Channing Tatum and Salma Hayek Get STEAMY in New Magic Mike Trailer

CNN analyst Andrew McCabe on Tuesday pointed out that the Department of Justice never responded to President Donald Trump's IRS lawsuit — and how that could impact Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's nomination.

The former deputy director of the FBI told CNN anchor Kasie Hunt that, as Blanche's nomination remains in limbo ahead of Thursday's vote, further questions about Trump's former personal attorney have come to light.

"Let's remember, there essentially was never really a true lawsuit here," McCabe said. "The president sued the IRS for $10 billion. The Department of Justice never even answered the complaint. So, there were never two opposing parties. The Justice Department never stood up and defended the United States in the way that it did in every other suit brought by the same leak from the same person."

This was unusual, McCabe explained.

"And because of that oddity, that's a very suspicious decision on the part of people like Todd Blanche and others," he said. "The lack of a true controversy meant that the entire thing was about to get dismissed. Before that could happen, they entered into these agreements. One of them, of course, created the weaponization fund, and the second one essentially granted complete immunity forever to Donald Trump, his family members and businesses."

McCabe described the situation further.

"It was basically a giveaway from the Department of Justice to the president," McCabe said. "How this thing stands or was ever conceived — I have no idea. I've been around many, many settlements of criminal matters, some of which involved IRS criminal matters, and have never seen any language like this. I think it's absolutely unprecedented and an incredibly bad idea."

The IRS settlement became a sticking point for some Republican senators during Blanche's confirmation hearing. On Tuesday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said there is no deal on Blanche's confirmation because of the settlement and the so-called anti-weaponization fund, Politico reported.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s controversial plan to test service members’ testosterone levels may end up having an ironic side effect on male soldiers, two medical experts said in a new report.

Dr. Adrian Dobs, a professor of medicine and oncology at John Hopkins University School of Medicine explained the issue to The Intercept Friday.

“We’re sort of creating a dependency on testosterone,” Dobs said. “Men who take testosterone will have a reduction in their sperm counts.”

Last week, Hegseth announced a new policy that would see all U.S. service members over the age of 30 be tested annually for testosterone levels, boasting about his efforts to transform the Defense Department into the “High-T Department of War.”

The policy is already facing legal challenges, with a federal judge on Wednesday ordering the Trump administration to explain how the new testing policy squares with its existing ban on hormone treatment for transgender service members.

Per the policy, testosterone screening will be mandatory for all service members over 30, though service members under 30 may voluntarily get screened as well.

The concern among medical experts, such as Dr. Alvin Matsumoto, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is that mandatory screening may produce unreliable results given that a person’s testosterone levels can vary widely depending on a number of factors, including the time of day and recent meals.

“That creates a risk under a program that will routinely screen otherwise healthy troops and make testosterone therapy available to those subsequently diagnosed with a deficiency,” The Intercept’s report reads.

Furthermore, the policy would almost certainly result in some service members being given testosterone replacement therapy when not medically necessary.

“Here we have men who are in their prime of reproduction, and we’re causing a drop in their sperm counts when there really may not be sufficient benefit,” Dobs said.

The Trump administration's newly launched "mega master" court system has quickly devolved into mass chaos that leaves defendants, guards, lawyers and judges "terrified," according to a new report.

"Attorneys and former judges say mega master hearings serve as the latest tool for the Trump administration to deport large numbers of people," the Chicago Sun-Times reported Friday. "This time by causing chaos and confusion in the courts."

Courtroom 11 at Chicago's immigration court barely seats 25 people — but one July morning saw 60 people, mostly unrepresented asylum seekers, crammed in wall-to-wall by 9:10 a.m., the Sun-Times reported.

This is a "mega master" calendar hearing, a new procedural format instituted by the Trump administration at the end of May that packs between 100 and 185 people into a single judge's morning docket — up from an average of just 30 before the change.

Chicago's courthouse at 55 E. Monroe has logged more of these mass hearings than any other immigration court in the country, according to immigration scholar Austin Kocher.

The scale has created conditions former immigration judges call dangerous.

On days when multiple mega hearings are scheduled simultaneously, hundreds of people — including families with strollers — spill into hallways narrower than an adult's arm span, waiting for hours to be called.

On one recent Thursday, roughly 200 people queued in the heat outside courtrooms designed to hold a fraction of that number.

"This is not good," one guard was overheard saying. Former judges have raised concerns that the overcrowded hallways amount to a fire hazard.

Attorneys and former judges argue the hearings serve to discourage immigrants from showing up at all, then fast-tracking deportations for those who don't.

In June, for the first time since 2019, more immigrants missed their Chicago court dates than attended — 58 percent of the 10,370 people summoned nationwide in June were marked absent, according to data from the nonprofit Mobile Pathways. Missing court can trigger an automatic in absentia deportation order.

Compounding the pressure, notice periods have collapsed. Median lead time for a Chicago hearing fell to just 34 days in June, down from 229 days in May.

The Justice Department, which oversees immigration courts, says the expanded scheduling is meant to clear long-standing backlogs.

But former judge Elizabeth Treacy, who resigned in June after presiding over three mega hearings with up to 150 people each, said the volume makes errors — and injustice — nearly inevitable.

She noted that indigenous asylum seekers with limited Spanish fluency are especially unlikely to speak up when they don't understand proceedings in a crowded, intimidating room.

“It’s not a coincidence, but another tactic to facilitate deportations,” said Stephanie Spiro, an attorney with the National immigration Justice Center.

“It’s much more efficient for the government to deport people without even having to read any briefs, without having to have a full hearing, without having to schedule hundreds of people, and actually listen to their claims, and afford them due process.”

That fear caused Carolina, an immigrant from Venezuela who just gave birth, to question whether she should show up for her hearing.

She and her husband eventually decided to risk deportation and bring their three children to court.

“I was terrified," she said.