The notice does not say the parties settled. Still, it does say a “voluntary dismissal under [the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] is available as of right, and requires neither leave of Court nor the consent of any party.” This is normally what happens when parties settle. The notice does not provide the amount of the settlement.

Nor has anyone in the government provided that settlement amount. The obvious conclusion is that the settlement is a totally outrageous sum.

Here is the full filing:

Court Filing

156KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

In other words, Trump appears to have done just what I predicted — settle the lawsuit with his cronies at the Department of Justice for an astronomical sum to avoid the federal district court from dismissing the case.

As I explained, this was not a legitimate lawsuit because there is a total lack of adversity between Trump and the two federal agencies controlled by Trump — the IRS and the DOJ (representing the IRS).

Trump pulled off this heist by filing the dismissal himself, without naming one of his sycophants at the Department of Justice, such as Acting AG Todd Blanche, as the culprit.

This whole episode reeks of shamefulness and criminality. The federal district court should use its contempt power to fine Trump $10 billion for misusing the court system.

Subscribe now

Share Legal Politics by Nick Akerman

Leave a comment

This week, I described Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS for at least $10 billion for leaking Trump’s tax information during his first term. My concern now is that Trump will use this lawsuit to extract an enormous settlement from the Government before the federal district court has the opportunity to determine whether the case is even valid.

On April 24, 2026, the court directed the parties to provide memoranda of law to the court addressing the issue of “whether a case or controversy“ exists in light of Trump's position as “the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction.”

The court issued its order in response to Trump’s motion for “an extension for a period of ninety (90) days in all proceedings in this matter.” The justification for the extension is to allow the parties to “engage in discussions designed to resolve the matter.”

In a normal case, if the parties settle before court papers and other deadlines are due, the settlement terminates the case. That result would be a total outrage here.

The reality is that Trump is misusing the federal judicial system to justify a settlement of a bogus claim in which he controls both the entity he is suing, the IRS, and the entity representing the IRS in the lawsuit, the Department of Justice. It should also be noted that it was the IRS that reported to Trump during his first term that allegedly leaked the tax information at issue in his lawsuit.

The court will almost certainly find the lawsuit is invalid because the parties are not adverse to each other. However, the court does have inherent jurisdiction over Trump through its contempt power for misusing the federal court as a fraudulent mechanism to fleece the American taxpayers.

If Trump settles the case with a massive theft of taxpayer funds before the court rules on the validity of his lawsuit, the court should fine him at least $10 billion for bringing this fraudulent lawsuit and involving the court system in his fraud.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Former Assistant Attorney General and Trump Co-Conspirator Jeffrey Clark

The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) is taking the position that its lawyers who committ unethical and illegal acts are entitled to presidential immunity.

On May 13, 2026, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against the District of Columbia Disciplinary authorities, the DC Court of Appeals, and the District of Columbia to halt disciplinary proceedings against Jeffrey Clark. The lawsuit also references the current disciplinary proceedings against the ethically challenged Edward R.Martin.

However, the lawsuit is specifically focused on Clark. He is Trump’s former Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division. Clark was named as

“co-conspirator 4” in the January 6th indictment against Trump. The indictment alleged that Clark “attempted to use the Justice Department to open sham election crime investigations and influence state legislatures with knowingly false claims of election fraud.”

It is a given that lawyers in their capacity as lawyers are not supposed to lie. As such, the District of Columbia Disciplinary Board has recommended that Clark be disbarred.

These allegations surrounding Clark were specifically addressed in the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision, holding that Trump is immune from these allegations because they are within the president’s “exclusive authority over the investigative and prosecutorial functions” of the DOJ:

“The indictment’s allegations that the requested investigations were shams or proposed for an improper purpose do not divest the President of exclusive authority over the investigative and prosecutorial functions of the Justice Department and its officials. Because the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority, Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”

As such, the DOJ complaint alleges that Clark, like Trump, should be entitled to immunity from his illegal and unethical acts because he was acting at Trump's behest. According to the DOJ complaint, “[t]he President’s constitutionally required immunity would provide little protection if Executive Branch attorneys could be targeted for internal Executive Branch deliberations.”

In other words, DOJ is taking the position that all DOJ lawyers who engage in illegal and unethical acts at the behest of the president, like Clark, automatically have presidential immunity for their crimes. This lawsuit overlooks the fact that even if a president is immune from certain criminal activity, that does not mean lawyers who assist in the commission of the president’s crimes are free to lie and commit crimes with no accountability to disciplinary committees of their respective bars.

The DOJ’s efforts to insulate its lawyers from unethical and illegal conduct began this past March when it filed a notice in the Federal Register that would allow DOJ to ask state bar disciplinary authorities to “suspend any parallel investigation [by DOJ] until the completion of the department’s review.” As I explained in my Substack piece at the time, the obvious goal of that proposed rule was to preempt the role of the state bar disciplinary committees and insulate DOJ lawyers from continuing to perform Trump’s illegal and unethical bidding.

DOJ, under the leadership of Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer, Acting AG Todd Blanche, has taken this crusade to insulate its lawyers from their ethical and legal obligations to a whole new disgraceful level.

Again, the shameless Acting Attorney General Blanche is the primary DOJ lawyer submitting this complaint.

Leave a comment

Share

Trump has picked the ideal candidate to pull off this theft of taxpayers’ funds — Todd Blanche, now the Acting Attorney General. As Deputy Attorney General, he became the Acting AG after Trump fired AG Pam Bondi.

Before being appointed to the number 2 position of Deputy AG in the Justice Department, Blanche was Trump’s criminal defense lawyer. Blanche was famously in charge of Trump’s defense that resulted in a jury convicting Trump of 34 felonies.

Since arriving at the Justice Department, Blanche has exhibited a shameless pattern of deceit designed to protect Trump, without regard to legal ethics or the law.

About a week after he signed federal court papers referring to Jefferey Epstein as “the most infamous pedophile in American history,” he coached Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s convicted partner in crime, to testify in a formal statement that she did not participate in Epstein’s illegal activities with underage girls. Indeed, he let her testify that the girls were not underage and engaged only in consensual sex with Epstein.

After getting Maxwell to say she never observed Trump do anything wrong with Epstein, Blanche used his DOJ position to award Maxwell a prison upgrade to a cushy, low-security prison with special treatment.

Most recently, Blanche orchestrated the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey for threatening the life of the President, premised on seashells that spelled out 86 47.

While 47 could refer to Trump as the 47th president, 86 means nothing more than that an item has been removed from a restaurant’s menu. This non-case can only be explained as Blanche shamelessly pursuing Trump’s retribution as an audition for Trump to appoint him as Attorney General.

It now appears that Blanche is about to prostrate himself before Trump with the most shameless act of them all — lining Trump’s pockets by settling the lawsuit Trump, his family, and business filed against the IRS for at least $10 billion over the leak of their tax returns during Trump’s first term.

With $10 billion on the table, the sky is the limit. Not only does Blanche have the authority to shower Trump and his family with the mega-bucks they seek in their lawsuit against the IRS, but he also has the option of the I.R.S. dropping any ongoing or future tax audits of Trump, his family members, or businesses. That alone could amount to billions in value without publicly having to assign a specific number to this mammoth rip-off settlement.

What makes any such settlement even more corrupt is that the judge, who is presiding over the case, has questioned whether this lawsuit is at all legitimate because of the conflicts of interest inherent in the case between Trump as president and the Department of Justice that is defending the case, which in turn is answerable to the president.

The most shameless act Blanche can now undertake is to head off the judge with a settlement before she has the opportunity to rule on whether the case is a legitimate use of the legal system in the first instance. If she finds it is not, she would likely dismiss the case. If so, there will be no case to settle.

Indeed, the New York Times reported this week that “The Justice Department is holding internal discussions about settling President Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service in the coming days.” Blanche, of course, is now in charge of the Justice Department.

Donald Trump, Todd Blanche — Have you no shame?

Share

Leave a comment