Senate Confirms Todd Blanche After Handful Of GOP Holdouts Threatened His Nomination 25%

By Nicole Silverio34%

8/8/2026, 2:54:53 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Availability Heuristic, and Unattributed Quote, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 22.6% saturation with 151 hits. Analysis detected 580 faulty-reasoning hits from 667 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 29.9% and a BS Rank of 25% (23,139 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.70% of the article peer group.

The Senate confirmed acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to be the next attorney general after holdouts threatened his nomination process. 
The upper chamber confirmed Blanche 50-49, with every Democrat and two Republicans, Maine Sen. 
Susan Collins and Alaska Sen. 
Lisa Murkowski, voting against him. 
Republican Sens. 
John Cornyn and Thom Tillis had been hesitant to support Blanche over a $1.8 billion anti-weaponization package, though they later reached a deal with Blanche and voted to advance his nomination out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. 
Cornyn and Tillis demanded that the Department of Justice (DOJ) provide written proof that the fund was rescinded and rewrite language in an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) settlement to ensure that audit immunity for President Donald Trump and his family did not extend beyond the plaintiffs. 
The DOJ sent a written proposal to Cornyn on July 27, though Cornyn returned it and argued they had not met his demands. 
Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley scheduled the markup for July 30, though he postponed it because Cornyn had not reached a deal with Blanche. 
The acting attorney general released documentation confirming the fund had been rescinded, which caused Cornyn and Tillis to support his nomination. 
The committee advanced Blanche’s nomination Tuesday in a 12 to 10 vote. 
Collins and Murkowski declared they would oppose Blanche’s confirmation. 
Collins argued in a Tuesday statement that the DOJ had become “too political” under his leadership. 
She cited the fund, the attempted indictments of Democratic Sens. 
Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Mark Kelly of Arizona and his promise to prohibit the mailing of abortion pills as her reasonings. 
“While I believe Mr. 
Blanche is a capable lawyer, the Department of Justice has become increasingly political. 
Mr. 
Blanche has taken several actions that have further eroded the Department’s independence, and that is the basis for my vote to oppose his confirmation  More than 1,200 former Department of Justice employees have opposed his nomination, arguing that he has undermined the institution. 
For these reasons, I will vote against this nomination,” Collins said. 
Murkowski criticized Blanche’s handling of the files surrounding the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and accused the DOJ of being weaponized. 
“Ultimately, however, I will oppose his nomination,” Murkowski said Thursday. 
“The politicization—even weaponization—of the Department did not start with this administration but has accelerated during it. 
I take issue with the handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the President, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting U.S. 
Senators.” 
Collins and Murkowski had voted for former Attorney General Merrick Garland’s confirmation. 
Republican Louisiana Sen. 
Bill Cassidy had been undecided on how he would vote, though he later declared on the Senate floor Friday he would vote in Blanche’s favor. 
Cassidy met with Blanche Wednesday to talk privately about their concerns. 
During a SiriusXM interview Wednesday, Cassidy worried that Blanche would serve as “Trump’s personal attorney who is now the attorney general.” 
Blanche could only afford to lose two Republican votes unless Republican Kentucky Sen. 
Mitch McConnell returned. 
Democratic Arizona Sen. 
Ruben Gallego said Thursday he would miss a few votes to be with his wife during an emergency. 
During Blanche’s July 15 confirmation hearing, Cornyn questioned Blanche about whether the fund could be revived. 
Blanche insisted the fund was “dead,” though he acknowledged there was no written agreement formally ending it. 
During the hearing, Tillis demanded that Blanche meet with alleged victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in exchange for his support. 
Blanche complied with the demand and met with several of the alleged victims at the DOJ headquarters in July, which appeared to satisfy Tillis. 
Some of the alleged victims criticized the meeting as dismissive and unproductive. 
Blanche became the acting attorney general on April 2 after Trump fired former Attorney General Pam Bondi. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.1%Nicole Silverio: 1.9%The Daily Caller: 4.5%Confirmation Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.4%Nicole Silverio: 1.4%The Daily Caller: 2.4%Availability Heuristic8.4%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.6%Nicole Silverio: 0.6%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Hindsight Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.5%The Daily Caller: 2.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 4.1%The Daily Caller: 8.7%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 2.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Nicole Silverio: 0.6%The Daily Caller: 1.9%Pessimism Bias1.9%This article: 22.6%Nicole Silverio: 6.2%The Daily Caller: 7.5%Negativity Bias22.6%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.7%Nicole Silverio: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.7%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 1.0%The Daily Caller: 1.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.7%Nicole Silverio: 0.6%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Recency Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Nicole Silverio: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 1.5%Ad Hominem3.1%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.6%Nicole Silverio: 1.7%The Daily Caller: 3.9%Appeal to Authority6.6%This article: 3.1%Nicole Silverio: 0.7%The Daily Caller: 2.5%False Dilemma3.1%This article: 2.4%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 1.9%Slippery Slope2.4%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.8%Nicole Silverio: 1.8%The Daily Caller: 5.5%Hasty Generalization8.8%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 2.1%The Daily Caller: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.5%The Daily Caller: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 1.9%The Daily Caller: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.2%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.8%Nicole Silverio: 0.8%The Daily Caller: 1.4%Anecdotal1.8%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.3%Nicole Silverio: 0.7%The Daily Caller: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.3%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.9%Nicole Silverio: 1.5%The Daily Caller: 2.0%Unattributed Quote6.9%This article: 0.6%Nicole Silverio: 1.3%The Daily Caller: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.6%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 2.1%The Daily Caller: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.6%The Daily Caller: 2.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 0.3%The Daily Caller: 4.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Silverio: 1.1%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

667 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers55%attributed speech298writer words
Selected voice

Lisa Murkowski

90%flagged-word coverage
96 attributed words26% of attributed speech46% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Unattributed Quote-15.4 ptsWriter: 15.4%Lisa Murkowski: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.3 ptsWriter: 1.3%Lisa Murkowski: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.