Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Soon: Confirmation Hearing for Attorney General Pam Bondi; Pam Bondi Faces Questioning as Trump's Pick for Attorney General. Aired 9:30-10a ET

Aired January 15, 2025 - 09:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[09:30:00]

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, I believe them to be true then. Yes, I believe them to be true now. That's a major problem. I don't know that Democrats - they don't have necessarily the numbers to do anything about it.

The other question I would ask her is, has your view changed? When you said those things in 2020, have - why are you now changing your position, if she changes her position. What's behind that?

So, I think what you do is, you confront her with the things she's said and you demand to know, did you believe it then? Were you making it up? Were you mistaken? And have you changed now?

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Were looking at right here, as you see, Pam Bondi, the nominee, in the hearing room, being, I think, escorted to the table by the chair and ranking member of the committee. The chair being Chuck Grassley, the ranking senator, Dick Durbin, who has joined us on the show to kind of give his preview a little while ago.

So, this is going to get underway and get underway shortly. Standing with Rick Scott, who was - is the senator from Florida, who is there, you can see him right there.

Paula, you also, while we're watching this, this - let's actually - let's just chill right here for a second because it sounds like they're about to get underway. Technical term for how a hearing begins.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: It's a Senate parliamentary hearing.

BOLDUAN: Yes, exactly. Parliamentary inquiry, my friends.

Photographs, takes the oath, and then they're going to be getting started. How this plays out as we kind of got to - saw yesterday, you'll have opening statements from the chair of the committee, ranking member of the committee. There may be some supporting testimony on her behalf. And then Pam Bondi herself, the nominee to be the next attorney general of the United States for Donald Trump will then begin what will be hours of questioning with her opening statements.

We're going to stand by. The moment I ask Paula Reid a question it's - we're going to begin.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: Correct.

BOLDUAN: But let's do it.

Paula, you have new reporting from Pam Bondi's team. Tell me what you got.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think her team might have seen our last - our last hit. But a source familiar with her preparation says that when she is pressed about the independence of the Justice Department, she is going to outline that Americans have lost trust in the Justice Department due to, quote, "weaponization," and that she wants to work with senators to fix that.

Now, that's notable because we've heard some similar themes come out of discussions that presumed FBI nominee Kash Patel has had with lawmakers on The Hill, the idea that they want to work with lawmakers to try to increase transparency around the Justice Department and restore trust.

But I think it's also easy to see, and she will likely be pressed, on how that too can be weaponized, especially if you bring The Hill into some of these questions. Obviously, a lot of partisanship up here. And it's unclear if they will be able to help fix the perceptions that people have of the Justice Department.

So, this is going to be likely one answer that she will give when she's pressed on this issue.

[09:30:00]

SEN. CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, R-IOWA, CHAIR: Good morning, everybody.

I welcome all of you to this very important hearing to consider the nomination of former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. She's serving as the 87th attorney general of the United States after her approval.

Congratulations to your nomination, Ms. Bondi, and thank you for your willingness to serve.

I thank Senator Durbin for his leadership as chairman of the committee over the last four years. Although he and I have differences of policies, I think the public could say we worked well together on many issues over the years. As he steps into his role as ranking member, I will work closely with Senator Durbin to serve the American people.

I also would like to welcome four -- three brand-new members to the committee and a person that's repeating his service here after a stint off. I welcome to the committee Senator Britt, Senator Schmitt, Senator Crapo and Senator Schiff. Welcome.

(APPLAUSE)

Before we get started, I'd like to set out a couple ground rules. I want to handle this hearing using a similar structure to how Senator Durbin handled the nomination hearing of Attorney General Garland. I want everyone here to be able to watch the hearing without obstruction. If people stand up and block the view of those behind them or speak out of turn it's not fair or considerate to others, so offers -- officers will immediately remove those individuals.

Now, before I turn to my opening statement, let me explain how we're going to proceed today. I'll give my opening remarks, and then I'll invite Ranking Member Durbin to give his opening remarks, then I'll call on Senators Scott and Schmitt to introduce this nominee, and following those instruction -- introductions and Ms. Bondi's statement we'll begin the first round of questioning.

[09:35:00]

Each senator will have an initial seven-minute round for question. After the first round, we'll do a second four-minute round of questioning. Members should do their very best to adhere to these time limits so that we can pursue --proceed efficiently with the hearing.

We're here today to -- considering Pam Bondi's nomination to serve as attorney general of the United States.

Ms. Bondi, for a second time, I thank you for your nomination, willingness to serve, but more importantly, serve the important role of Senate's advise and consent process. You're nominated to one of the most important offices in our country.

It took a -- let's see -- a lot of work on your part just to get here today, the more than 14,000 pages of records, hundreds of hours of media files, and more than 3,400 responsive entries you disclosed to this committee are a testament to your long career in public eye and your cooperation with this committee.

I'd like to also thank your family for being here today. I know that many of them have traveled some distance to celebrate with you.

I'd like to explain -- and expect that Ms. Bondi be treated fairly. During Attorney General Garland's confirmation hearing, Republicans treated him with respect. We asked tough but fair questions, and we ultimately voted him out of committee on a bipartisan basis.

Although Attorney General Garland wasn't who we, on this side of the aisle, would have chosen to lead the -- the Department of Justice, we recognize that President Biden won that election and that he was entitled to choose his Attorney General. We were ultimately disappointed with some of the things that General Garland and his department did, but at the time of his nomination, we gave him the benefit of the doubt.

As the recent terrorist attacks in New Orleans and around the world have shown, our national security must be a high priority. The American people deserve a secure homeland and borders, safe streets, orderly markets, civil rights, and a protected environment. So, delivering on these promises require the swift confirmation of an Attorney General. This committee should give Ms. Bondi the same benefit of the doubt that this committee gave to Attorney General Garland.

President Trump has selected a nominee whose qualifications speak for themselves. Ms. Bondi made history in 2010 as the first woman to be elected Florida Attorney General. She held that role for eight years and was comfortably re-elected by the people of Florida to a second term.

Eight years of service as Attorney General of the third-largest state in the nation is excellent preparation for the role of U.S. Attorney General. As Florida Attorney General, Ms. Bondi was a member of the Florida Cabinet, chief legal officer of the state, and led a large agency that tangibly impacted people's lives.

And by all accounts, Ms. Bondi handled her responsibilities well. As the Florida Attorney General, Ms. Bondi achieved numerous successes. She engaged in key initiatives to fight human trafficking, counter the opioid epidemic, and protect consumers and protect the citizens of Florida from violence.

[09:40:06]

She didn't shy away from hard work or complicated problems. She engaged in aggressive campaign to eliminate pill mills, took a leading role in securing a $3.25 billion settlement following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and eliminated the backlog of rape test kates -- kits that had accumulated in that state's laboratories.

Ms. Bondi experience isn't limited to her service as Florida Attorney General. She also served as a prosecutor in Hillsborough County for 18 years and prosecuted terrible crimes. She sought tough penalties and justice for victims of violent criminals, domestic abusers, and sexual predators. She prosecuted drug traffickers, and thus protected her community.

She was also active outside of her professional role, serving in -- in the Junior League of Tampa, on the Board of Special Olympics Florida, and as well known for her animal rescue efforts.

Her experience and performance as Attorney General, prosecutor, and community leader speaks volumes about her character and her dedication to the rule of law. She's received multiple letters in support of her nomination, including from the Fraternal Order of Police, the Republican State Attorneys General, more than 100 former senior DOJ officials, and a bipartisan group of former state attorneys general.

In short, Ms. Bondi is highly qualified, and of course as we all know, a change is desperately needed. When confirmed, Ms. Bondi will take the helm of -- of -- at a very turbulent time for the -- this country and for that department.

The Justice Department's infected -- is infected with political decision-making, while its leaders refuse to acknowledge that reality. Crossfire Hurricane was the textbook example of government weaponization. The FBI's investigation was built on the fake Steele dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign who worked with foreign operatives. My investigative work exposed that the FBI actually knew the dossier was false information and was likely a part of a Russian disinformation campaign. Even with the knowledge of such dossier defects and political infections, the Justice Department sought FISA warrant renewals and took other actions.

After directing my Oversight staff to investigate Justice Department's mishandlings of the matter, the Justice Department retaliated in issuing a subpoena for my own staff's phone records. That's right -- challenging my constitutional rights of -- of doing my over -- oversight duties.

Well, what's next? Then a few Democratic colleagues pressured the FBI Foreign Influence Task Force to supposedly brief me and Senator Johnson related to our Biden family investigation.

On August the 20th, Senator Johnson and I had that infamous briefing from the FBI. Later, this FBI's briefing contents were leaked to the media, even though the FBI promised confidentiality. That leak falsely labeled our oversight work as, you guessed it, ration disinformation.

[09:45:00]

To this day, over four years later, the intelligence community and the FBI refuse to provide us the intelligence basis for that briefing. The title of this Wall Street Journal's article sums it up, quote, the FBI's dubious briefing. Did the bureau set two U.S. GOP senators up at the behest of Democrats? Question mark, end of quote.

So, I know as other people on this committee and in and out of Congress, know what government weaponization is. And then we get to Special Counsel Jack Smith in his lawfare operation. It involved an unprecedented FBI raid on Trump's house, including agents that even searched the former first lady's clothing drawers.

Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden certainly did not receive the same treatment by government regarding their records. Indeed, as my oversight exposed, the FBI amazingly agreed to destroy laptop records and records associated with Clinton's staff.

This Orwellian conduct should have no quarter. On top of it all, the FBI Special Agent Thibault, the anti-Trump agent, that violated the Hatch Act for political activities on the job started one of Jack Smith's cases.

But Jack Smith wasn't the only department official who tried to influence this past election. The Washington Post reported just last August about a previously undisclosed Mueller investigation into Trump that was closed for lack of evidence and it being, quote-unquote, fishing expedition.

That news reporting was based on sealed court records, government records, and potentially classified information roughly 90 days before the last presidential election. The justice department leaked that information to the press to impact the election against President Trump. And they did it while stiff-arming congressional requests for information that would prove embarrassing to the Biden-Harris administration.

So let us not forget some of the more and other flagrant abuses of power that we've seen from the DOJ and the FBI over the last four years. And I don't have the time to spend on these that I spent on two or three others, but just to list them, the Department of Justice use the might of the federal government to prosecute individuals peacefully praying outside of an abortion clinic.

The FBI suggested that traditional Catholics could be domestic terrorism threats, claiming that these individuals adhere to, quote, anti-Semitic, anti-immigration, anti-GBT, and white supremacy ideology and to quote, the FBI opened dozens of investigations into parents who voiced their concerns at school board meetings regarding curriculum choices and COVID-19 mandates.

The FBI applied undue pressure to social media platforms to censor so- called misinformation downgrading or removing flagged social media posts and removing users. These are only a few particularly egregious examples of rot infesting the Department of Justice.

The impact of this political infection in our once storied law enforcement institutions is catastrophic. By every metric, the Biden- Harris Justice Department conduct has failed to live up to our country's ideals.

So, Ms. Bondi, should you be confirmed, the actions you take to change the Department's course must be for accountability, so that the conduct I just described never happens again. The only way to accomplish this is through transparency for the Congress and the American people.

[09:50:00]

Now to my friend, Ranking Member Durbin.

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL): Thank you, Senator Grassley. I appreciate your commitment to the Judiciary Committee's long-standing bipartisan practices for vetting presidential nominees. That was in doubt several weeks ago, but I spoke to Senator Grassley and he assured me that he's still personally committed as I am to maintaining these practices which we've established over the years.

Our process is rigorous and it shows how seriously members on both sides of the aisle take our constitutional responsibility of advice and consent. Ms. Bondi, thanks for coming to my office last week to discuss your nomination.

The importance of the Attorney General to our justice system cannot be overstated. As our nation's chief law enforcement officer, the Attorney General oversees the Department of Justice, which is responsible for protecting the civil rights of Americans, economic freedom and opportunity, public safety, and, of course, national security.

In short, the Attorney General has real impact on America's everyday life. It is critical that any nominee for this position be committed first and foremost to the Constitution and the American people, not any president or political agenda.

But President Trump claims he has, quote, an absolute right to do what he wants with the Justice Department. And that's how he conducted his first term. He interfered with the criminal cases of his friends and allies and successfully pressured DOJ to investigate his rivals.

He even tried to use the Justice Department to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The president-elect made it clear that he values one thing above all else and he said it over and over again, loyalty.

Speaking about Attorney General Sessions, Donald Trump said, quote, the only reason I gave him the job is because I felt loyalty. He was an original supporter. But when then Attorney General Sessions did the right thing and recused himself from the Mueller investigation, Trump said he should never have nominated him. And he fired him.

Trump then nominated Bill Barr to succeed Sessions. Barr successfully auditioned for the job and an unsolicited memo to DOJ that sharply criticized the Mueller investigation.

Once confirmed, Barr misrepresented and blocked the release of the report, intervened in multiple criminal cases of Trump's political allies and spread falsehoods about election fraud.

But in December of 2020, when Bill Barr finally announced there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would change the outcome of the election, Trump dismissed him, fired his second attorney general.

This time around, President-elect Trump has vowed not just to use the Justice Department to advance his political interests, but also to seek, quote, retribution against, quote, the enemy within.

He has repeatedly threatened to arrest, prosecute, jail, and otherwise punish those he considers his enemies. This includes reporters, prosecutors, judges, poll workers, military officials, and even his own former political appointees.

Even before taking office, Trump has forced out his own FBI director that he appointed, Chris Wray. And he's trying to replace Wray with Kash Patel, whose main qualification to be FBI director seems to be his loyalty to Donald Trump.

Patel has even compiled an enemies list of, quote, government gangsters to target that even includes former Trump appointees like Director Wray, Attorney General Barr and Defense Secretary Esper.

Trump's approach is a stark contrast with the bipartisan view born out of the post-Nixon era that the Justice Department should serve the interest of the American people, not any one president.

For those who need a reminder. Richard Nixon ordered department officials to fire Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor investigating Watergate. Two of those officials, Elliot Richardson and William Ruckelshaus, resigned rather than carry out Richard Nixon's orders. When this committee considered the appointment of Loretta Lynch to be President Obama's Attorney General, a Republican member of the committee emphasized, and I quote, what we need from our next attorney general, more than anything else, is independence.

That same member who now still serves on the committee said, and I quote, the job is not to be the president's wingman. The job is to represent all Americans. The attorney general must be willing to stand up to the president and say no when the office demands it.

When attorney general nominee, Merrick Garland, came before this committee, another one of my Republican colleagues still serving told Garland, and I quote, my sole criterion for voting for your confirmation is your pledge to make sure that politics does not affect your job as attorney general.

[09:55:00]

So the view that the Justice Department must be insulated from political influence and should not be weaponized against political rivals has historically been bipartisan, certainly on this committee. At this crucial moment in history, that view, not Mr. Trump's view, must prevail.

Ms. Bondi, you have many years of experience in law enforcement, including nearly a decade of service as attorney general in one of the largest states of the nation. But I need to know that you would tell the president no, if you're asked to do something that is wrong, illegal or unconstitutional.

Ms. Bondi, you are one of four Trump personal lawyers that he has already selected for top positions in the Department of Justice. You joined Mr. Trump in working to overturn the 2020 election. You've repeatedly described investigations and prosecutions of Mr. Trump as witch-hunts. And you have echoed his calls for investigating and prosecuting his political opponents.

This flies in the face of evidence, like Mr. Trump's call to Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger. We've all heard that audio recording.

These are the kinds of anti-democratic efforts that in the past you have defended. And it's critical that we understand whether you remain supportive of Mr. Trump's actions.

I also have questions whether you will focus on the needs of the American people rather than wealthy special interests. I'm concerned that you failed to identify your extensive lobbying for foreign governments and big corporations as potential conflicts of interest. There'll be questions in this hearing on that issue. That's why I've asked the Justice Department and the National Archives for information on your lobbying of the Trump White House and your foreign lobbying disclosures.

I'm particularly concerned about your work on behalf of the government of Qatar, which reportedly paid you $115,000 a month to launder their image on human trafficking, an issue of bipartisan concern on this committee. We need an attorney general who enforce our antitrust laws to prevent price fixing and monopolies that lead to higher prices for American consumers, not favor corporate giants that you've lobbied for in the past, like Amazon and Uber.

I also have questions about some of your actions as Florida attorney general. I'm concerned that your office failed to investigate more than two dozen complaints about the for-profit Trump university after Mr. Trump donated to your reelection campaign. And have a fund-raiser for you at Mar-a-Lago. In addition, you have a long track record on the issue of civil rights, reproductive rights, voting rights, and LGBTQ rights that needs to be discussed.

In contrast, Ms. Bondi, Merrick Garland didn't campaign for President Biden, never served as his personal attorney, never lobbied on behalf of foreign governments and corporate giants. After years of relentless criticism on Attorney General Garland, for many of my Republican colleagues, I hope they're prepared to hold you to the same standards.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: OK, it's now time for senators to introduce the nominee. The first one will be Senator Scott at the table, as you see, and Senator Schmitt is a member of this committee at his place on the dais.

Senator Scott, please proceed.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member and committee members, it is absolute honor to sit before you today to introduce my good friend, Pam Bondi for her nomination hearing. I'd also like to recognize some important people appearing in support of her today. Her husband, John, as well as her mother, father-in-law, sister, brother, sister-in-law, nephews, friends, and family members of John. Many more would surely be here if space allowed. I can tell you wholeheartedly that President Trump couldn't have a better leader than Pam Bondi for Attorney General.

She is undoubtedly qualified, brilliant, and committed to defending and protecting the laws of this nation and has a track record to prove it. It's no secret that the DOJ is facing a public trust crisis. After Democrats spent years weaponizing the justice system and the entire federal government, they become an agency that attacks the American people instead of defending and protecting them. That will change under Pam Bondi.

Under her leadership, the DOJ will actually fairly enforce the laws, protect the rights of the American people, and keep our nation safe and crack down on violent crimes and dangerous drugs, and the American people will trust her to do so. I know that well because I worked alongside Pam Bondi for eight years when I was governor of Florida, and she was Florida's elected attorney general, working to approve the lives of Floridians to make Florida the best state in the nation to live, work, and raise a family.

Pam was an incredible partner, working to keep Florida safe and uphold the laws of our state. Ensuring crime is aggressively pursued by law enforcement and prosecutors. President Trump has made clear that one of his top priorities is to reverse the rising rates of crime and specifically violent crime that have plagued our communities over the past four years.

[10:00:00]