Skip to playerSkip to main content
During Todd Blanche's confirmation hearing, Sen. Mazie Hirono questioned him about the Justice Department's cooperation with New Mexico's investigation into alleged crimes at Jeffrey Epstein's Zorro Ranch. Blanche confirmed that his team would continue cooperating with state investigators. Hirono also pressed Blanche over a previous statement about President Donald Trump's authority over the Justice Department, asking whether a president has the right to order investigations of perceived political enemies. Blanche declined to answer with a simple yes or no, saying his earlier remarks referred to the president's constitutional authority under Article II, not the targeting of political opponents.

#MazieHirono #ToddBlanche #JeffreyEpstein #ZorroRanch #DOJ #DonaldTrump #ConfirmationHearing #USPolitics #Senate #JusticeDepartment #BreakingNews #RuleOfLaw #Congress #News #Politics

~HT.318~PR.498~GR.538~ED.103~VG.HM~

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00At an April 8th press conference, a reporter asked you a question about President Trump's desire
00:06to see his perceived political enemies prosecuted. You answered, quote, that is his right and indeed
00:15it is his duty to do that. The DOJ has sued 30 states seeking their voter lists. 14 of those
00:26lawsuits have been resolved by federal judges. Mr. Blanche, did any of those 14 federal court
00:33judges from across the country agree with DOJ's legal position? Again, yes or no? With some of the
00:43legal positions, yes. Welcome, Mr. Blanche. To ensure the fitness to serve of all nominees who come
00:51before any of my committees, I asked the following two initial questions. Since you became a legal
00:57adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or
01:04physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? No, Senator. Have you ever faced discipline
01:10or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct? No, Senator. Mr. Blanche, over
01:17the course of the past five months, the New Mexico Department of Justice has talked to your staff
01:25about getting access to information for its investigation into alleged crime at Jeffrey Epstein's
01:33Zorro Ranch. Will you and your team continue to cooperate with the New Mexico Department of Justice
01:41Justice and help it get the information it needs? Yes, we're continuing to work with them, and yes.
01:49Thank you. Mr. Blanche, at an April 8th press conference, a reporter asked you a question about
01:55President Trump's desire to see his perceived political enemies prosecuted. You answered, quote,
02:03that is his right and indeed it is his duty to do that. To clarify, Mr. Blanche, do you believe
02:12it is
02:13the president's right and duty to order the investigation or prosecution of his perceived
02:19enemies? Yes or no? I can't answer that yes or no. That wasn't the question, and my answer was that
02:25as
02:25the president of the United States under Article 2, he's in charge of the Department of Justice,
02:31and so my answer reflects that idea, not that he has a right to go after his political enemies.
02:36Reclaiming my time, I think that what the president meant was pretty clear, and I just wanted to know
02:41whether you thought that that is indeed his right and duty to prosecute his perceived enemies, so let
02:51me get to that. Investigations of the president's perceived enemies aren't theoretical. They are happening.
02:59For example, last August, President Trump posted on social media that George Soros should be charged
03:07with RICO. Weeks later, one of your deputies directed several U.S. attorneys' offices to investigate
03:15Soros' charitable foundations for violating the RICO statute. Mr. Blanche, to confirm,
03:25were the U.S. attorneys' offices asked to launch these investigations because of the president's post?
03:33Yes or no? I'm not even confirming that they were asked to do that, but most certainly not because of
03:39any truth from President Trump. Well, the president definitely, excuse me, the president definitely
03:42posted that he should be, Mr. Soros should be charged with RICO, and lo and behold, several weeks later,
03:49that is exactly what your office sought to have done. Since last year, DOJ has sued 30 states seeking
03:59their voter lists. 14 of those lawsuits have been resolved by federal judges. Mr. Blanche, did any of
04:09those 14 federal court judges from across the country agree with DOJ's legal position? Again, yes or no?
04:19With some of the legal positions, yes. Pardon? The answer to the question is yes. Some of the judges
04:27agreed with some of our legal positions, and most of those cases are under appeal? Actually,
04:36that's not correct. The answer is actually no. These 14 federal judges, some of them were Trump appointees,
04:42disagreed with DOJ's position in terms of getting access to these voter rolls. It's all part of DOJ's
04:50attempt and with the president's attempt at election interference.
04:57We know that federal judges are a problem for you, certainly a problem for President Trump, because
05:04they actually care about facts and evidence. And that's why last fall, at a Federalist Society event,
05:12you called for young lawyers, at that event, to join you in fighting a war. And you said,
05:18we need you, because it's a war, and it's something we will not win unless we keep on fighting.
05:24The war that you were talking about was against federal judges who were ruling against the
05:32administration, correct? No.
05:37Well, then do you believe that judges should be impeached based on their rulings against this
05:47administration and the president? Yes or no? No. No, I don't believe that.
05:55On that, you disagree with the president, because he believes judges should be impeached for
05:59disagreeing with them. President Trump sees DOJ not only as a tool to attack his enemies,
06:08but also useful for helping his friends. To that end, on May 18th, you signed an attorney general order
06:15establishing funding and setting out requirements for the so-called anti-weaponization fund.
06:24Correct? You signed such an order? Yes, I did sign that document. Yes.
06:29Have you rescinded that order? Yes. The order is no longer in effect. There is no weaponization fund. Correct.
06:35That is not my question. My question is, did you rescind that order? Yes. I'm doing it under oath right
06:39now. It does not exist.
06:41You know, when you answer that there is no fund, that is not rescinding the order, because you can resurrect
06:47that order at any time. So actually, your answer is no, you have not rescinded that order.
06:52Mr. Blanche, one of your first acts as a deputy attorney general was to issue a memo eviscerating DOJ's enforcement
07:01work against crypto criminals.
07:04Crypto crime surged in 2025. Mr. Blanche, are you aware that Americans reported over $11 billion in crypto fraud losses
07:16to the FBI last year?
07:19Mr. Blanche, crypto enforcement is way up compared to a year and a half ago. So I didn't eviscerate anything.
07:24To the contrary, actually, we empowered AUSAs around the country to go after criminals in the right circumstances.
07:32Mr. Blanche.
07:32And we continue to do it.
07:36I take it you are not aware that there were reports of over $11 billion in crypto fraud reported to
07:43the FBI. That was my question. Are you aware or are you not aware?
07:48Are you talking about the fraud that we have prosecuted?
07:51No, I'm talking about the $11 billion worth of crypto crime. This is a pretty good, simple question.
07:57I just don't understand. Are you or are you not aware? But it doesn't seem you're aware because you're making
08:02all kinds of excuses. The fact is that we, crypto enforcement, you eviscerated that work that your department is supposed
08:13to be doing.
08:13And so anyway, Mr. Blanche, when you issued your memo ending crypto crime enforcement, you held significant amounts of cryptocurrency
08:22yourself. And I sent you several letters asking you about it. And I am still awaiting your answer.
08:32Mr. Blanche, Mr. Blanche, it is clear to me that your leadership is going to be a continuation of what
08:39we have seen so far at the Trump Department of Justice, or more likely to be called the Department of
08:45Retribution and Corruption.
08:47You see nothing wrong with the president treating DOJ as his own personal law firm to use as a weapon
08:54against his perceived enemies and as a way of helping his friends and as a tool to interfere with the
09:01upcoming elections.
09:03The states run elections in this country, but you want to insert DOJ at every step of the process, suing
09:11the states with frivolous claims and sending threatening letters to secretaries of state.
09:17You want to suppress the votes of American citizens who will have a chance to resoundingly reject the president's corruption
09:25at the ballot box this November.
09:28You signed a memo eviscerating DOJ's cryptocurrency enforcement work leading to a surge in Americans being victimized by cryptocurrency fraud.
09:39You also championed a slush fund for the president's allies who attacked police officers on January 6th.
09:46From the beginning we all knew that that's what this fund was for, but now we have findings of fact
09:52from a federal judge concluding that the fund came out of a fake lawsuit filed solely to lend an air
10:02of legitimacy to the president's attempt to compensate his insurrectionist allies.
10:08You played a key role in attempting to perpetuate this fraud on American taxpayers, and you oversaw the botched release
10:18of the Epstein files denying justice once again to survivors who have been waiting so long for it.
10:26You have no business being the attorney general of the United States of America.
10:30I certainly urge my colleagues to vote against your confirmation.
10:36Subscribe to One India and never miss an update.
10:40Download the One India app now.
10:43For more details to visit one Southeast Asia State University.
10:45Thank you again for joining us in!
Comments

Recommended