[ad_1]
YOU KNOW HOW I SAID THAT TODD BLANCHE WAS HAVING A BAD WEEK? WELL IT JUST GOT WORSE!
by Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. – giving you 100% facts and truth in plain English about what’s going on with this administration and the law
First, earlier this week, it was the court smacking Blanche for trying to say that the weaponization fund issue was moot because he pinky swore to Congress that, even though the framework for it had already been created, he was “not moving forward with the fund”, and the Court telling him that no, it is very much *not* moot, and *ordering* Blanche to file answering documents with the Court, and reminding him that he is now open to discovery, and that was very much his own fault. (You can see the replay of the livestream that I did about that with colleague Jordan Parker, Esq. here: https://annepmitchell.substack.com/p/the-latest-on-the-weaponization-fund-b6a )
Then, the next day, another court spanked Blanche for his failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, hitting him with *another* court order, requiring him to produce the *unredacted* versions of certain document or explain why they were redacted. (You can read my reporting on that here: https://annepmitchell.substack.com/p/woot-court-spanks-blanche-over-failure )
And now, just this morning, Blanche was hit with a *4*-page Congressional demand letter, ordering Blanche to respond to six very specific questions about the weaponization fund, and instructing him that in light of the “serious concerns and the unprecedented nature of this suspect payout” he must “provide complete written responses to each of the following questions no later than July 8, 2026 , and produce all documents related to the negotiation, approval, and structure of this settlement.”
You see, in addition to everything else hinky (not a legal term but it should be) around the weaponization fund, it seems that *the very act of creating it* it violates the DOJ’s *own policies and practices*.
And here’s the gotcha, and I quote directly from the letter:
“The Anti-Weaponization Fund is plainly illegal. At a bare minimum, the establishment of the Fund violates requirements the Department itself has imposed on settlements that direct payments to non-governmental third parties in the Justice Manual. But the central question this letter demands you answer is not whether the fund will proceed, but whether the head of the Department of Justice ignored the Department’s own rules to carry out an act of corruption designed to benefit the President and his allies. This question does not become moot simply because courts and public pressure forced the Department to reverse course.”
In other words, Todd m’boy, you have been backed into a corner of your own making. Because in *this* case it doesn’t matter if you never intend to move forward with the fund. In *this* case what matters is what you *already did*. In *this* case it is the very act of *creating* the fund in the first place that has you in hot water.
Notes from the Front members: the full text of the 4-page letter with the six questions is in your inbox now!
If you’re not a Notes from the Front member yet, please consider joining me! It’s just $5 a month and not only will you be supporting my research and reporting for you, but you will gain access to all of the documents and to our live shows! You can join here and of course you can cancel any time!
https://annepmitchell.substack.com/subscribe
New by popular demand: Many of you have asked how you can support my work without joining Notes from the Front (thank you for asking! ❤️), here’s how: https://www.annepmitchell.com/buy-anne-a-coffee/
P.S. If you actually read all the way to the bottom please leave a comment that includes the word “hinky”. It will show me that my efforts aren’t in vain and that people actually *do* read these things, and it will drive those who just skim crazy wondering just why everyone is talking about something being hinky! ;~)
[ad_2]
Source