General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBREAKING: Woman COMPLETELY LACKING INTEGRITY hisses "Don't you ever. Challenge. My. Integrity."
For hours, Bondi dodged questions from Democratic senators on everything from the Epstein files to Trumps targeting of his political foes, to what authority the president has to launch fatal strikes against boats he merely claims are trafficking drugs off the coast of Venezuela, to the systematic firing of Justice Department or FBI officials who probed the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6, and more.
At one point, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) himself a Trump opponent who has been a subject of the presidents political targeting ran down a laundry list of questions Bondi wouldnt answer Tuesday, like what role she had in flagging any reference to Trumps name in the Epstein Files, whether she approved of the mass firing of anyone who criminally investigated Trump at the DOJ or if she supported the creation of a compensation fund for Jan. 6 rioters.
Bondis approach to Democrats on the oversight hearing was summed up in her response to a question posed by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D.-Conn.) about her possible conflicts of interest amid Trumps acceptance of a $400 million plane from the Qatari government. (Bondi lobbied on behalf of Qatar when she worked for Ballard Partners.)
How dare you? I am a career prosecutor! Dont you ever. Challenge. My. Integrity, she replied, punctuating nearly every word in her sentence with a pause.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pam-bondi-hearing-senate-judiciary-committee_n_68e56d1ae4b05e212f21fb5e

Grim Chieftain
(690 posts)and not in a good way. She was totally unhinged, ranting, raving, lying, flipping through a notebook for talking points - no decorum whatsoever. Yep, true Trumper, through and through. Disgraceful.
blue neen
(12,460 posts)We need to question her integrity some more!
DFW
(59,108 posts)She seems to deserve serving the next fifteen years as a career felon. After all, thats what other felons do, isnt it?
That's why I used the singular. Nixon's gang were (Republicanese: we're) choir boys and girls compared to this gang of thugs.
Harker
(16,961 posts)Biggles7650
(6 posts)doth protest too much !
joshdawg
(2,880 posts)when she has none?
dalton99a
(90,645 posts)mwmisses4289
(2,392 posts)You. Have. No. Integrity.
Seinan Sensei
(1,175 posts)She. Was. Not. Being. Honest.
area51
(12,472 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(171,032 posts)Over several hours, the attorney general was unprofessional and partisan, but most importantly, she was evasive, rejecting important lines of inquiry.
AG Pam Bondi was unprofessional and partisan, but most importantly, she was evasive, refusing to answer good questions she didnât like.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-10-08T13:48:39.368Z
Fortunately, Adam Schiff kept the receipts. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/ag-pam-bondi-refused-answer-key-questions-adam-schiff-kept-receipts-rcna236327
But it was the same California senator who also used the opportunity to share some of the receipts hed collected over the course of the proceedings. As The New Republic noted:
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California took Attorney General Pam Bondi to task Tuesday for her incessant deflections and evasions throughout a Senate judiciary hearing. Bondi had verbally attacked Democratic senators throughout the hearing rather than answer their questions. Schiff was, evidently, keeping track of questions Bondi left unanswered, and he ran through the lengthy (yet inexhaustive) list.
It was arguably the most memorable exchange of the frustrating hearing.
"This is supposed to be an oversight hearing" -- Schiff helpfully ticks through all of the incriminating questions -- and there are many of them -- that Bondi refused to answer during today's hearing
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-10-07T17:29:23.535Z
As Schiff documented, Bondi refused to respond to all kinds of legitimate lines of inquiry, including:
what role she played in asking that Trumps name be flagged in the Jeffrey Epstein files;
whether White House border czar Tom Homan took the $50,000 from undercover FBI agents in the run-up to the 2024 election;
whether career prosecutors found insufficient evidence to charge former FBI Director James Comey;
whether Bondi discussed the Comey indictment with Trump;
how the administration concluded that military strikes against civilians in international waters are legal;
whether Bondi approved the firing of antitrust lawyers who disagreed with the Hewlett Packard merger;
whether she supported a fund for violent insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6;
whether the Justice Department had fired career professionals because they worked on Jan. 6 cases;
and whether DOJ employees should have to abide by court orders.
In effectively all of these instances, the attorney general couldve offered substantive answers. She instead attacked senators for asking good questions she didnt like.
yellowcanine
(36,636 posts)Just sayin.