Republican senator holdouts will now vote to advance Trump's Attorney General nomination
Blanche ordered the Justice Department to rescind the fund and issued written assurances that addressed the senators’ stated concerns.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYCredibility rates KATV, which republished this story. The other scores rate the article itself.
KATV is an established local news outlet, and the article attributes its reporting to The National News Desk. The brief report identifies the senators’ statement and the scheduled committee vote, though it offers limited independent sourcing or context.
- Source type — Established local television news publisher.
- Author attribution — The byline names Caitlyn Frolo and The National News Desk.
- Transparency — Identifies the senators’ joint statement and the committee timing, but provides little sourcing beyond that statement.
The article gives a clear account of the senators’ stated conditions, Blanche’s order and the upcoming committee vote. Most of the senators’ rationale comes from their own statement, and the article provides limited independent perspective or detail about the fund and settlement.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The senators’ position and their explanation dominate the article. It includes a brief account of concerns about the fund but does not provide direct comments from critics or further independent examination of the dispute.
- Source diversity — The senators’ statement supplies most of the detail; other perspectives are not directly quoted.
- Counterarguments presented — The article notes concerns about possible payments to Capitol rioters, but does not develop the opposing case.
- Opinion vs reporting — Presented as a news report rather than an argument.
The report uses mostly neutral language and centers the senators’ stated conditions and the procedural status of Blanche’s nomination. It briefly notes concerns about the fund without strongly adopting either side’s framing.
- Language tone — Mostly straightforward, attributed reporting.
- Framing — Frames the development as holdouts changing their position after receiving written assurances.
- Source selection — The senators’ statement is central; criticism of the fund is mentioned but not developed.
Republished with credit
Republished from Foxbaltimore, with credit to the original publisher.
Not rated.
Sens. Thom Tillis and John Cornyn said they would vote to advance Todd Blanche’s attorney general nomination after Blanche ordered the Justice Department to rescind its anti-weaponization fund. The Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled to vote on the nomination Tuesday.
Tillis and Cornyn said they had held up Blanche’s nomination pending written assurances about the anti-weaponization fund and an IRS audit settlement involving President Trump. They said a binding written order addressed their concerns and that they would vote to advance Blanche’s nomination out of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Community verdict
11 VOTESPeople in this story
SWIPE →Attorney general nominee whose order preceded the senators’ decision
Senator who said he would vote to advance Blanche’s nomination
Cornyn's version of this story ↗Senator who said he would vote to advance Blanche’s nomination
Tillis's version of this story ↗President whose IRS settlement and stated purpose for the fund are mentioned
Part of a bigger story
22 OUTLETSOutlets agree Todd Blanche issued a Justice Department order rescinding the proposed anti-weaponization fund, addressing senators’ concerns as they weighed his attorney general nomination. Senators then said they would support advancing his nomination. Left-leaning outlets question whether the order meaningfully limits protections for Trump and criticize senators who backed Blanche, while others report the deal and nomination path. Center outlets mostly report the order and confirmation process, while some question whether the changes leave loopholes. Right-leaning outlets emphasize the deal as a negotiated step that addresses senators’ concerns and advances Blanche’s nomination.
- ARTICLES
- 26
- OUTLETS
- 22
- AVG CRED
- 75
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…



