The embarrassing lesson of Pam Bondi’s confirmation hearing
MS NOW · an hour ago
by Mary McCord · Opinion
Maybe now that
Pam Bondi is gone, she will reflect on where and why she went astray.
Since Bondi became U.S. attorney general last February, I’ve often thought of three witnesses
who testified at her confirmation hearing in support of her nomination. All were in law enforcement. All had worked with Bondi when she was attorney general of Florida. One had even run for that office as a Democrat.
Each said that they believed she would adhere to the rule of law as U.S. attorney general.
Play
‘She couldn’t get the revenge he craved’: Trump fires Bondi as attorney general April 3, 2026 / 13:14
I, too, testified during the second day of Bondi’s confirmation hearings, in my capacity as a veteran of the Department of Justice for more than 20 years, including as the acting assistant attorney general for national security. I was there not to speak about Bondi — whom I have never met — but to remind lawmakers of the importance of maintaining the independence of the Department. I testified that this requires the attorney general to take seriously the oath they swear to the Constitution, not the president; to recuse from any matter where their impartiality could reasonably be questioned; and to reaffirm policies in place since Watergate to limit contacts between the White House and Justice Department lawyers on specific investigations and cases.
Among the other witnesses’ comments that I have reflected on during Bondi’s tenure,
which ended Thursday, are these: One testified that Bondi understood a prosecutor’s obligation to “follow the evidence and the law, without fear or favor.” Another said that Bondi “appreciates the rules which make our judicial system the best in the world” and told Justice Department lawyers that they, like him, “will love working with Pam Bondi.” One extolled her “compassionate side,” as a “staunch supporter of crime victims.” Bondi herself committed to “one tier of justice for all.”
I have since wondered many times whether Bondi’s supporters at that hearing have had regrets as they’ve watched her actions over the past 14 months stray far from their predictions.
Chatting with Bondi’s supporters before and after the hearing, I never doubted their earnestness. They had worked with her to go after the “pill mills” that had produced the opioid crisis that killed many Floridians. The Democratic witness had even been tapped by Bondi to be her “drug czar,” which sparked significant criticism from Florida Republicans. Having seen Bondi promote Donald Trump’s fraudulent election claims on Fox TV and elsewhere, I was dubious about her ability to uphold the ideals of the Department of Justice, but I could not deny that she had some prosecutorial chops and had, at least with respect to her choice of drug czar, shown a commendable lack of partisanship.
I have since wondered many times whether Bondi’s supporters at that hearing have had regrets as they’ve watched her actions over the past 14 months stray far from their predictions.
In her first address to Justice Department attorneys in the Great Hall of the Robert F. Kennedy building, Bondi did not commit to evenhanded justice. Instead, she
announced that she, Todd Blanche (Trump’s former personal attorney who was deputy attorney general under Bondi and is now acting attorney general), and Emil Bove, then the principal assistant deputy attorney general, were “so proud to work at the directive of Donald Trump.”
And
work at the president’s directive she did. On her first day as U.S. attorney general, Bondi issued a series of memos to DOJ attorneys, including one that established a “
Weaponization Working Group” to examine, among other frequent Trump complaints, the investigations by Special Counsel Jack Smith and the “pursuit of improper investigative tactics and unethical prosecutions” relating to
Jan. 6. Another memo announced a
policy of “zealous advocacy” and threatened discipline, including termination, for any department attorney who refused to zealously advocate for the president’s policies because of “personal political views or judgments.”
Play
Pam Bondi out at DOJ after failed ‘revenge’ prosecutions and Trump administration’s Epstein turmoil April 2, 2026 / 11:45
Rather than following the evidence and the law, as one witness predicted, Bondi tried to appease Trump by investigating and prosecuting
his political enemies, including former FBI director
James Comey and New York Attorney General
Letitia James. She did so after the president
complained that “
Nothing is being done” about Comey, James and Sen.
Adam Schiff, D-Calif., all of whom Trump called “guilty as hell.” Under Bondi’s leadership, the Justice Department took steps such as dropping its prosecution of Eric Adams, then mayor of New York, in what appeared to be a deal to get Adams to cooperate with the president’s immigration enforcement agenda. Acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon, who headed the prosecution, cited the zealous-advocacy memo in her
resignation letter, which said the dismissal was “driven by improper considerations.”
Far from adhering to the rule of law and the impartial administration of justice, Bondi cast those principles aside as attorney general in her dogged pursuit of the president’s campaign of retribution.
And in contrast to the prediction of another witness that lawyers would love working with Bondi, scores of DOJ attorneys
lost their jobs. After getting rid of Jack Smith’s team, Bondi told Fox News host Sean Hannity that department leadership would keep going to “
root out” the people “who despise Donald Trump.” Many career attorneys with irreplaceable expertise were forced out; others resigned because they did not feel that they could in good faith defend the president’s actions. So many left U.S. attorney’s offices that Bondi’s former chief of staff
posted on social media: “If you are a lawyer, are interested in being an AUSA, and support President Trump and anti-crime agenda, DM me.” In March, the Justice Department
authorized U.S. attorney’s offices to recruit straight out of law school, removing a minimum requirement of one year of experience, due to the “exigent hiring need for attorneys across the Department.”
As to Bondi’s record as, in the words of one of the witnesses, a “staunch supporter of crime victims,” the evidence is spotty at best. Although she has
publicly honored the mothers of victims of violence by those she called “illegal aliens” and victims of fentanyl overdoses, she refused even to look at victims of Jeffrey Epstein who attended a
February House Judiciary Committee hearing when lawmakers asked the Epstein victims present to raise their hands if they had not had any opportunity to meet with the Justice Department. Bondi has been
harshly criticized by Democrats and Republicans over her handling of the Epstein files, including
the Justice Department’s failure to redact personal identifying information and even nude photographs of victims. Her response to criticism from lawmakers included calling Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a “washed-up lawyer” and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a “failed politician” with “Trump derangement syndrome.”
Far from adhering to the rule of law and the impartial administration of justice, Bondi cast those principles aside as attorney general in her dogged pursuit of the president’s campaign of retribution. She did an enormous disservice to the Department of Justice, greatly harming its lawyers, crime victims and public trust in the institution. The Senate must ensure that the next attorney general is held to the standards that Bondi’s supporters predicted of her — but that she failed to meet.
The post
The embarrassing lesson of Pam Bondi’s confirmation hearing appeared first on
MS NOW.
