LIVE German 2025 Election Results

Washington — Todd Blanche’s confirmation as attorney general is on hold as Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas leverages his vote in exchange for an agreement in writing to formally kill the Justice Department’s “anti-weaponization fund.” 

The Senate Judiciary Committee was set to vote Thursday on advancing Blanche’s nomination, but Cornyn, a pivotal vote on the panel, told reporters, “I’m not prepared to vote yes” without an agreement. 

Late Wednesday, the committee announced it had delayed a Thursday morning hearing to consider Blanche’s nomination. A committee spokesperson said the hearing was “postponed as work continues to secure sufficient support in committee to favorably report Attorney General-nominee Todd Blanche, who is highly qualified for the job.”

Opposition from Cornyn could sink the nomination of Blanche, who currently serves as acting attorney general.

GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, another member of the committee, said he shared Cornyn’s concerns, but appeared more hopeful about a resolution. The two met with Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, hours before Thursday’s vote was canceled. 

Cornyn has also demanded modifications to restrict the scope of the Justice Department agreement with President Trump that granted tax audit immunity to the president and his family for prior tax returns. 

The audit protection and the nearly $1.8 billion fund to pay people who claim they were politically persecuted were part of a settlement to resolve Mr. Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury Department. 

“All I want them to do is to confirm what he said in his sworn testimony before the Judiciary Committee, with regard not only to the weaponization fund, but also who is protected from future audits and what agencies of the federal government are bound by the release,” Cornyn said Wednesday afternoon. “It’s pretty simple, and we’ve actually sent them a redline strikeout.” 

Earlier in the day, Cornyn said he hadn’t seen “a single piece of writing that is responsive to what I’ve requested.”

A Justice Department official said the department provided a “written proposal” to Cornyn’s staff Tuesday. 

“We look forward to further discussion around any outstanding concerns,” the official said. 

But Cornyn said the Justice Department’s proposal was “not responsive” to some of his concerns. 

The Justice Department transmitted a new response to Cornyn and Tillis that “addresses their concerns,” a source familiar with the matter said later Wednesday.  

The “anti-weaponization” fund was met with fierce resistance from members on both sides of the aisle after its unveiling in May, leading the Justice Department to back away from it. 

At his confirmation hearing earlier this month, Blanche reiterated that the fund was “dead.” Cornyn noted that the settlement states that any changes to it must be agreed upon in writing by all parties involved. 

“Has there been a written agreement of the parties to modify the settlement fund?” he asked.

“No, the settlement fund is just not moving forward,” Blanche responded. “There’s no modification. It never started. No money went from the Treasury to any other account.”

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump suggested Cornyn’s opposition stemmed from his endorsement of his primary opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Paxton defeated Cornyn in the May primary. 

“Maybe John Cornyn is upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Mr. Trump said. 

In response to Mr. Trump, Cornyn said: “That’s a convenient excuse, and it happens to be untrue.” 

Former FBI Director James Comey filed new motions late Tuesday in his effort to toss out federal charges accusing him of threatening President Trump’s by posting a photo of seashells arranged to form the numbers “86 47,” casting the indictment as the latest salvo in a yearslong effort to punish him for criticizing the president — and accusing the government of misconduct.

The filing — accompanied by a 76-page-long spreadsheet listing out all of the insults Mr. Trump and Comey have hurled at each other over the last nine years — argues the indictment should be dismissed on the grounds of vindictive and selective prosecution. Comey’s lawyers also asked the court to suppress evidence from warrants for Comey’s accounts, and to force the government to disclose the grand jury proceedings that led to his indictment.

“Here, the government has singled out Mr. Comey for prosecution because President Trump harbors animus toward Mr. Comey and his protected speech, and it has done so in direct response to the President’s urgings and Mr. Comey’s successful motion to dismiss a prior indictment,” the former FBI chief’s attorneys argued. 

The Justice Department has denied that Comey is being singled out due to his political views.

In the motion to dismiss, Comey also accused the U.S. Secret Service of conducting “illegal electronic surveillance of Mr. Comey at the request of a high-level DOJ official” without a warrant shortly after Comey’s spring 2025 Instagram post. 

Filings submitted by his lawyers show discussions between Secret Service staff about “pinging” Comey’s phone to track its location, which some personnel viewed skeptically, and a request for Verizon to provide location information due to an “emergency” situation. At the time, Comey was set to travel from North Carolina to his Virginia home.

“At that time we did not believe that anyone’s life was in immediate danger and legally it was a bad idea to ping the phone,” an unnamed Secret Service official said in one message.

Those details on the surveillance — along with other allegations about the government’s scramble to investigate Comey — are from an affidavit filed by Comey’s attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, who cited “substantial discovery provided by the Government.”

Comey’s legal team is also asking for a Franks hearing, a court proceeding where the judge overseeing his case would determine if the government misled or lied to the magistrate judge who approved search warrants. In this case, the warrants are related to digital accounts belonging to the former FBI director and his wife.

The affidavits at the center of those search warrants, Comey’s legal team said, “omitted facts known to the affiant,” and “misled the magistrates with material falsehoods, bizarrely insinuating that Mr. Comey’s lawyer (a former U.S. Attorney) and Mr. Comey’s wife had obstructed the government’s investigation.” 

Comey’s lawyers wrote that the warrant applications cited a person who knew and spoke to Comey’s wife. In interviews with federal law enforcement, Tuesday’s court filings said, that witness “admitted that they had been estranged from Mr. Comey and had not spoken to him for at least two years,” and “made clear their intense bias” against Comey.

Again citing the evidence reviewed by Fitzgerald, Comey’s legal team said the witness told law enforcement in both interviews that their first reaction to the “86 47” post was that it was related to restaurant slang that an establishment was out of a menu item, until they listened to an episode of Rudy Giuliani’s podcast.

Then, the FBI in September 2025 searched its database for any references to the term “86” in cases that Comey worked on, which an FBI staffer said produced “inconclusive results,” according to messages filed in court by Comey’s lawyers.

A separate search of the FBI’s file in the case of mob boss John Gambino, whom Comey prosecuted in the 1990s, also turned up no references to the term. After Comey was indicted, Fitzgerald wrote, an FBI agent and a federal prosecutor also interviewed Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano, a former member of the Gambino crime family, and asked if Comey ever discussed the term “86” with him. Gravano doubted he would have brought up the term with Comey, though he did say it can mean “to kill.”

The new slate of court filings came one day after Comey asked U.S. District Judge Louise W. Flanagan, who is overseeing his case, to dismiss the indictment against him on separate grounds. He argued the case against him targets speech protected by the First Amendment, and that the “86 47” phrase at the heart of the indictment is not a true threat against Mr. Trump.

Comey was indicted last year in a different case that accused him of lying to Congress in 2020. He and his legal team moved to dismiss that case on similar grounds, but the Virginia federal judge overseeing the case never ruled on the issue. Instead, the judge dismissed it on the grounds that the prosecutor who secured the indictment against him was unconstitutionally appointed to her role as interim U.S. attorney.

Comey is set to be arraigned on the two charges of threatening to kill the president on Sept. 30 in New Bern, North Carolina.

A Department of Justice spokesperson told WTX US News, “A North Carolina grand jury indicted Comey, and he’ll have his day in court like any other defendant.” 

Secret Service communications chief Anthony Guglielmi said, “We have great respect for the judicial process. Because this matter is currently pending before a federal court, any and all comments will be made through our official court filings.”

WTX US News has also reached out to Comey’s legal team for comment on Tuesday’s filings.

The bout of criminal charges against Comey follow a yearslong feud between the president and the former FBI leader, dating back to when Mr. Trump fired Comey during his first term in 2017. Since then, Comey has castigated Mr. Trump and called him “morally unfit” to be president, while Mr. Trump has called Comey a “dirty cop” and mused about prosecuting him.

In May 2025, Comey posted on Instagram a photo of seashells on a beach arrayed to form the numbers “86 47.” He didn’t make his meaning clear, but “eighty-six” typically means “eject” or “get rid of,” and Mr. Trump is the 47th president.

Mr. Trump and his allies accused Comey of threatening the president’s life, which Comey strongly denied, saying he came across the shells and assumed they were a “political message.” He deleted the post, saying he “oppose[s] violence of any kind.”

The Secret Service quickly launched an investigation, and Comey was interviewed by agents, WTX US News has previously reported. The matter remained out of the public eye for nearly a year after that, until Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche unveiled charges against Comey in April.

In order to get an indictment tossed for selective prosecution, a defendant needs to show that they were charged for a discriminatory reason and that “similarly situated” people haven’t been prosecuted for the same conduct. To show vindictive prosecution, a defendant needs to show that they were prosecuted solely out of animus or to punish them for exercising a legal right. Courts tend to be skeptical of these claims. 

As evidence, Comey’s legal team noted that vast amounts of merchandise with the message “86 47” or “86 46” — referring to former President Joe Biden — is available for sale online, and the government has not taken similar steps to prosecute the sellers.

They also pointed to Mr. Trump’s history of “personal attacks and calls to retaliate against Mr. Comey through criminal prosecution.” They suggested that the Justice Department pursued charges against Comey for threatening Mr. Trump “based on political expediency” after their previous indictment for lying to Congress was tossed out.

And Comey’s lawyers shared emails showing that on the day of Comey’s Secret Service interview, an official at the agency who was traveling on Air Force One with Mr. Trump and his team asked for updates, saying he was “getting LOTS of questions.”

Blanche has denied that Comey was prosecuted for political reasons, telling WTX US News earlier this year that the case was spearheaded by “local prosecutors” in North Carolina.

Asked in a separate WTX US News interview if Mr. Trump directed the indictment, Blanche said: “Of course not, absolutely, positively not.”

“If anybody in this country thinks — especially given what happened over the past couple of years with respect to President Trump — that it is okay for anybody to threaten the president of the United States … and then have the media or others say, well that’s not serious, then we have a bigger problem than I even imagined in this country,” Blanche said.