Bondi did her homework; still pivots and weaves for Trump

By Mimi Rocah

For DOJ alums, anyone who cares about the actual independence of the DOJ from improper influence from a President, or anyone with a political agenda, there was a lot that Pam Bondi— Trump’s nominee to be Attorney General of the United States—got right at today’s hearing. She sounded a lot like Republican and Democratic nominees of the past who similarly pledged to uphold the independence of the DOJ at their hearings.

However, and this is a very big “but…” — none of these nominees were going to be serving under a President who so blatantly and repeatedly has called for the baseless prosecution of his perceived political “enemies,” or who so unfairly villainized the FBI and DOJ for his own personal and political purposes. And no prior nominee had, to my knowledge, herself previously pledged that “prosecutors will be prosecuted” and “investigators will be investigated.”

Let’s take a look at some of Bondi’s testimony and answers. She said that DOJ’s “core mission” will be “keeping Americans safe and vigorously enforcing the law.” Sounds right. Under questioning from Democrats, she claimed there would “never be an enemies list” at DOJ (but notably wouldn’t acknowledge that Kash Patel, the nominee to lead the FBI even has an enemies or target list, which he unquestionably does.) She said that she condemns “any” violence against law enforcement (in the context of being asked if she would pardon Jan. 6th defendants) and would look at each case individually. She said that she would abide by “the separation doctrine.” When asked by Senator Klobuchar whether she would ensure that the White House didn’t tamper or interfere with investigations, Bondi said she believes the Justice Department must be independent and must act independently. “The number one job is to enforce the law fairly and even-handedly.” Again, sounds like a lot of past AG-nominee answers, and pretty good. When asked who her client would be, Bondi said “the American people,” and that her “guiding star” is the Constitution. Can’t really ask for a more appropriate answer than that.

But here is where the heart of the problem lies, from my point of view. It’s easy to say words and talk about independence and upholding the Constitution and doing the right thing. Almost every AG nominee has done it, and Bondi was a well-prepared non-exception to this rule. She is a career prosecutor with the experience and the language to talk about these topics. But nothing is said in a vacuum, and she was pretending otherwise. She has been nominated (as the second choice) by a man who has been unabashedly calling for the prosecution of his perceived political nemeses, and has been doing so repeatedly since 2016. Most recently, he did so with respect to people who were doing their job — like Special Counsel Jack Smith and Congresswoman Liz Cheney, to name but two. Yet Bondi refused to say that she wouldn’t investigate them or to acknowledge that there was no predicate to do so. Normally, AG nominees would not comment on potential pending cases. But her refusal to respond to these hypotheticals is not OK, especially when the person who undoubtedly will be pressuring her has made it crystal clear he wants innocent people to be investigated and even prosecuted—whether the evidence or predicate is there or not.

Equally troubling, Ms. Bondi simply would not or could not say that the 2020 election was legitimate. She did not turn away from her or Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. She pivoted and talked about what she “personally” saw with respect to fraud in Pennsylvania, not the more general question about who won the election. She claimed (implausibly) that she had never heard Trump’s call with Georgia election officials pressuring them to overturn Biden’s victory in the state in 2020 (even if she never “heard” it, she cannot really claim not to know the substance). In fact, she wouldn’t even say that Biden actually won the election. In response to questions from different Democratic Senators who asked about false claims of widespread election fraud in 2020, she would only say that Biden was the President, not that he had actually won.

Regardless of whether this aspect of Bondi’s testimony was because she still does not believe the 2020 election was legitimate, or because she is afraid of angering her boss, neither bodes well for her actual independence from Trump and his grudge-driven, improper agenda for the DOJ and FBI.