President Donald Trump has yet to name a nominee for his next attorney general, but congressional Democrats are making clear they intend to make things difficult for Todd Blanche, the former deputy attorney general now leading the Justice Department in an acting capacity.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, in a new letter is accusing Blanche of leveraging his “office to improperly shower government cash on Donald Trump’s political operatives and sycophants.”

Specifically, Raskin is alleging that Blanche — who is running the agency after Pam Bondi’s ouster — ordered the FBI to pay large sums to FBI agents accused of misconduct.

“The record definitively shows that the agents were not disciplined for making protected disclosures to Congress or for the imaginary offense of being a Republican,” Raskin wrote. “They were disciplined for reckless misuse of classified information or serious episodes of professional misconduct that endangered national security.”

For example, Raskin writes that the DOJ approved payments in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for someone who previously had his security clearance revoked after he was involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and misrepresented his actions to the FBI.

Judiciary Democrats did not provide supporting documentation for the sources of some of their claims. But Raskin argued the settlements underscore “broader pattern of the Trump Administration using the public fisc as a slush fund to reward its allies.”

He asked for a host of materials relevant to the Democratic investigation into the issue, and the request suggests that Democrats — should they retake the House in the midterms — could make the settlements a key part of their oversight activities in the next Congress.

A DOJ spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment.

Raskin also alleged in his letter that staffers in the office of Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley were involved in talks around the settlements. The Iowa Republican’s office has previously said he played a role in the meditation of FBI “whistleblowers” settlements.

“This seven-page screed is a disgusting and defamatory attempt to smear legitimate whistleblowers while protecting their Biden administration retaliators,” said Clare Slattery, a spokesperson for Grassley. “Senator Grassley stands by his efforts to defend and protect all whistleblowers, no matter which administration they blow the whistle on, just as he has done for decades.”

WEST PALM BEACH, Florida — House Oversight Democrats heard Tuesday from victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach County, where many of the crimes took place.

The so-called shadow hearing, an informal event with lawmakers, took place less than three miles away from the mansion where Epstein abused hundreds of girls, and in the same county where prosecutors negotiated to have the financier avoid federal charges or extended prison time almost 20 years ago, allowing for the abuse to continue.

Much of Tuesday’s forum focused on how victims and attorneys in the case didn’t know the so-called sweetheart deal had been negotiated. They called for changes to the Crime Victim Rights Act to ensure victims know about these arrangements — and have standing to challenge them.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the panel’s top Democrat, promised that if Democrats win the House in November, anyone involved in arranging the deal would be made to testify. He also said the committee would have more questions for Alex Acosta, the former prosecutor who brokered Epstein’s plea deal and the secretary of Labor in Trump’s first administration. Acosta resigned amid renewed scrutiny of the Epstein case.

Witnesses additionally shared how they’d been harmed during the last year, when all files related to the case were supposed to be released. Democrats claim millions of files are still being withheld despite Trump signing a bill to make them public amid widespread pressure.

And among files that were released, information on many victims was not adequately redacted. Victims at the event called for those harmed through the exposure to be compensated, and for co-conspirators of Epstein who still haven’t been named to be “held accountable.”

The informal hearing comes amid pressure on the full Oversight Committee to host a forum with Epstein victims. First lady Melania Trump recently called on Congress to hold such a hearing, and Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) has indicated he plans to. But no date has been set.

At the end of the month, former Attorney General Pam Bondi is scheduled to be questioned by the Oversight panel in a transcribed interview. Some victims offered their own questions for Bondi on Tuesday. For one, Jena-Lisa Jones accused the former attorney general of being unable to “even look at the survivors” behind her in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee earlier this year.

“You were willing to lose your job to cover up for these people,” she said. “What do they have on you, because I’d like to know.”

Also on Tuesday, House Oversight Democrats released an “interim staff analysis” of the widely criticized plea deal. In the report, called “The Price of Non-Prosecution,” the Democratic minority argued that the agreement “enabled Epstein to continue his abuse and trafficking activities for almost another decade, shifting his focus to European and Central Asian women.” Epstein was not arrested for sex trafficking of minors until 2019.

“Despite DOJ’s claims to the contrary, the Committee’s findings demonstrate the need for further law enforcement investigation of Epstein and his international network,” the Democratic report states.

Kimberly Leonard reported from West Palm Beach. Hailey Fuchs reported from Washington. 

Senators emerged from a closed-door meeting focused on ethics language that Democrats want to insert into landmark cryptocurrency legislation split over the status of the talks, with one Republican calling the negotiations a “circus.”

A bipartisan group of senators met in the Capitol Tuesday with a top White House crypto policy adviser to negotiate language that would restrict government officials’ engagements with digital assets — a key demand for Senate Democrats who have raised concerns about the Trump family’s crypto businesses. Lawmakers are trying to come to a deal ahead of a Thursday markup in the Senate Banking Committee.

“The Democrats are trying to find reasons to vote against the bill and making up a bunch of bullshit excuses,” said Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who called the meeting a “circus.”

“Super annoying,” he added.

Other members struck a more positive note.

“Sen. Moreno is prone to exaggeration,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona, a key Democratic negotiator. “We are working constructively. I think that could be his interpretation and then, it that’s the interpretation, maybe he should stop going to the meetings.”

Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), a key GOP negotiator, said lawmakers are “making progress.”

“You have to go into those discussions assuming that the other side is negotiating in good faith,” she said. “And if that turns out not to be the case, then shame on them, not shame on me. I’m trying to get a deal here.”

Patrick Witt, a top Trump administration crypto policy adviser, is representing the White House in the talks. But lawmakers on both sides say they want sign-off from Trump on any final ethics deal.

“Whatever we agree to, it has to be signed off by Trump,” Gallego said earlier Tuesday. “And if he doesn’t sign off on it, then it doesn’t happen.”

Lummis said in an interview that she and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have agreed to seek a meeting with Trump about the ethics issue if White House staff are unable get him on board.

“If we end up with a ethics proposal that the White House staffers think is on the bubble in terms of the president’s ability to swallow it, it would be important for us to go,” she said.

Republicans have said that ethics language can’t go into the bill that the Banking panel votes on this Thursday due to jurisdictional issues, but Democrats are insisting on a deal ahead of the markup. Gallego told reporters the ethics issue “will have to be addressed before the Banking Committee,” but added: “It doesn’t necessarily have to be addressed through the Banking Committee.”