a texas man accused of stalking indiana fever star caitlin clark was in court facing felony stalking charges when this happened this morning. >> mr. lewis guilty as no, sir. >> yep. yep. that is what he said. guilty as charged. authorities say the man was sending a number of threats and sexually explicit messages to clark on social media. he has been ordered to stay away from clark. >> three two, one ignition and liftoff. >> we've got a firefly. go! ispace. go! >> and that was the launch of spacex's falcon nine rocket early this morning from cape canaveral's kennedy space center in florida. on board are two lunar landers for two different missions. the liftoff is kicking off what's expected to be a really busy year of moon launches, as a new space race is underway to try to put humans back on the lunar

surface. a new hour of cnn news central starts right now. >> all right. we are following the breaking news, which is all of the action is on capitol hill this morning, especially this hour. six of donald trump's cabinet nominees will face lawmakers in confirmation hearings today. his picks for attorney general, secretary of state, transportation secretary, cia director, energy secretary and his pick to lead the white house budget office, all facing hearings. first up, just minutes from now is one of the positions in government wielding the most power. pam bondi, the former attorney general of florida, is donald trump's choice to be the next attorney general of the united states. and just moments ago, we got a first look at her opening remarks released by the senate judiciary committee. in them, she says, in part. lastly, and most importantly, if confirmed, i will work to restore confidence and integrity to the department of justice and each of its components. under my watch. the

partisan weaponization of the department of justice will end. america must have one tier of justice for all. she has long supported donald trump. she spearheaded legal efforts to challenge the 2020 election results in pennsylvania, and also has said publicly she wants to prosecute the prosecutors, investigate the investigators of the biden administration. let's get to it. manu raju evan perez, paula reid, elie honig all standing by for coverage of these confirmation hearings that are about to begin. molly, let me start with you. you're right outside that committee room. what are you hearing there? >> yeah, this is going to be another eventful day. >> there will be some fireworks at some of these hearings, but these some may be less controversial than others. this will. there will be. >> you're right. six confirmation hearings today. >> a busy day for trump's picks to fill out his cabinet. pam bondi undoubtedly will be the one that will get perhaps the most attention, given her closeness with donald trump, her allegiance to him, and whether she will show any

independence from him. >> that's going to be one of the issues that democrats plan to push on in this hearing. that could be very contentious, but could really go along party lines. we're not hearing any real republican opposition to her at the moment, which was one big reason why there is confidence between the trump team as well as with republican leaders, that ultimately she will get the job unless something goes drastically wrong for her in this confirmation hearing. but other ones could be much smoother, including senator marco rubio, the outgoing florida republican senator who has been picked to be the next secretary of state. he is someone who is getting bipartisan support. that could be a much more smoother ride for him. there could be some other fireworks as well. watch for russ vote. he is the next pick to be the next budget director of the white house. it is a very powerful position that could help determine federal policy, help determine how regulations are implemented and the like. he is someone who has pushed for very conservative policies that someone who has been targeted by democrats. but again, the question ultimately here will

be kate is if any republicans raise concerns, because ultimately, if there is republican support, that's enough to get any of these nominations to the senate floor and get confirmation from the full united states senate in which they can afford to lose as many as three republicans on any party line vote. at the moment, no republicans are opposed to any of these six nominees. kate. >> all right, but still very important what we're going to be hearing in these confirmation hearings. manu raju right outside that that hearing room, john. >> all right. let's focus in on pam bondi donald trump's pick to be attorney general. cnn's senior justice correspondent, evan perez is with us now. so what kind of questions is she likely to face? evan well, the the closeness to donald trump is probably going to be a lot of the focus, especially from democrats. >> i mean, they obviously know that she was involved in defending him in one of his impeachments. she was very, very much involved in some of the efforts that he made to try to overturn election results back in back in 2020. and so the the focus for democrats is

to try to figure out how to tie pam bondi closely to donald trump and raise questions as to whether or not she will ever say no to him. and so that's part of the work that you will see from from democrats. look, i think, as manu pointed out, the republicans have the majority here. they know that unless something goes terribly wrong at this hearing, that she is very likely to be the next attorney general. and one of the interesting things, john, that, you know, going into into the beginning of this, of this administration, there's a lot of things that will be on her plate, including, for instance, what to do about trump's co-defendants down in florida. right. do they dismiss that case immediately? everyone expects that that will happen very quickly. and of course, this whole idea that she highlighted in that, in that opening statement that she is going to get rid of the partisan weaponization of the department of justice, the president, the incoming president has already said that

he wants people targeted because of what happened to him over the last four years to federal charges, two federal prosecutions under the joe biden justice department. so we'll see whether that really is the way she's going to turn this around, which is that she believes that this there was weaponization during the current administration. >> john, it'll be interesting to hear how she answers those questions. and, perez, we know you'll be watching. thank you so much for being with us, sarah. >> all right. let's bring in cnn legal affairs correspondent paula reid on capitol hill for us and cnn senior legal analyst and former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, elie honig to discuss some of this. paula, i'm going to start with you. just give us some sense of what you're expecting today, what you are focusing in on, and what you think will be focused in, on, on the hill. >> well, bondi has kept a remarkably low profile given the job that she is interviewing for today. this is not just a cabinet position. this is the cabinet position because president elect trump has made it clear that he wants to leverage this agency to

pursue his political enemies. now, sources tell me that bondi has been preparing for weeks for tough questions from this committee. she's met with lawmakers from both parties. and look, she's coming into today with three decades of law enforcement experience. for eight years, she was the attorney general of the state of florida. in her opening statement, she says she, quote, wants to make america safe again. i'm sure that she would prefer that much of today's hearing focus on the bread and butter work of the justice department, recent terrorist attacks remind us that the justice department is always dealing with the threat of i.s.i.s. they also deal with violent crime, opioids, fraud, antitrust. but we know that democrats believe her biggest liability is, of course, her question. questions about her loyalty to trump. we know that in the past, trump has put enormous pressure on his attorneys general to pursue his political whims. so she is going to face questions about how she will handle this. now, she has served as a surrogate for trump. she's been on his legal team. she helped push

false claims about the 2020 election. so this is going to be a big focus for democrats. her team declined to tell me how she is going to handle those questions, but whatever comes her way today, she is going to have a lot of moral support because she's going to be accompanied today by 16 members of her family. >> yeah, we did see what happened when he tried to push bill barr. bill barr did not do his bidding. in the end. we will see what happens here. ellie, you have so much to do, but you simply somehow had time to write a piece in the new york times called the perplexing case of pam bondi. say that three times. what's perplexing to you? >> well, sara, i'm easily perplexed, as you know. >> but pam bondi does provide a really complicated case for attorney general, because on one hand, she's absolutely qualified by any objective measure. she's been a prosecutor for over two decades. she was the attorney general of florida, the third most populous state in the country for eight years. she's handled all types of prosecutions. on the other

hand, there are genuine questions about pam bondi independence and her credibility. she was a vocal 2020 election denier. she has said publicly that donald trump won pennsylvania in 2020, which he did not, that there were fake ballots cast. she also, and i think most concerningly watch for democrats to ask about this, has said publicly that inside doj, prosecutors need to be prosecuted and investigators need to be investigated. now, she said that before she was nominated for attorney general, but i think she will be confronted with those prior statements, and i cannot wait to see how she responds to them. >> yeah, those will be, i think, the big questions that you will definitely hear from democrats. i guess the big question, paula, is when you're, you know, talking to some of these congress members, some of these senators, do they think that she can be independent? what are you hearing? >> yeah. speaking here, listening to senators, particularly democrats, they don't believe that pam bondi or really any trump appointed attorney general is independent

because if they show any independence or push back on the boss, they get fired. see jeff sessions, see bill barr for examples of this. so they are going to raise a lot of these concerns today. this is going to be really i think the theme of this hearing, the questions from democrats are likely mostly to be about loyalty to trump. i would also expect that someone might ask about that second jack smith report, the second volume of his report related to the classified documents case. sources tell me the trump legal team, they're concerned about that report and it will be up to pam bondi whether it gets released to the public. it's a good litmus test of just how loyal she will be to trump. so i really think this is going to be difficult for her to convince democratic senators that she will be completely independent from trump. but again, this is a woman who comes with three decades of experience as a prosecutor. she is more than capable of handling these kinds of questions. but she's she's going to be grilled, which is why she has spent so much time

with her team preparing. and really, we haven't heard from her at all since she's been nominated. >> i'm just curious, would you expect someone in her position who does have a long history of implementing the law as she is supposed to do in florida? she is the first female attorney general there. how do you expect her to answer these questions? how should she answer these questions even though, look, they're going to be likely brought by democrats and the democrats, don't you know, they can't change things if all the republicans vote for her. >> so first of all, i found it really interesting in the opening statement that paula just obtained the draft of there's no mention of any of these issues. there's a sort of oblique reference to it when she says, we need to get rid of the weaponization at doj, but that's sort of a perfectly ambiguous statement. you could look at that and say, oh, good, we're not going to see people picked out and prosecuted for partisan or political reasons. or you could look at it as saying, sort of, we're going to enact the trump agenda of retribution. and that would

even the scales. i think when she's asked those questions, and she certainly will be. we saw senator durbin being questioned earlier about how he's going to question pam bondi. i look for her to be quite lawyerly in her response. i would listen for a lot of this kind of answer while i've made no prejudgment about any given case, every case that comes across my desk as attorney general, i will assess independently on the facts and the law and do the right thing. so i think that will be her mantra today. >> yeah, we saw pete hegseth, who's up for defense secretary, sort of changing what he said in past times. we will see what happens with this nominee, paula reid and elie honig, thank you both so much. appreciate it kate. >> still ahead for us. more confirmation hearings for florida senator marco rubio. he is minutes away as well from his own confirmation hearing. sitting on the other side of the table now taking questions rather than giving them. taking questions from his senate colleagues in his quest to become secretary of state. what he says his top priority will be for the state department if

he is confirmed. also next hour, the confirmation hearing for donald trump's pick to lead the cia john ratcliffe what? what it would mean, what he would mean for the future of america's spy agency kobe believed in himself at the youngest possible age. >> it's one of the most remarkable stories in sports history. i don't want to be remembered as just a basketball player. kobe premieres january 25th on cnn. >> whoa. how'd you get your teeth so white? >> you got to use the right toothpaste, doctor. >> see? >> not all toothpaste whiten the same crest 3-d white removes 100% more stains for a noticeably whiter smile. >> new personal best crest. >> well, you're in the big leagues now. >> how was your vacation, sir? >> well, i needed one with your 10% loyalty program discount. >> that's $225 for the

night. >> not bad. >> $155 for the night. >> hold up how? >> it's easy when you know where to look. >> trivago compares hotel prices from hundreds of sites so you can save up to 40%. >> trivago is my secret tactic. >> hotel trivago. >> if you're living with diabetes, i'll tell you the same thing i tell my patients. getting on dexcom g7 is one of the easiest ways to take better control of your diabetes and help protect yourself from the long term health problems it can cause. this small wearable replaces fingersticks, lowers a-1c, and it's covered by medicare. >> not managing your diabetes really affects your health for the future. >> the older you get, the more complications you're going to see. >> i knew i couldn't ignore my diabetes anymore because it was causing my eyesight to go bad. >> before the dexcom g7, doctors appointments were not something i looked forward to. >> for my patients, getting on

dexcom g7 is the biggest eye opener they've ever had. >> when i got dexcom g7, i couldn't believe how easy it was. this small wearable sends my glucose numbers right to my phone or my receiver. with just a glance, i can see if i'm going high, low or steady so i can quickly get my glucose under control and better protect myself from complications. my a1c is down to 5.8. >> call now to get started on the most accurate and most recommended cgm brand. you'll also get a free discussion guide for your next doctor's visit. >> dexcom g7 has changed my life for the better. now i'm a superstar. my anc is 5.7. >> my anc has never been lower. i go swimming, i ride my exercise bike, and i play with my grandkids. i finally have my life back. >> my wife used to worry about me having diabetes before my dexcom g7, but now she doesn't worry as much because she knows

it gives me a lot of peace of mind. >> i want him to be around forever. >> no other cgm system is more affordable for medicare patients. don't miss out. you may be entitled to this valuable benefit. call the number on your screen now to talk to a real person. >> what do people want from a medicare advantage plan? >> let's find out. >> i want a $0 monthly premium. >> i take a lot of medications, so i need prescription drug coverage. >> if you would like help making an informed decision about your medicare coverage. >> aetna licensed agents are standing by ready to help you find health coverage that meets your needs. >> if you're turning 65, you may qualify for medicare's initial enrollment period, which is the three months before the month of and the three months after the month of your 65th birthday. >> you are not automatically enrolled in a medicare advantage plan. >> aetna has medicare advantage plans, with monthly plan premiums starting at $0. >> plans may also include part

d prescription drug coverage, dental vision and hearing coverage, fitness memberships, and more. >> to find out if an aetna medicare advantage plan is right for you, call now to speak with a licensed aetna agent. >> call 1-833-771-3383 to find out if you qualify for medicare coverage, start the bidding at $5 million. >> robinhood gold members get a 3% ira match, while the wealthy hoard their perks. our retirement contributions are boosted by 3% now, with robinhood gold. some unforgettable, more than incredible. >> are you not entertained? >> what are you ready for? guarantee me. unforgettable. it's pretty kenneth fire. watch on tnt, trutv and stream b r sports on max. >> we're glad to have you all back. >> we are just minutes away now from a new day of confirmation hearings for donald trump's cabinet. pick six and all but two major hearings in terms of national security. senator

marco rubio to be secretary of state, and john ratcliffe to be cia director. let's get right to cnn's alex marquardt for a sense of what we think the major issues will be today in these hearings. alex. >> well, john, this is a very big day for donald trump's national security team on the heels of another big day just yesterday with the hearing for pete hegseth for defense secretary. here we have marco rubio for state, john ratcliffe for cia. these are two men who are slightly less they are less controversial, it should be said, but they will be core members of not just the national security team, but for trump's cabinet as well. they're going before committees today who know them well, in particular marco rubio. he will be grilled by the senate foreign relations committee. it's a committee that he has been on for quite some time. so he knows those players. he knows those issues. well, john, we've gotten some of his opening remarks. we're expecting him to take a swing at what he has seen from the biden administration in terms of what he calls prioritizing

the global order above our core national interests. here's a little bit more of what he plans to say in his opening remarks. at the top priority of the state department must be and will be the united states. every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions does it make america safer? does it make america stronger? does it make america more prosperous? now, john rubio has also been the top republican on the senate intelligence committee, where he's known as a hawk on china. he has long advocated for tougher measures against iran. but as is always the case with incoming national security teams, democrat or republican john, they often want to prioritize the longer term issues, major issues like china. but at the same time, of course, they've got more immediate, shorter term crises and conflicts to deal with, like ukraine, like what's going on in the middle east. we're expecting this ceasefire in gaza any moment now. so there are going to be a lot of issues that rubio is going to

have to tackle right off the bat, john. >> it is a big job, no doubt about that. alex marquardt, stand by. it's going to be a long day for all of us. thank you very much, sarah. >> all right. just minutes from now, trump loyalist pam bondi will take the hot seat at her confirmation hearing, hoping to become the next attorney general. a major question democratic senators wanted answered. would she back the president elect's threats to prosecute his political enemies? that is ahead. >> trump's cabinet picks the candidates you've heard about for months. go before the senate. who will get the votes? >> i think we have great people. >> follow the trump confirmation hearings. follow the facts, follow cnn. >> we lose 1% of our collagen every year starting in our 20s, which means we must start banking collagen for plumper, glowing skin. >> do it with neutrogena collagen bank. trust me, i'm a banker. >> they trust me. the dermatologist. >> it's not a competition. my

favorite babysitter is annalisa. >> she's pretty good. >> she's like my grandma. >> she says, paula, go mustache. and then we go skateboarding. >> from babysitters to nannies to daycare centers. find all the care you need at care.com. >> at this very moment, children at saint jude are fighting to survive with a gift right now. you can join the battle to save lives without saint jude. >> i don't know where we would be. they have given children with cancer like my winston a chance. >> she has neuroblastoma and it has spread to her liver. i try to enjoy every minute with her because i do not know when would be my last moments with her. >> when you support saint jude and give $19 a month, you can help make cures possible for

kids with cancer. saint jude provides customized care for some of the world's sickest children. >> please call, go online or scan the qr code right now. together, we can save more lives. >> just that feeling that was like so hard on your heart. that kid's not going to live every day now. it's like a gift. >> for just $19 a month. you can make a difference. please become a saint jude partner in hope right now. >> those that donate, it's more than a miracle for me. it's more than a blessing. they have done so much for me and my family. >> join with your credit or debit card for only $19 a month, and we'll send you this saint jude t-shirt you can proudly wear to show your support. >> all these children deserve to live, and i would love for it to be the day where no other family has to fear losing their

child to cancer. you've given us hope. >> please don't wait until the last minute. make your donation now to help saint jude save lives nice to meet you. >> my name is david. >> i've been a pharmacist for 44 years and i'm from flowery branch, georgia. >> when i have customers come in, i recommend prevention number one because it's safe and effective, does not require a prescription. and i've been taking it quite a while myself. and i know it works. and i love it when the customers come back in and tell me, david, that really worked so gooet money wi

out and try to get you a refund for the money you lost. >> actually. yeah. download rocket money today. >> ben thinks he's playing a game, but he has no idea. it's blank. it's all a prank on him. >> boy, do i hope we're all friends after this. >> the joe schmo show premieres tuesday at nine on tbs. set

your dvr now. >> we are standing by. any minute now. pam bondi senate confirmation hearing to be attorney general of the united states is about to get underway. it's a huge committee room, and it is filling up. standing by with us. senior justice correspondent evan perez, chief legal affairs correspondent paula reid, senior legal analyst elie honig and of course, manu raju, who's outside that committee hearing room. paula, let me start with you. what is pam bondi going to face today? >> well, she's going to face a lot of tough questions, especially from democrats, about her loyalty to trump. this is going to be the theme of this confirmation hearing. look, there are no questions about her experience and her resume. she comes to this job interview with three decades of experience as a prosecutor, eight years as florida's attorney general. there's no question that she is experienced enough to handle the day to day. the bread and butter issues that face the justice department like violent crime, fraud. she also has a really strong record on pill

mills and opioids. but it's her loyalty to trump that is going to come under scrutiny, because we've seen the kind of pressure that he has put on his previous attorneys general pressuring them to use this agency, leverage it to pursue his political enemies. and he has made it clear on the campaign trail that he intends to do that this time around as well. so she is going to be in a position where she is going to have to confront things trump has done in the past, vis a vis his attorneys general, and figure out how she is going to handle similar situations now. one example they could ask her about is what she will do with jack smith's second special counsel report. it will likely fall to her discretion as to whether that ever sees the light of day, whether the public gets it. that is a report about his alleged mishandling of classified documents. his team is very worried about it. so that's a perfect example of something they could ask her about. will you release this? if so, i think that would be a little surprising. but she's going to face a lot of questions about her relationship with trump,

about false claims she pushed in the 2020 election, about her work as a surrogate for him, that's going to be the big theme, and i'm really fascinated to see how she threads this needle, because we really haven't heard from her at all since she's been nominated. unlike the first nominee, former congressman matt gaetz, she has been really keeping a low profile. i'm told she's been preparing for weeks for these confirmation hearings. she's been quietly meeting with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle in preparation for today. >> all right. thank you, paula, there. we are looking again live inside the hearing room. but outside the hearing room. our manu raju, who has been running down senators trying to get their thoughts before this all starts. what are you hearing from them this morning? manu. >> yeah, that's exactly right. >> that is going to be how democrats plan to go after pam bondi question whether or not she'll be able to show any independence from donald trump, a question about some of the things that she did, her alliance with him, allegiance with him. as trump was trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election, how does she respond to those questions? that's going to be something

that democrats plan to focus on, as well as trying to push back against anything that could potentially be illegal coming from the president of the united states. would he resist anything that could be out of bounds? that's going to be another question. both senator dick durbin, who is the top democrat on the committee, as well as senator chris, both indicated that would be a theme of their questions going in. both of them did have a chance to meet with both of them. had a chance to ask her some of these questions. durbin indicated that he was not satisfied with how she responded while they met. he said, we'll see how she responds in this meeting. now, republicans much different. they plan to defend pam bondi. they plan to go after the biden justice department. and so expect this to really come down along party lines. one senator eric schmidt, just told a group of us, he said, that he believes there should be some consequences for people who went to some of the prosecutors who went after donald trump over the last several years. so there's going to be some some defense of donald trump here and some pushback against what happened in the biden years. so

expect this very much to go along party lines. we'll see if there's any surprises, if any republicans raise any concerns with their answers. that's one thing we'll be watching. but democrats, no question about it, plan to question her loyalty. how did she respond to those questions? that's going to be something to watch in the hours ahead here. sara. >> and again, we are watching this committee hearing room. it will get underway very shortly. you can see the people milling about there in my hands. i'm holding a new york times op ed written by cnn senior legal analyst elie honig. and ellie, you outlined in this op ed basically, pam bondi resume is the kind of resume that gets someone confirmed as attorney general, very similar to janet reno's and others. you know, you worked as a state prosecutor for years, has experience in that front. what you also say, though, is that one area that she needs to talk about or be asked about, miss pam bondi must explain her 2020 election denialism. now, you were a good prosecutor, ellie. how would you ask those questions if

you're the democrats, what specific questions do you ask and what answers do you anticipate? >> so, john, i would confront pam bondi with her own words, quote them. she said, we won pennsylvania. she said there were fake ballots cast. i would read those back to her. i would have her say, first of all, did you say those things? yes, she did. and then i would say, are they true? did you believe them to be true when you said them in 2020? do you still believe them to be true now? and i would demand to the extent possible, some sort of yes or no explanation. and if she says 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 said and you demand to know. did you believe it then? were you making it up? were you mistaken? and have you changed

now we're 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. >> the senate parliamentary hearing. >> yeah. >> 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 asked paula reid a question. we're going to begin, but let's do it. paula, you have new reporting from pam bondi team. tell me what you got. >> yeah, 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. >> good morning everybody. >> i welcome all of you to this very important hearing to consider the nomination of former florida attorney general pam bondi uh, she's serving as the 87th attorney general of the united states. >> after her approval. congratulations to your nomination. mrs. 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 of the committee and a person that's repeating his service here. after a stint off. i welcome to the committee, senator brit, senator schmidt. senator crapo and senator schiff. welcome. uh, 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 senator scott schmidt to introduce this nominee. and following those instructions, introductions and miss bondi's statement will begin the first round of questioning. each senator will have an initial seven minutes 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 nomination to serve as attorney general of the united states. miss 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. your nominated to one of the most important offices in our country. uh, it took. uh, it took, uh. 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 3400. responsive entries you disclose 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 miss 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 required the swift confirmation of an attorney general. this committee should give miss bondi the same benefit of the doubt that this committee gave to attorney general garland. president trump has selected a nominee who's qualifications speak for themselves. miss 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 reelected 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, pam 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, miss bondi handled her responsibilities well. as the florida attorney general, pam 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. 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 $3.25 billion settlement following the deepwater horizon oil spill, and eliminated the backlog of rape test kits, kits that had accumulated in that state's laboratories. miss 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 the junior league of tampa on the board of special olympics florida, and is 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, miss bondi is highly qualified. and of course, as we

all know, a change is desperately needed. when confirmed, miss bondi will take the helm of of a at a very turbulent time for 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 a 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 mishandling 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 oversight duties. 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 briefing. contents were leaked to the media. even though the fbi promised. confidentiality. that leak falsely labeled our oversight work. as you guessed it, russian disinformation 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 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 and 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, is my oversight exposed. the fbi amazingly agreed to destroy laptop records a and and 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 a 2 or 3 others, but just to list them. the department of justice used 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-lgbt and white supremacy lo, 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, miss bondy, 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. now to my friend, ranking member durbin. >> 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 is 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. miss biondi, 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,

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 in 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 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 interests 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 als, 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. so the view that the justice department must be insulated from political influence should 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. miss bond, you made

many years. you have many years of experience in law enforcement, including nearly a decade of service as attorney general and one of the largest states in 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. miss bond, 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 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 will 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 will 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 held a fundraiser 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, miss 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 are prepared to hold you to the same standard. thank you, mr. chairman. >> okay, 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 schmidt is a member of this committee at his place on the dais. uh,

senator scott, please proceed. >> mr. chairman, ranking member and committee members, it is an absolute honor to sit before you today to introduce my good friend pam 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 and father in law, sister, brother, sister in law and 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 the track record to prove. >> it is no secret that the doj is facing a public trust crisia weaponizing the justice system and the entire federal government, they become an agency that tax 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 improve 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 and 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. pam bondi is uniquely equipped to advance his priority as u.s. attorney general because she has a she

was in office together, florida experienced a remarkable 26% drop in overall crime, including a 19.6% drop in violent crime and a 27.4% drop in property crime. these aren't just numbers. these are tens of thousands of lives saved and communities improved and made safer. and families and businesses protected. as florida's attorney general, pam bondi, also spearheaded other life saving initiatives like tackling the opioid opioid epidemic and fighting human trafficking. her achievements are too many for me to list in this short introduction. as u.s. attorney general, pam bondi will restore law and order to the nation. she'll put america's interests first and make the nation a better and safer place. i urge every single member of this committee to support my friend pam bondi. i look forward to voting for her confirmation soon on the senate floor, and help her get to work for the american

people. thank you, chairman. thank you senator al-qahera news. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ranking member durbin and members of the committee. it is an honor for me and a privilege to introduce pam bondi, president trump's nominee to be the 87th attorney general of the united states. i have known and worked closely with pam for years, and i'm glad to call her a friend. when pam was nominated by president trump, my reaction was, this is a home run. as many of us are, i was only to be outdone by senator graham, who described the nomination as a grand slam. touchdown hole in one ace. hat trick. slam dunk. olympic gold medal pick. and he's right. as the letter, joined by more than 100 former justice department officials put it, quote, it's all too rare for senior justice department officials, much less attorneys general, to have such a wealth of experience in the day to day work of keeping our

communities safe, end quote. pam exemplifies and personifies the department of justice's mission to uphold the rule of law, to keep our communities safe, and to protect our rights and liberties as americans. pam has distinguished herself in her career in public service that has taken her from her small town upbringing in temple terrace, florida, to a hearing before this esteemed committee. after attending the university of florida and stetson university college of law, she started her career as a local prosecutor in hillsborough county, florida, as a local prosecutor for nearly two decades, pam kept her community safe, prosecuting violent criminals, drug dealers, those who had threatened the local community, and those who stood in opposition to the rule of law. pam's fellow floridians then elected her to serve as florida's attorney general, where she was the first woman in state history elected to that office. as a former state attorney general myself, i can vouch for the deep experience

that pam bondi has developed from serving in that role as the chief law enforcement official in her state, she worked with local prosecutors to fight crime, work to protect our constitutional rights or the constitutional rights of floridians, and stood up for the little guy by taking on abuses of power. as florida's attorney general, she worked tirelessly to combat the opioid crisis, fighting pill mills and helping to combat the widespread misuse and trafficking of deadly drugs, including fentanyl, which have devastated families and communities all across our country. she stood up for floridians in the wake of a 2008 financial crisis leading to the national mortgage settlement act, resulting in $56 billion in compensation to victims. and after the deepwater horizon oil spill, pam was there and stood up for florida. for floridians by getting $2 billion dollars from the companies responsible. on a more personal note, pam has always taken it upon herself to help

others. she's incredibly generous and someone i could always count on. she's truthful, she's tough, and she's a born leader. she has charted her own course with the rare combination of backbone and heart. the next attorney general of the united states must restore trust by reversing the weaponization we've seen the last four years, and refocusing that department to its core mission administering justice. the next attorney general must promote the rule of law, take on violent crime, keep our communities safe and safeguard the god given rights that each american has protected in our constitution. i can think of no one, no one more up to that task than pam bondi, a career prosecutor and widely respected attorney general. with the prudence, fortitude and temperance for this incredibly important job. mr. chairman, it is truly an honor for me to introduce pam bondi to this committee and to our country here today and speak on

her behalf, and is my hope that her nomination will be swiftly confirmed. >> thank you, senator schmidt. now, miss bondi, would you please come forward and before you're seated, i'd like to administer the oath. would you please raise your right hand and answer this question? do you swear that the testimony you're about to give to this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? please be seated and go ahead with your opening statement. >> thank you. chairman grassley. ranking member durbin and members of the senate judiciary committee. i've had the opportunity to meet with almost all of you, and i greatly appreciate that. i'm

grateful to president trump and to this committee for your consideration to be the 87th attorney general of the united states. i would not be here without my family. and if you can bear with me for just a moment, a lot of them have made a very long trip, and i wrote them all down. so i don't forget anyone. my beautiful mother, who i wouldn't be here. retired kindergarten teacher would not be here without my mom. as of a week ago, it was 12 years since we lost my dad to leukemia. feels like 12 days. um, my amazing husband, john and his two incredible girls, collins and finley. collins is a senior at university of florida. and i think all of you on this committee will be very happy to know finley is in cybersecurity. there's a third who is traveling abroad. i wish she could be here. my amazing father in law, david, my sister beth, my

brother in law is home with my niece, my nephews. if you could just raise your hand. evan, jake and soon to be niece savannah. my brother brad, a brilliant lawyer. my sister in law tandy, and my nephews, justin, who just got a 4.0 at uva rex, great college tennis player. brad, great tennis player, is here. and my niece, my beautiful niece, rhea. and the little guy is in school because he's ten. um, my friends leslie, kathy, dina, tiffany, kim, paula and so many of my former coworkers and ranking member durbin. if you want to get dirt on me, these women have known me since i was a child. um, seriously, most of them. so thank you for indulging me in that. they've all made a very long trip to be here. and thank you for for

holding my hearing as well and not postponing it, i appreciate that. thank you all. from the moment i interned at the state attorney's office in tampa, florida, all i wanted to do was be a prosecutor. the supreme court certified me and i had four jury trials while still in law school, lost most of them, but had four jury trials and never wanted to do anything else. i continued my career there, trying everything from duis, domestic violence cases, capital murder cases, the whole gamut. i became a lead trial attorney in courtroom every day, trying career criminals. was deputy chief of a division and then ultimately was felony bureau chief. and eventually left to become florida's 37th attorney general for the state of florida. nothing has

impacted my career more than my experience as a state prosecutor, because i got to know and still keep in touch with many victims and their families. from when i was a prosecutor. upon becoming attorney general in 2011, i proudly served for two terms. i was term limited. i would probably still be there right now had i not been kicked out of office by term limits. i loved being attorney general. i did my best to keep florida safe, to continue to stand up for victims of crime, and to fight the opioid crisis and the drug crisis that was not only facing florida, but this entire country. out of the top 100. this is one of the things i'm the most proud of. oxycodone dispensers in the entire country. i believe it was 98 of them, 90 or 98 of them lived in florida.

we fought for tough legislation. kids were dropping dead every day. we fought for tough legislation. and after that legislation, none of those opioid dealers doctors practiced in florida. we fought to eliminate human trafficking by raising awareness and prevention and talking to parents and talking to children. we also provided critical resources, including safe houses, that my state was lacking. on the civil side, we worked to protect consumers. we tackled everything, including off label prescription marketing, which affects, as you know, many, many people who can't afford prescriptions as well. we partnered with state attorneys general from both parties and federal agencies across administrations. we went after

price gougers during hurricanes. if confirmed as the next attorney general of the united states. my overriding objective will be to return the department of justice to its core mission of and vigorously prosecuting o si terrorists, cartels, our border and our foreign adversaries. that is what the american people expect, and that is what they deserve from the department of justice. if confirmed, i will do everything in my power and it will be my great responsibility to make america safe again, making america safe again also requires reducing recidivism. we have to fix the bureau of

prisons, and i am looking on both sides of the aisle. the bureau has suffered from years of mismanagement, lack of funding, and low morale. i was proud to support president trump's first step act. i think more can be implemented and more can be done on that front president trump's leadership on criminal justice reform has demonstrated what is possible when a president is unafraid to do the things that have been deemed to be too difficult. we have to reach across the aisle and get solutions for all of these problems, like the president, i believe we are on the cusp of a new golden age where the department of justice can and will do better. if i am confirmed. lastly, and most importantly, if confirmed, i will fight every day to restore

confidence and integrity to the department of justice and each of its components the partisanship, the weaponization will be gone. america will have one tier of justice for all in all this work, i'll collaborate closely with this committee. i will work with all of you as i have committed to do. when i met with almost all of you and i will partner not only with the federal agencies, but with the state and local officials throughout our great country. i look forward to answering your questions today and working together for this country and our constitution. thank you, senators. >> um, i will ask first questions and senator durbin, and then i'll call on the democrat people. the way that

senator durbin would, uh, say so on their arrival or here by seniority, in the same way that on the house side, um, and i'll make sure that i don't abuse the seven minutes i want you to have your attention on this binder that i put up here. it gets to a key factor of each senator's role in oversight. uh, it contains 144 oversight letters that i sent to the biden-harris justice department and its component agencies. with many of those letters in there to the fbi. uh, adding letters to the inspector general, that would be about 165 letters. so i've sent more letters since you've been in my office before christmas.

should you be confirmed? 144 letters will be your responsibility. the responses i have received so far fall in two categories. first, they weren't answered at all. second, i received a response, but it didn't fully respond. said another way the justice department merely sent me words on a piece of paper. so should you be confirmed? you'll have an obligation to respond even to the minority and consider a letter from them. even if my signature is not on it, as they want information. will you commit to responding to my oversight requests, as well as the request of other members of the committee chairman, either i or my top staff will personally review the letters and do everything we can to

respond to you. uh, your tenure as florida attorney general was impressive. you fought against pill mills, human trafficking. you eliminated a backlog of rape test kits in state labs. you fought against organized retail theft, and you were known to stand for law and order with such achievements, it's easy to see why the people of florida reelected you in 2014. and why president elect trump nominated you to serve as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. so this gives you a chance to tell us on this committee and the people of this country, what you're proud of is your record as attorney general of florida. thank you. >> chair. >> thank you, chairman grassley. i am i was truly honored to serve the people of

the state of florida for eight years. but it was a team effort. i had great people around me, many of whom are in this room today. um, and we did a lot. we did a lot to, um, to fight crime. and i've been reminiscing a lot since i was asked to take this nomination. opioids, as i talked about, were a top priority right when i took office. when i was running for office, i went through the entire state of florida. parents were walking up to me, handing me pictures of their children who were deceased from opioid abuse. after i was elected, i took those pictures and i framed them in my office as a goal of stopping that fight, which i talked about in my opening statement. and if u.s. attorney general, i'll bring those pictures back out and they will be there to inspire me on the further drug abuse we're facing

throughout this country. we also learned that something else was happening. pregnant women were having babies as a result of being opioid dependent. we called it neonatal abstinence syndrome. we fought to educate mothers. we fought that issue as well. fentanyl was wreaking havoc in our country, but it was just getting started. i actually fought my own party a bit on scheduling fentanyl, because at that time, people thought it was something you merely got in the hospital on a patch after surgery. apples and oranges. and boy, do we all know that. now the difference fentanyl is raging throughout our country and i will do everything i can to fight that with the agencies that fall under the department of justice, human trafficking became a top priority for me as attorney general. i had the opportunity on a bipartisan trip to go to mexico, and the one thing i found out there, they were doing better than we were. they had safe houses. i

saw things i never dreamed i would see, and all of these things in my past have formed the person i am right now. sitting here before you. i came back to florida. we started a human trafficking council and we partnered with others and we expanded and added safe houses in the state of florida. i don't know how many are in this country right now, but i would like to partner with both sides if confirmed, to continue those efforts, i'd like to interrupt you. >> yes, sir. and go to another question and i'll have another round so you can finish on that point. i'd like to ask you about something that's central to. uh, fighting government waste and fraud. the false claims act. i want to want you to know that attorney general garland calls me once a year. he called me yesterday to tell me the

success of the false claims act. since 1986, when i got it passed, and president reagan signed it. it's brought in $78 billion as of yesterday. his report, two and 9/10 billion dollars for the year of 2020. four. most of that is because of patriotic whistleblowers who found the fraud and brought the cases forward at their own risk. the supreme court has long upheld the law's constitutionality. but i want you to know your view is the false claims act constitutional before you answer that one time in the 1990s, um, one of the attorney general said it wasn't constitutional. and when that same person by the name of barr was back, uh, five years ago to be attorney general, he said it was constitutional. so

if confirmed, will you commit? well, answer that first question. do you think it's constitutional? would you defend the constitutionality of it? >> i would i would defend the constitutionality, of course, of the false claims act. senator. >> uh, last question, if confirmed, would you commit to continuing doj's defense of the constitutionality of it? and will you assure the entire staff and funding levels to properly support and prosecute false claim cases? >> senator, the false claims act is so important, and especially by what you said with whistleblowers as well, and the protection and the money it brings back to our country. yes, sir. >> thank you for your answers, senator durbin. >> thank you. senator grassley. miss bondi, if you're successful in your nomination, this democrat would like to give you three words of advice. answer. grassley's letters. you'll never hear the end of it if you don't. at issue. i believe in

this nomination hearing is not your competence nor your experience. at issue is your ability to say no more than any other cabinet official. the attorney general has to be prepared to put the constitution first, and even tell the president of the united states, you're wrong. the political danger and personal costs of such a decision are well documented. you have only to ask former attorney general jeff sessions and bill barr, whom donald trump sacked for lack of loyalty. and so i have three basic questions i'd like to ask you. most americans believe that central to the peaceful transition of power in a democracy is the acceptance of the results of an election. to my knowledge, donald trump has never acknowledged the legal results of the 2020 election. are you prepared to say today, under oath, without reservation, that donald trump lost the presidential contest to joe biden in 2020, ranking

member durbin president biden is the president of the united states. >> he was duly sworn in, and he is the president of the united states. there was a peaceful transition of power. president trump left office and was overwhelmingly elected in 2024. >> do you have any doubts that joe biden had the majority of votes, electoral votes necessary to be elected president in 2020? >> you know, senator, all i can tell you as a prosecutor is from my firsthand experience. and i accept the results. i accept, of course, that joe biden is president of the united states. but what i can tell you is what i saw firsthand when i went to pennsylvania as an advocate for the campaign. i was an advocate for the campaign, and i was on the ground in pennsylvania, and i saw many things there. but do i accept the results? of course i do. do i agree with what happened? and

i saw so much, you know, no one from either side of the aisle should want there to be any issues with election integrity in our country. we should all want our elections to be free and fair, and the rules and the laws to be followed. >> i think that question deserved a yes or no. and i think the length of your answer is an indication that you weren't prepared to answer yes. have you heard the recording of president trump on january 2nd, 2021, when he urged the secretary of state of georgia to, quote, find 11,780 votes and declare him the winner of that state. >> no, i've heard about it through clips, but no, no, senator, i've not heard it. >> what was your reaction to president trump making that call? >> i have i would have to listen to the tape. senator. >> well, the quote that i give you is exact. he said to the georgia secretary of state, find 11,780

votes. >> do you have the entire context of that call? i feel like it was long, much longer than that and may have been taken out of context. >> it was an hour long, and you can certainly listen to it. i hope you will. every american should. as a former prosecutor, are you not concerned that the president of the united states called a state election official and asked him to find enough votes to change the results of the election? >> senator, i have not listened to the hour long conversation, but it's my understanding that is not what he asked him to do. >> you need to listen to it. let me ask a third question. do you believe that the january 6th rioters who've been convicted of violent assaults on police officers should be pardoned? >> senator, if confirmed as attorney general of the united states, the pardons, of course, fall under the president. but if asked to look at those cases, i will look at each case

and advise on a case by case basis, just as i did my entire career as a prosecutor. >> you also advised the president on pardons as part of your responsibility as attorney general. and so i'm asking you, do you believe that those who have been convicted of the january 6th riot, violent assaults on our police officers should be pardoned? that's a simple question. >> so, senator, i have not seen any of those files. of course, if confirmed and if asked to advise the president, i will look at each and every file. but let me be very clear. in speaking to you, i condemn any violence on a law enforcement officer in this country. >> let me ask you about your work as a lobbyist for ballard partners. you did not list your current position as a partner at the lobbying firm, nor the work you've done for your ballard. ballard partner. clients such

as lobbying for the country of qatar for $115,000 a month, and for corporate giants amazon and uber. when you were asked about conflicts of interest, why do you believe your work as a lobbyist does not constitute potential conflicts of interest? >> well, senator, first, that was the amount my firm received, i believe multiple people represented the country of qatar within my firm, my role, and i am very proud of the work that i did. it was a short time, and i wish it had been longer for qatar was anti-human trafficking efforts leading into the world cup, which is something i'd like to talk about later too. i was registered as fara, along with many members of my firm. that was the sole portion of my representation for qatar. now, if there are any conflicts with anyone i represented in private practice, i would consult with the career ethics officials within the department and

make the appropriate decision. i would also like to point out to you, i don't believe that i would be the first attorney general who has represented and advocated for businesses in their past. >> of course not. the question is whether you will recuse yourself from any cases involving your ballard clients. one of those clients was the geo group. was it not? >> geo? yes. >> a private prison company. you lobbied for. it manages correctional institutions and detention facilities. the geo group has faced criticism for safety violations, inadequate health care and poor management. the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement is geo's largest source of revenue under the trump administration. geo stands to earn hundreds of millions of dollars by detaining immigrants. if there is this mass deportation, would you sense any conflict of interest? if you're asked to judge the performance of this government contractor? >> senator, i will consult with

the career ethics officials within the department of justice and make the appropriate decision. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator graham. >> thank you. congratulations. thank you. forgot to say that john's family was from south carolina, the upstate. >> i'm sorry. yeah. >> give you a pass on that? i'm anderson, by the way. so listen, president trump asked a bunch of us, who would you pick for attorney general? how many of you got to ask that on our side? probably didn't ask dick, but he asked me. i said pam bondi, that's like an easy decision. i couldn't think of anybody more qualified that he knew that he trusted. and it's okay to have. you were his lawyer, right? >> yes, sir. i represented him when they tried to impeach him the first time as part of white house counsel, office of special counsel. >> being trump's lawyer prepares you for many things. so, yeah, you have a long standing relationship with the president. he trusts you. that's a good thing. that's

probably why president kennedy picked his brother, bobby kennedy. i guess you can say no to your older brother. i'm sure he would. but this idea, there's something bad is ridiculous. who do you pick? you pick people you know. you pick people you trust, people that you're qualified. i'm glad he picked you. he knows you. he trusts you, and you're highly qualified. so the idea that there's something wrong with that is just absolutely ridiculous. so let's talk about, um, the job you're about to have here. do you support making certain drug cartels in mexico foreign terrorist? organization? >> senator, i personally went to mexico. i personally dealt with these cartels when i was a state prosecutor, and they are a grave and violent threat to our country. yes. >> advising the president. good, good. now, when it comes to, um, crossfire hurricane or

those days over, if you're attorney general. >> absolutely. okay. >> lake and laken riley, are you familiar with that case? >> sadly, i am. senator graham. >> do you know why? uh, the man who killed her was released from custody. he was paroled to the detention capacity at the central processing center in el paso, texas. now, that's not your call. you'll be doge. but do you agree with me that the statute regarding parole does not allow parole to be based on. we don't have detention beds. there's nothing in that statute would authorize parole based on lack of capacity. are you familiar with that statute? yes, sir. >> and that's frightening. >> yeah, well, it is frightening. are you going to fix it? >> i'm going to do everything in my power to fix it. if confirmed as attorney, you're going to advise president trump. >> we need more beds. tom homan is the guy who's going to do this. but would you, as attorney general, say we need more bed space? so laken riley

never happens again? >> senator, my job, if confirmed as attorney general, will be to keep america safe. do you think we need more detention space? and that includes having enough space for violent criminals, for people that should not be in this country who have committed violent crimes and laken riley like laken riley is one of many. yeah. >> 41,000 beds in this country to detain people. we've got like millions of people here illegally. we let this dude go because we didn't have any place to put him. i hope those days are over. and if you're listening out there, i hope you create enough detention space to make sure we don't find this dilemma ever again. uh, do you think we're at war? and if so, who with? >> oh, senator, we're at war on so many fronts. >> um, we're at war with i.s.i.s. >> of course we're at war with i.s.i.s. >> they're. they're at war with us. do you agree with that? >> absolutely. >> do you think since our withdrawal from afghanistan, threats to our homeland have

gone up from i.s.i.s.? yes. okay. march 7th, 2024. general carrillo, i.s.i.s., i.s.i.s. retains the capability and will to attack the and western interests abroad in as little as six months with little or no warning. that's march of 2024. uh, general mckenzie, i.s.i.s. has a strong desire to attack the united states after it began to grow in afghanistan, following u.s. exit in august 2021. he also stated the threat to i.s.i.s. k from i.s.i.s. k is growing. uh, major general quantock the u.s. remains target number one for i.s.i.s. k do you agree with that, senator? >> i don't have my security clearance, but from everything i've read and heard, i.s.i.s. is one of the greatest threats. >> okay, well, when you get your security clearance, you're going to find out these people are coming after us and they want to kill us. so i would like to have a strategy to deal

with the i.s.i.s. threat that's beyond just the law enforcement model. does that make sense to you that we should use every tool in the toolbox, senator, that includes wrapping in our state and local officials, too, and better cooperation throughout our country and our world? i totally agree. do you support reauthorizing fisa in 2025? >> senator, i believe 702 is up in 2026. i believe it's 2026. and we will closely be looking at that. fisa is a very important you agree that the the. >> 702 provides important intel gathering capability to protect our nation. >> extremely important okay. >> so pam, you're about to step into a job that's one of the most important jobs in any democracy. uh, let's go back to pardons. if i'm a lawyer for

somebody in jail, would you promise to listen to the application and read it before you made a decision? >> yes. okay. >> no matter who you are, good. that's the way it works. people want to bargain with you up here. will you do this? will you do that? all i ask you to do is call it as you see it. hire good, competent people and give the president the best legal advice you can run the department of justice in a manner that other people would want to join it one day. growing up, i had a fondness for the fbi. i watched the show. i think it's every sunday. wanted to be an fbi agent right now, the fbi needs, need, needs an image overhaul. so you have a real task ahead of you in two areas to restore trust to many americans who have lost trust in department of justice and to make sure that this country is safe from drug cartels that are killing 3000 americans every two weeks for money to go after these people and to protect our

homeland that's under siege. i think you're the perfect pick at one of the most dangerous times in american history, and i look forward to supporting you. >> thank you. senator. >> senator whitehouse, thank you, chairman. >> welcome, miss bondi. >> thank you, senator, and thank you for meeting with me. i greatly appreciate that. >> it was a pleasure. um, miss bondi, you were a courtroom prosecutor for a great many years as a courtroom prosecutor, did you ever have an enemies list? >> no, senator. >> and you went on to be florida's attorney general as florida's attorney general, did you ever have an enemies list? >> no. senator. >> as florida's attorney general, you were responsible for hiring into the florida department of attorney general, correct. >> senator, the attorney general's office in florida is the third largest in the state. approximately 1400 employees and approximately 400 lawyers. only california and texas are bigger offices. >> and you were responsible for

hiring into that office while you were attorney general? yes. would you have hired someone into the florida attorney general's office who you knew had an enemies list senator, to cut to the chase, you're clearly talking about kash patel. >> i don't believe he has an enemies list. he made a quote on tv, which i have not heard. i saw your sign or senator durbin sign about cash, but i. i know that kash patel has had 60 jury trials as a public defender, as a prosecutor, he has great experience in the intel department, department of defense. i have known cash and i believe that cash is the right person at this time. for this job, you'll have the ability to question mr. patel, and i'm questioning you right now about whether you will enforce an enemies list that he announced publicly on television. oh, senator, i'm sorry. there will never be an

enemies list within the department of justice. >> thank you. um, the fbi's. what is the fbi's role in national security and counterterrorism? and how important is that role? >> you know, senator, i believe now more than ever, counterterrorism is so important and vital in our country. we are facing such incredible threats here and abroad. if i'm sure many of you saw, um, fbi, former fbi director wray's interview on 60 minutes, he talked about the threats that frankly, again, i don't have my security clearance, but the threats facing us, senator from china, from china right now that are so great given sleeper cells within our country, given that importance, is it responsible to call for shutting down the fbi's counterterrorism and national security work? >> and will you, as attorney

general, impede or shut down the fbi's counterterrorism and national security work? >> senator. questions. senator, i believe that national security is vital right now for our country on so many fronts. i could continue to discuss my role in that. and the fbi plays a vital role in counterterrorism throughout, or will not shut down. i will look at each agency. i have no intention of shutting anything down right now. senator. i am not in that office yet. and if confirmed, i will look at each individual agency and how it should be managed. but counterterrorism right now in our world is vital. >> you have said that department of justice prosecutors will be prosecuted in the trump administration. what department of justice prosecutors will be prosecuted and why? >> i said that on tv. i said prosecutors will be prosecuted to finish the quote, if bad

investigators will be investigated. you know, we all take an oath, senator, to uphold the law. none of us are above the law. let me give you a really good example of a bad lawyer within the justice department. a guy named clinesmith who altered a fisa warrant. one of the most important things we can do in this country. so will everyone be held to an equal? equal and fair system of justice? if i am the next attorney general? absolutely. and no one is above the law, under what circumstances will you prosecute journalists for what they write? i believe in the freedom of speech only if anyone commits a crime. it's pretty basic, senator, with anything, with with any victim. and this is this goes back to my entire career for 18 years as a prosecutor and then

eight years as florida's attorney general. you find the facts of the case, you apply the law in good faith, and you treat everyone fairly and, um, it would not be appropriate for a prosecutor to start with a name and look for a crime. >> it's a prosecutor's job to start with a crime and look for a name. correct? >> senator, i think that is the whole problem with the weaponization that we have seen the last four years. and what's been happening to donald trump. they targeted donald trump. they went after him actually starting back in 2016. they targeted his campaign. they have launched countless investigations against him. that will not be the case. if i am attorney general, i will not politicize

that office. i will not target people simply because of their political affiliation. justice will be administered even handedly throughout this country. senator, we've got to bring this country back together. we've goto ccern is that weaponization of the justice department may well occur under your tenure, and we want to make sure that that's not the case, that you remain independent, that you remain able to and willing to tell the president no, when that's necessary for to protect the constitution and the integrity of the department. so that's where i'm asking these questions. um, we talked in the meeting about the contacts policy that has prevailed, really, since senator hatch sat in that chair and demanded it of the clinton justice department through all the administration since then, with the exception of a brief period under attorney general

gonzales, which he corrected and which did not end well for him. there has been a context policy that limits contacts between the white house and the department of justice to a very few senior officials on each side. in your role as attorney general, if you are confirmed, will you maintain, defend and enforce that long standing contacts policy? >> senator? yes, i will meet with white house counsel and i will meet with the appropriate officials and follow the contacts policy. >> my time has expired. thank you, miss bondi beach. >> senator cornyn. miss bondi, your testimony is music to my ears. >> thank you. one of the things that i have been most concerned about over the last, certainly the last four years and extending back during president trump's administration, is the weaponization and politicization of the department of justice, which, together with the fbi, is one of the most important

institutions in this country. if people don't trust that their their elected officials will faithfully enforce the law or administer equal justice under the law, they've lost faith in america and that that disturbs me greatly. and i know it does you too, based on what you said. so i'm delighted to hear you say what you have said, but i want to talk about some specific topics. time is short. first, the border, i believe, uh, president biden and vice president harris had presided over one of the biggest humanitarian and public safety disasters in american history. senator cruz and i represent a state with 1200 miles of common border with america. but as you pointed about, out with fentanyl, what happens at the border doesn't stay at the

border. fentanyl poisoning is the most common cause of death of young people between the age of 18 and 45. we know where it comes from. the precursors come from china. they go to the cartels, they mix them up, make them look like innocuous pills, and young people take them and die. it's just that simple. and that tragic. so there's just so much that we could talk about with regard to the border, but, you know, i know people voted for president trump in large part because of his promise to restore security at the border. will you do everything within your power as attorney general to enforce the laws on the books, including the president's executive orders, which i anticipate he will be signing on january the 20th when he is sworn in and help do everything you can in the department of justice can to restore security

to our southern border. >> yes, senator. absolutely. >> one example is, of course, if you come here to the united from anywhere in the country and you show up at the border under the biden and harris administration policies, you'll simply be released into the interior of the country, either to await a trial date, which may never occur due to the enormous backlog, or you will simply be paroled. and i know parole has a special connotation in the criminal law, but in this context, as you know, it's designed to be administered on a case by case basis. yet president biden and vice president harris had granted parole, that is released people into the united states on a categorical basis, or anybody who shows up or because they don't have the detention facilities to keep them. so do you believe laken riley would be alive today if

president biden and vice president harris had enforced the law and secured the border? >> senator, he should not have been in our country. and then laken riley would have been alive. and i don't think it's just laken riley. there are so many victims throughout our country. not only that, we're all familiar with the violent gangs who are coming into our country, walking into our country freely through the open border, the cartels, the gangs, venezuela's let people out of their prisons. it's been reported. i don't have the security clearance yet to see what's happening, but i know we all know there are criminals throughout our country. and it is my commitment to you on both sides of the aisle that i will do everything in my power with the agencies that fall under me. if i am confirmed to make america safe again, we have to do that, senator. >> well, many of us, of course,

see classified information on the intelligence committee or just generally in our duties as a as a senator. and so you're not going to feel any better about the blinking lights. the danger that that director wray has talked about in my closing moments here. i want to revisit an issue that is of particular importance. 60% of the president's daily brief, which is the intelligence brief that the director of national intelligence and the cia director delivered to the president comes from section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. i've called this the most important law that most people have never heard of. i know you have, and you're familiar with it, but i want to ask you a few more, a few questions about that. it's been called the crown jewel of u.s. intelligence. and of course, it cannot be used legally used to spy on american citizens. and

if it is, it ought to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. i know you would agree with that. but there have been some, as you know, and as you pointed out to senator graham, we have a temporary extension of the existing authorization for the use of the intelligence community to target foreign threats to our national security that expires in 2026. and i'd like you just to confirm here on the record that you will enforce that law and you can support the law as it is written. >> senator, i haven't read the entire 702 in front of you, but i will commit to reading that and doing everything i can to keep america safe again. >> of course you will. so, director ratcliffe, who's going to be. i'm going to go to his hearing on former cia director. of course, he was confirmed as director of national intelligence. he some have argued that in order to

query or look at lawfully collected requirement in order to show probable cause that a crime, including espionage, perhaps has been committed. but director ratcliffe has written that a warrant requirement may not achieve its intended objectives and could hinder national security efforts. do you share director ratcliffe's concerns? >> i would read his memo and i will speak to you after i read his memo. senator. >> well, we need to have a i hope you and i can continue this conversation after this because, um, i think there's a lot of misinformation with regard to how section 702 works. i'm happen to be one of the members of the senate intelligence committee. we read that product on a regular basis, and it is not used to spy on american people. i think

what's fundamentally missing is a lack of trust in the intelligence community, including the fbi, which i'm hoping you and mr. patel can restore. thank you. >> thank you. >> uh, senator klobuchar, thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair. um, we had a good meeting this week. thank you for that. um, and i appreciated your priorities on human trafficking that you mentioned today that work as well as fentanyl and some of your other prosecution experience. we had some similar backgrounds in doing that. um, and i want to talk about, first of all, the u.s. attorney's office in minnesota, um, one of the premier offices in the country. this office has been instrumental in combating violent crime, dismantling street gangs, um, taking fentanyl off our streets, enforcing civil rights laws after george floyd's murder, ensuring victims of fraud get justice. um, do you agree that it should be a

priority to support u.s. attorney's frontline prosecutors and case agents who work hard every single day on our streets? >> senator, i think that is one of the most important things in our country right now. and there are so many good men and women within the justice department throughout our country, as well as all the law enforcement agencies. yes, they work very hard and they will be supported. >> um, the i'm concerned about some of the proposals that could put cuts in the cops program, burn jag programs. i know you're familiar with those. senator murkowski and i lead the cops reauthorization bill. um, just will you commit to continue to support those programs? >> senator? i will read everything about those programs because that is a top priority of mine. and i would love to meet with you on that. and senator murkowski to support law enforcement and those programs. >> thank you. uh, independence from political interference is

vital to the legitimacy and success of the department of justice. i was honestly troubled by some of the answers to senator durbin's questions. we will continue that discussion, i'm sure, on the committee about the election. but i want to focus on the investigation, charging decisions. as a prosecutor. i'm sure you had this experience. i would get calls from people, hey, that's just a kid. give him a break. and i remember one answer i gave was, he's 40 years old. he's not a kid. um, but that kind of interference is attempted all the time. and one of my concerns here, whether it's a call from a friend, a corporate lobbyist, a white house, it has been very clear that the attorney generals of both parties have established clear policies to ensure the white house doesn't tamper with criminal investigations and prosecutions at attorney general mike mukasey's hearing, he made clear that any attempt by the white house and these are the words to interfere with the

case, is not to be countenanced. any call to a line assistant or to a united states attorney from a political person relating to a case, is to be cut and curtailed. do you agree with the statement, senator? >> yes. i believe that the justice department must be independent and must act independently. the number one job is to enforce the law fairly and even handedly, and that's what will be done if i am confirmed as the attorney general. >> so you will provide an insurance to every member of this committee that the justice department will only follow the facts and the law, and the white house will play no role in cases investigated or brought. >> senator, it will be my job, if confirmed as attorney general, to make those decisions. politics will not play a part. i've demonstrated that my entire career as a prosecutor, as attorney

general, and i will continue to do that if you confirm me as the 87th attorney general of the united states of america and in earlier question, um, with some of my colleagues talked about china and the risk, yet you have a nominee from this incoming administration. >> kash patel the pick to head the fbi of serious concerns about him, has referred to the fbi's intel division, which is responsible for protecting us from foreign adversaries like china, as, quote, the biggest problem the fbi has had. and he said that he wants to, quote, break that component out of the fbi. do you agree? >> i have not seen those comments from mr. patel. i would review them, but we have to do everything we can to protect our country again. mr. patel would fall under me and the department of justice, and i will ensure that all laws are followed and so will he. okay. >> there are many decisions

made by the fbi director, having seen a number of them do their work. that can be made. while i agree you would be the boss of kash patel, i'm not sure that you would be able to intervene with every decision or position that he had or know what he's doing. so let's continue. do you agree it is a duty of the justice department to defend the laws congress passes? and will you commit to do even when the president may disagree with an act campaigned against its passage or called its for its repeal? president reagan's ag william french smith said the department policy was the department has the duty to defend an act of congress. whenever a reasonable argument can be made in its support. so i'm specifically referring to the 2022 law that i long led, that we passed to empower medicare to negotiate drug prices, major savings for seniors. will you commit to defend the law against the lawsuits from big pharma? >> senator, i was involved in big pharma cases when i was

attorney general of the state of florida, and i will commit to protect the laws of the united states of america. >> okay. thank you. that would also the same question with the supreme court is going to be hearing a challenge to the affordable care act's coverage of preventative services. and despite the fact that you twice joined suits to have the entire affordable care act invalidated, will you commit to defending this law? >> yeah, i believe this is very different. it's a very isolated. it's different. it's not the entire affordable care act, but i will it's pending litigation, of course, within the department since the 1990s, the freedom of access to clinic entrances act has protected patients, providers and facilities that provide reproductive health services. >> will you commit to continuing to enforce the face act to address violence and threats against those providing reproductive health care services?

>> senator. the face act not only protects abortion clinics, but it also protects pregnancy centers and people going for counseling. the law should be applied even handedly. yes, senator. >> so you'll uphold the enforcement of that law? >> i'll uphold the enforcement of the law, senator. okay. >> and i will ask my antitrust questions in the next round. we had a good discussion about that, and i do appreciate the nominee that has been put in place for the antitrust division. and there's incredibly important work that has to be done in that division. >> so slater is remarkable. >> thank you. thank you. >> i thank all of my colleagues for abiding by the seven minute rule. before i call on senator lee. i want everybody to plan on our first break would be about 1150, and that would be 30 minutes for lunch. >> senator lee, thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, miss bondi, for being here today. i too, share the assessment that gail slater is great. had a great meeting with her

yesterday. um, and just thrilled that you're here and that you're willing to serve. i'd like to talk to you as a longtime lawyer and one who has handled a variety of criminal matters about the fourth amendment. what can you tell us about the fourth amendment's warrant requirement and why it's so important? >> well, the warrant requirement requirement is so important, which i've dealt with that since i was in my 20s. as a state prosecutor, a warrant is so important because it protects citizens rights, and that's why it's so important. >> does that specifically because under the fourth amendment, you're required to go to a judge and you're required to show a judge evidence, evidence, uh, providing probable cause, uh, and based on that probable cause, you can describe with particularity the things or persons to be searched or seized. and on that basis, the judge may issue or not issue the warrant, but without it, you can't get it. now, this is time consuming, no doubt. right. >> oh, i've done many of them. yes. it's very time consuming, senator. >> and there's probably not a

law enforcement officer anywhere in the world who wouldn't acknowledge that they could save time if they didn't have to go about it, and yet we require it. why is that so important that we do it? >> well? it's so important for the reasons you just laid out when i said i've done many of them, i've approved them and not approved them. as a state prosecutor because law enforcement, there are checks and balances and law enforcement must bring these warrants to prosecutors to see if there is sufficient evidence. then after that's done, they have to take them to a judge to have a judge sign them. so there have to be sufficient checks and balances throughout our system. >> so even after you as attorney general, as the chief law enforcement officer and prosecutorial authority in the state of florida approved it within your office, you still had to go to the judge. and if it was late at night or early in the morning, didn't matter. when you had to find a judge, all hours of the night. >> that was more when i was a state prosecutor. as attorney general, the office of the state wide prosecutor, nick cox, would have done that many,

many times at all hours throughout the night and woken up many, many judges throughout the state of florida. >> is there an exception to the warrant requirement that exists any time? it would be inconvenient for prosecutors or anytime national security might be involved. >> i'm not certain about national security, but but absolutely no. for a state prosecutor. yeah, there's no no exception. >> there's no catch all exception that just says this is important or it would be inconvenient for the prosecutor. and with good reason. right. we've learned through sad experience over many hundreds of years, not only in our own country, but also in that of our mother country. what happens when you don't have this in the loop? so you've been asked today a little bit about section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act, also known as fisa. there are those who have repeatedly assured members of this committee, including myself, that don't worry. uh, content of phone calls or electronic communications involving american citizens,

sometimes resulting in the quote, unquote, incidental collection of american citizens, private conversations. uh, don't worry, their fourth amendment rights are just fine. and yet, when they incidentally collect the communications of american citizens, either because they're perhaps unwittingly talking to somebody who might be an agent of a foreign power and, uh, and themselves under 702 surveillance, they get onto this big database and at times there are those in the government, including the federal bureau of investigation, who have gotten into that database and done so, of course, without a warrant, because there currently is no warrant requirement. this has the effect of what we call a de facto backdoor warrantless search. would you agree with me that that is potentially concerning anytime an american citizens private conversations are intercepted, stored, whether as an incidental collection or otherwise, they ought not be searched without some kind of probable cause showing? i assume you would

agree with me. yes. yeah. it's important. sometimes people will defend that by saying national security is involved, as if that's the beginning and the end of the inquiry. that has never been the case, and i hope and pray it never will be the case, because that's not what the fourth amendment says, not what it does, not what it ever can be. so it's my sincere hope that the next time, the fisa 702 comes up for reauthorization, congress finally do what it has been avoiding for a long time, which is to ensure that this doesn't happen. we've heard again and again from people who, if you're confirmed to this position, will soon be your predecessors. uh, prior occupants of the position to which you've been nominated and to which mr. patel has been nominated. don't worry. we have good people. don't worry. we have good systems in place. don't worry. it's as good as a warrant requirement. the internal approval procedure that we have within our system. and yet we found out time and time again that this has happened, uh, is by some accounts, hundreds of thousands

of times these things have been accessed where searches for an american citizens private communications that have been intercepted and stored through incidental collection have been searched without those safeguards, uh, being met, including instances where people just wanted to check on, uh, to cite one example, whether his father was cheating on his mother or in other instances, doing background checks on someone looking to lease an apartment that he owned and was looking to rent out. this is unacceptable and we've got to fix it. speaking of unacceptable, we have seen over the last few years the weaponization of government, specifically within the department of justice against law abiding americans, law abiding americans whose offense was something along the lines of, you know, them exercising their constitutional rights, ranging from catholics attempting to practice their faith, uh, to parents showing up to school board meetings, uh, to people showing up to

engage in peaceful protesting outside of abortion clinics. as attorney general, how will you prevent the weaponization of the department of justice against americans? >> and, senator, you just gave the classic example of what's been happening regarding the weaponization. i mean, going after parents at a school board meeting has got to stop for practicing your religion, sending informants in to catholic churches must stop. >> what about granting parents as domestic terrorists or trying to incarcerate one's political opponent? as a sitting president of the united states? >> will stop, must stop your senator? >> is exactly the sort of answer i was hoping and expecting to receive from you. and i look forward to doing everything i can to help get you confirmed. i've been pleased with your answers thus far. i've enjoyed knowing you, considering you a friend for many years, and look forward to the great things you will do as attorney general of the united states. you have my emphatic

support and my vote. >> thank you, senator. >> senator, thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, attorney general bondi, and to your family and supporters, thank you for your service, and i look forward to our conversation today. i have a simple three factor test when considering the executive branch nominees before us. do you have the qualifications and experience to do the job policy views to do the job in the best interest of the american people and the character and integrity to conduct your job and yours in particular, with the independence that the role requires. you demonstrably have the relevant experience. i understand we will not see eye to eye on some or even many policies, but we had a constructive conversation last week about our shared interest in fighting the opioid epidemic, countering human trafficking, criminal justice reform, and supporting law enforcement. but i need to know that you share a core value, ensuring the department of justice remains free from partisan or political influence, in particular by the white house. so i look forward

to our discussion about that today. as attorney general. if confirmed, who would be your client? >> my oath would be to support and defend the constitution of the united states of america. the people of america would be my client, and it is also my job to advise the president. my client is the are the people of america. >> a simple question of constitutional interpretation is president elect trump eligible to run for another term as president in 2028? >> no, senator, not unless they change the. constitution. >> thank you. um, one of the concerns i've raised with you is safeguarding the department of justice's independence in the face of some promises on the campaign trail by then candidate trump, that he would use the department to target his political adversaries, or that he might interfere with prosecution. what would you do if your career doj prosecutors,

came to you with a case to prosecute, grounded in the facts and law, but the white house directs you to drop the case? >> senator, if i thought that would happen, i would not be sitting here today. that will not happen. will not happen. every case will be prosecuted based on the facts and the law that is applied in good faith. period. politics have got to be taken out of the system. i agree with you has been weaponized for years and years and years. but let me has to stop. >> thank you. let me, if i might, madam attorney general, refer you back to senator durbin's opening comments about previous attorneys general, our former colleague jeff sessions, bill barr. um, i don't think it's credible to say that it may never happen that the president elect would direct an unethical or illegal

act. i think both of those attorneys general found themselves crosswise with the then president by doing things he didn't welcome or approve of. just to answer the question for me, if you would, i know you may not expect it. i know you wouldn't have accepted this nomination if you thought it possible, but let's imagine that once again, president-elect trump issues a directive or order to you or to the fbi director that is outside the boundaries of ethics or law. what will you do, senator? >> i will never speak on a hypothetical, especially one saying that the president would do something illegal. what i can tell you is my duty, if confirmed as the attorney general, will be to the constitution and the united states of america. and the most important oath, part of that oath that i will take are the last four words. so help me god. >> given the importance of that oath, i hope you can understand

the importance of repeated questions from some of us about the importance of having independence in the department of justice. it has a long tradition of independent special prosecutors, especially to handle high profile or often political cases. if you got credible evidence of a criminal violation by a white house official, including even the president, would you bring in a special prosecutor? >> senator, that's a hypothetical. i can tell you. what i do know is special prosecutors have been abused in the past on both sides. we have seen that for many, many years. they have cost the taxpayers countless dollars, countless. and i will look at each situation on a case by case basis and consult the appropriate career ethics officials within the department to make that decision. >> attorney general, do you do you think special counsel's need to be confirmed by the senate? >> i will follow the law and i

will consult with the appropriate ethics officials regarding the law. right now, they do not need to be senate confirmed, of course. >> but you did sign an 11th circuit brief arguing that he should be. >> i will follow the law, senator. that's why i said that. >> understood. but i was just getting to the clarity about the difference between a position you've advocated and what the current law is. thank you for that. um, look, bluntly to me, refusing to answer a hypothetical when there is clear and concrete previous history raises some concerns for me. i think chris wray has done an outstanding job as fbi director at avoiding political pressure. and although he was chosen by president trump, he's being driven out so that he can be replaced. my perception i've not yet met with mr. patel by a loyalist who has publicly said he will do what the president asks him, given that attorney general barr was asked to go find evidence of election

interference and improprieties, went and looked for the evidence and said, i can't find any, and was then dismissed. i'm just going to ask you one last time. can you clarify for me that in following ethics and the law, you'd be willing to resign if ordered to do something improper? >> senator, i wouldn't work at a law firm. i wouldn't be a prosecutor. i wouldn't be attorney general. if anyone asked me to do something improper. and i felt i had to carry that out, of course i would not do that. that's one of the main things you learn when you're a young prosecutor is to do the right thing. and i believe that is continued with me throughout my very long career. >> as we discussed protecting american invention and innovation, american intellectual property is a real concern of mine and of several others on this committee. i look forward to talking with you about that pressing concern. but the most important question i had for you today is whether you will be willing and able to stand up to

politicization and interference in the department of justice, and i look forward to further clarification from you about the specifics of that. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> uh, senator cruz would be next, but he's not here. so i call on senator kennedy. >> thank you, mr. chairman. miss bondi, welcome. congratulations. um, can we agree that legitimacy is important to america's to america's criminal justice system? >> yes, senator. >> can we agree that? legitimacy is important to the department of justice, which in part, which in part administers our criminal justice system? >> yes, senator. >> and if, um, if americans

come to believe that our criminal justice system or our department of justice is acting illegitimately. that makes americans less likely to accept the results of that system, does it not? >> yes, senator. >> and that makes americans less likely to follow the substantive laws that we pass that are administered by the department of justice. isn't that true? >> yes, senator. >> and if that happens, we have chaos, don't we? chaos and the social contract is breached, isn't it? >> yes. >> do you remember a person by the

name of michael avenatti? >> yes. >> um. several years ago, he was a media star here in in washington, an attorney. >> correct? yes. >> he was a media star. and many members of our media loved him because he persistently. bashed donald trump. um, and he was on tv every day. he was on cnn more than wolf blitzer uh, do you know where mr. avenatti is today? >> i believe he's sitting in prison, senator. >> he's in jail because he was a crook. and the department of justice helped put him there, didn't it? >> yes, senator.

>> do you remember a gentleman by the name of sam bankman-fried yes, senator. boy genius. um. so smart and so powerful that he thought he could, uh, command the tides. so smart and so powerful and so rich that he would go to meetings with serious people like bill clinton. like tony blair, looking like a slob. looking like a. a fourth runner up to a john belushi lookalike contest. and he thought it was cute. where is mr. bankman-fried today?

>> i believe he is in prison, and i believe that's from the netflix series i saw as well. >> because he's a crook. and who helped put him there? >> the department of justice. >> senator, can we agree that there's some really, really good men and women at the department of justice? >> many, many great men and women in the justice department as well, senator, as all the law enforcement agencies that fall within the department of justice. they're out there risking their lives, especially the law enforcement officers. every single day. >> can we agree, though, that there there have been and may be today, some bad people at the department of justice? >> yes, senator, we don't know for sure, because for the last four years, the curtains there have been tightly drawn.

>> but but i think some a minority of people there have delegitimized america's criminal justice system the most. destabilizing act that i saw in the past four years, maybe in the history of the department, is when attorney general garland decided, on the basis of. dubious facts and untested legal theories. to criminally prosecute a former president of the united states. and and not only that, this is this is the special part. he decided to do it after the former president of the united states had announced that he was going to

run against attorney general garland. boss, didn't he? >> senator, are you referring to going after a political opponent? >> i think so. now, this is one person's opinion that kind of stupid takes a plan. and and i say that because, number one, this is america. that had never happened before in america. that's the sort of thing that happens in a country who's who's powerball jackpot is 287 chickens and a goat. it doesn't happen here. and i call it stupid because it broke the seal. it did. it broke the seal. it normalized it. there are a lot of ambitious prosecutors in

america, democrat and republican. and i'll bet you right now there's some prosecutor in a particular state thinking about, well, maybe i ought to file criminal charges against president biden's inner circle for conspiring to to to to conceal his mental decline. and that's the road we're headed down. and you've got to fix it, counselor. you've got to fix it. and and here's what, in my judgment, what i would ask you to do, find out who the bad guys are and the bad women and get rid of them. find out who the good people are and lift them up. but do it on the basis of facts and evidence and fairness. because the temptation of some people is going to be they're going to tell you, look, two wrongs don't make a right, but

they don't. they do make it even don't resist or resist that temptation. help us restore legitimacy to the department of justice. >> thank you, senator. >> senator blumenthal, thank you, mr. chairman. >> welcome, miss bondi, and to your family. thank you. thank you for visiting with me in my office. and i have to say, uh, i'm sympathetic always to a former attorney general, particularly having been one myself. but i am, i have to say, also really troubled, deeply disturbed by some of your responses and non-responses to the questions that you've been asked today. you say the right things, that you're going to be the people's lawyer. that's what you have to say to be here. but i believe being the people's lawyer means you have to be able to

say no to the president of the united states. you have to speak truth to power. you have to be able to say that donald trump lost the 2020 election. you dodged that question when you were asked directly by senator durbin. you have to be able to say that january 6th, insurrectionists who committed violence shouldn't be pardoned. you have to be able to say that a nominee for the fbi director who says he has an enemy list, and that's just the beginning of what he has said in terms of politicizing, deeply, weaponizing the fbi against political opponents, that he shouldn't be the fbi director. you know, uh, we have some history here with your predecessors. uh, barr

sessions and others who perhaps sincerely, when they sat where you are now, said that they would say no, but they were working with a president that expected them to be his roy cohn, his personal attorney. do you really think that you can avoid the disgrace that they encountered? or the repercussions from the white house if you say no to the president? and so my question to you is, can you say no to the president of united states when he asks you to do something unethical or illegal senator, first i need to clarify something that you said, that i have to sit up here and say these things. >> no, i don't i sit up here and speak the truth. i'm not going to sit up here and say anything that i need to say to

get confirmed by this body. i don't have to say anything. i will answer the questions to the best of my ability. and honestly ask you a an individual who says that he is going to quote, come after and quote people he alleges, quote, helped joe biden rig the presidential elections, that he has a list of people who are part of this deep state, who should be prosecuted, uh, that he's going to close down the fbi building on his first day in office. >> is that a person who, appropriately, should be the fbi director? aren't those comments inappropriate? shouldn't you disavow them and and ask him to recant them? >> senator, i am not familiar with all those comments. i have not discussed those comments with mr. patel. what i do know. >> well, i'm asking you for

your. >> excuse me. what i do know is mr. patel was a career prosecutor. he was a career public defender defending people. and he also has great experience within the intelligence community. what? i can sit here and tell you is, mr. patel, if he works with running the fbi, if he is confirmed, and if i am confirmed, he will follow the law. if i am the attorney general of the united states of america, and i don't believe he would do anything otherwise. >> well, let me just submit that the response that i would have hoped to hear from you is that those comments are inappropriate, and that you will ask him to disavow or recant them when he comes before this committee, because they are indeed chilling to fair enforcement and the rule of law. let me ask you

on another topic. uh, when we met, i welcomed your support for the goals of the kids online safety act. and, uh, senator blackburn and i have spent a lot of time devoted a lot of effort to the passage of the kids online safety act, which happened by an overwhelming vote of 91 to 372 co-sponsors, including vice president elect vance. i appreciated our discussion and your support for protecting kids online. when we met last week. i'm hopeful that this area is one where we can work together. can we count on your support in working together to protect kids online, senator? >> absolutely. and thank you for that legislation. and, senator blackburn, i believe in this world right now. we have to find the things we have in common, and that is certainly one of them. senator,

protecting our children from online predators. you've done so much on that front, and i thank you. i, i attempted to do that as well when i was attorney general, but i am committed to working with you on anything we can do to protect our children throughout this country. when i was attorney general, we started something called from instant message to instant nightmare and educating parents about online predators. and that also, senator, is one of the core functions of the fbi. the cyber unit. they sit there, these these agents sit there all day long and investigate child predators. we tell parents constantly, you think you're talking to another child and you're not going to interrupt you. >> i welcome your positive response. i have one more question that i'm going to try to fit into this round. um. tiktok will be banned unless it is

sold because it has become a tool for the chinese to collect information and do surveillance and endanger our national security. can you commit that you will enforce that law promptly and effectively. and i ask this question because. president trump's pick for your solicitor general in the department of justice went to the united states supreme court arguing that the ban should be delayed. will you commit to enforce that law on your first day when you are if you are confirmed, senator, as i discussed with you during our meeting, that is pending litigation within the department of justice. well, it's pending litigation, but will you enforce that law? >> i can't discuss pending litigation, but i will talk to all the career officials again, prosecutors who are handling the case. absolutely. senator, talk discuss with me. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator tillis, miss bondi,

thank you for being here. >> i think i told you when we met. thank you for the time we met. i was born in florida. i have a lot of friends and family and follow florida politics pretty closely. and you've had a very impressive career there. though i do also have to admit i'm a gator hater. so for the florida alum, i'm university of tennessee. but anyway, actually, in some of these hearings, i've created a bingo card to see what some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were going to hit. i want to go back to a few of them really quickly. one, um, was about you being a lobbyist. paid for it on the payroll of qatar. would you mind going back and repeating what you said in case people did not hear the involvement of your law firm and precisely what you were doing for the government of qatar? >> yes, senator. i was very proud of that work. it was anti-human trafficking in advance of the world cup. and human trafficking has been something that's been very important to me my entire career, especially when i was attorney general.

>> and you also made it clear that you had a number of practitioners within the firm working on it. so this narrative that you were getting $115,000 a month from qatar is correct or not? not correct. okay. thank you. um, i, i want to talk a little bit about, uh, well, first off, i want to go back to you should be happy that so many comments have been directed towards kash patel. whose confirmation i am supporting. in fact, i'm meeting with him today because that means they're out of stuff for you. so if it comes up again, you will once again know that you've got a great reputation and a great resume and they are just trying to find things to put your integrity into question. you have answered the question repeatedly that your, uh, that you will be loyal to the constitution and you will. you will live up to the oath to to the constitution and to protecting the american people.

um, and i think mr. patel, when he comes here, he'll be able to get rid of the myth in the same way that you did as a lobbyist for qatar. he'll be able to get rid of that list of the enemies, or be able to deal with the enemies list and the marketing department for your opposition is going to have to come up with new material, because that stuff is getting old. um, section 702, you heard, uh, senator lee talk about some concerns that he has with 702. i believe it's one of the most important things that you can do early into your confirmation, you will be confirmed and hopefully with some democrat support. um, the there have been dramatic reforms to 702. i've sat through an extensive presentation to try and make sure that the abuses never occur again, and that you have a throat to choke if somebody abuses the protocol that's in place. i believe that we need to codify a lot of that. as a matter of fact, when i went through it, i felt like there were so many blinding flashes of the obvious. how could this not have already been a part of

the approval matrix? so can you, after you're confirmed, commit that you or a designate will come back and provide for this committee? an update on all of the the protocols that have changed and recommended legislation for codifying so that when we do go to reauthorization, we'll have what we need to make sure that that program stays in place. >> senator, i or designee will review all of 702 before i.t. terms, of course, in 2026, and come back and report to you, um, on both sides of the aisle. >> thank you. you have a great perspective with your time in the in the state and working with the department of justice. give me an idea of things that we need to do better in terms of. and i'm talking primarily in the law enforcement role. i think many people don't understand the joint task forces, the law enforcement efforts that are going on every single day and every one of our states. and what an incredible

job. um, they do. so can you give me some sense of things that you would look at to say, maybe we could do it better from your perspective of having been a prosecutor for a in florida? >> yes. thank you. thank you. senator. yeah. having been a career prosecutor, i think i have a unique perspective because i was a state prosecutor. of course, prior to becoming attorney general. so i worked on a daily basis with local law enforcement and state and federal, not daily with federal. but i worked consistently with state, local and federal. then when i was attorney general, i worked with all three as well. i feel like we have to have better coordination among all our agencies, especially given all the terrorism issues that we've discussed earlier in this hearing. we have to wrap in and communicate better with our local and state law enforcement officers throughout this country. there are so many great men and women in law enforcement, and we have to i

don't know exactly how yet, but we have to figure out a better way to work together with the federal authorities. >> thank you. and i'm going to do a second round as well. but i think i also check the the bingo card for election denier. there were some people, you know, seemed to suggest that you were denying the election. i think that you said that president biden is our president. >> um, president biden is the president of the united states of america, and president trump will be the 47th president. >> uh, but i think you made a point that that, or at least i inferred from a comment that you made a very important point, folks, there are election improprieties in every election. the matter of the question is a matter of scale and whether or not you can prove it. we've seen it in north carolina and seen it at other places. it's one of the reasons why i support voter i.d., because we want to make elections easy to vote and hard to cheat. but the fact of the matter is, people are cheating. so if anybody on this dais suggests that there aren't, um,

irregularities in every election, that they need to spend more time at home and really studying the facts. i don't think, though, that you've said that that biden is an illegitimate president. in fact, i think you said just the opposite. he is the president of the united states, and president trump will be the next president, right? >> yes. >> okay. uh, last thing before the second round, january 6th. a lot of people are going to say you're going to have a rubber stamp for letting people have pardons or recommending a pardon for people who did violence to law enforcement. i'm not going to ask you a hypothetical, because i want you to be consistent and not answering them. but i have to believe, as a member of the i was the last member out of the senate on january the 6th, i walked past a lot of law enforcement officers, excuse me, who were injured. i find it hard to believe that the president of the united states, or you would look at facts that were used to convict the

violent people. on january the 6th and say it was just an intemperate moment that i don't even expect you to respond to that. but i think it's an absurd and unfair hypothetical here. and you probably haven't heard the last of it. thank you, mr. chair. thank. before i call on ron rivlin, this is our. >> this is before i call on senator hirono after her and cruz's testimony. then we'll take a lunch break. and that break will be for 30 minutes. and i can't control when my senators come back. but i expect you to be back at after 30 minutes, and i'll be here. yes, chairman. and then i may leave the meeting to open the senate. so whoever's on our side is acting chairman. during that period of time, senator hirono, thank you, mr. chairman. >> as part of my responsibility to ensure the fitness of all nominees, i ask the following two initial questions. first, since you became a legal adult,

have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? >> no. senator. >> have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct? >> no, senator, i am focused on two things in my evaluation of president trump's president-elect trump's nominees. >> the first is whether the nominee is qualified and experienced enough to do the job. the second is the fitness to serve, which includes putting loyalty to the constitution over loyalty to the president. unfortunately, in my view, many of president trump's president-elect trump's nominees are lacking in at least one of these two requirements. miss bondi, your experience as a prosecutor is the kind of thing we would expect to see in a nominee for attorney general, but i do have questions and concerns about potential conflicts of interest, about

whether you will keep doj's law enforcement responsibilities independent of the president's political whims, and about whether you will let facts and evidence guide your decisions. so let's start with the importance of facts, which you say is so important. miss bondi, we want an attorney general who bases decisions on facts. so i want to ask you a factual question. who won the 2020 presidential election? >> joe biden is the president of the united states. >> miss bondi, you know that there is a difference between acknowledging it and, you know, i can say that donald trump won the 2024 election. i may not like it, but i can say it. you cannot say who won the 2020 presidential election. okay, it's disturbing that you can't.

give voice to that fact. moving on to doj's independence from politics, mr. bondi, if you are confirmed as attorney general, you will take an oath to the constitution and not to any individual, including the president. to start, i'd like to know whether you agree with some of the statements president-elect trump made during the election. during the campaign, first, are the felons convicted of breaking into the capitol on january 6th? hostages or patriots? quoting the trump. as president elect, trump has said repeatedly, do you agree with his characterization of the felons that i referred to? >> i am not familiar with that statement. senator. >> i just familiarized you with that statement. do you agree with that statement? >> i'm not familiar with it, senator. >> no answer. he has also said illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation. he said that in

december 2023. do you agree with that statement, senator? >> i am not familiar with that statement. but what i can tell you is i went to the border a few months ago. i went to yuma, arizona, and what i saw at that border was horrific. senator. it was horrific. i went to a rape crisis center. >> it's not my question. >> i went to a rape crisis center. i'm not familiar with the statement, but i went to a rape crisis center. i met with border patrol agents. i'm sure you've been to the border as well. >> so i want to get to my next question. so, um, i believe that you responded to a question from senator whitehouse, and let me get your response again. you said that the white house, if i'm putting words in your mouth, correct me. you said that the white house will play no role in investigating or charging decisions in the doj. is that

correct, senator? >> what i said is that it is the department of justice's decision to determine what cases will be prosecuted. >> what role will the white house have in investigative or prosecutorial decisions of the doj? >> it is the department of justice's decision. senator. >> so that sounds to me that you're saying that the white house will not have any kind of role. meanwhile, though, you have an incoming president who said, i have the absolute right to do what i want to do with the justice department. and in fact, president elect trump considers the doj to be his law firm. i'll ask you this if president elect trump asks, suggests or hints that you, as attorney general, should investigate one of his perceived political enemies, would you do so? >> senator hirono, i wish you had met with me. had you met with me, we could have

discussed many things and gotten to know i'm listening to you now. >> could you respond to the question? >> yeah. you were the only one who refused to meet with me, senator. but what we would have discussed is that it is the job of the attorney general i follow to listen to your responses under oath, miss bondi. >> so i think it's really important to us that the attorney general be independent of the white house, and you have a president elect who considers the ag's office, his law firm. i would like to know whether if the president suggests, hints. asks, that you, as attorney general, should investigate one of his perceived enemies senator, i certainly have not heard the president say that. >> but what i will tell you is two thirds of americans have lost faith in the department of justice, and it's statements like that. i believe, that make people continue to lose faith. if i am

confirmed as attorney general, it will be my job to not only keep america safe, but but restore integrity to that department. why don't we move on to plan on doing. you said every single day as attorney general on august 25th, 2025 on fox news, you said. >> when republicans take back the white house, the department of justice, the prosecutors will be prosecuted. the bad ones, the investigators will be investigated, mr. bondi is jack smith one of those bad prosecutors that you will prosecute as ag senator? >> you hesitated a bit when i said the bad ones. every decision will be made in the eyes of the beholder. >> i'm just asking whether you would consider jack smith, senator, to be one of the people. how about liz cheney, senator? how about merrick garland? >> i am not going to answer hypotheticals. no one has been prejudged or nor will anyone be

prejudged. if i am confirmed. >> the kind of people these are, in fact the people that you would prosecute. >> i'm not. >> your time is up. >> would you like to? my time is. >> would you like to respond, chairman? >> she is clearly not going to answer that question. so let me get on to would you would you like to? i do have questions for the second round. >> you you'll have a second round. >> would you like to speak before i go on, senator cruz? >> no, sir. >> thank you senator cruz. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general bondi, welcome. thank you for your long career in public service. and thank you for your willingness to take on this, this incredibly important office. you know, i have to say. i don't know that there is a more important position in this new administration than the position to which you have been nominated. attorney general of the united states. i thought the exchange just a moment ago with

senator hirono was illustrative. she asked you how you would respond if the president asked you to target his political enemies. it's rather striking because it's not a hypothetical. it has happened over the last four years. and i think perhaps the most tragic legacy of the biden-harris administration has been the politicization and the weaponization of the united states department of justice. and we don't need to ask, hypothetically, because joe biden publicly mused and allowed the new york times to report it, calling on merrick garland, why will he not prosecute trump more quickly? and merrick garland, sadly, he sat in that chair and promised to be apolitical. and he broke that promise almost the instant he walked into the department of justice. if you look on the west pediment of the supreme court of the united states, just above the entrance, there is a simple yet profound four

word phrase equal justice under law. we have seen over the last four years a department of justice that systematically targeted the political opponents of joe biden and kamala harris, and that systematically protected his friends and allies. and it is tragic to see the loss of confidence in the american people in the department of justice and in the fbi. i would note, i don't think there's an institution in america who has lost more respect from the american people than the fbi has in the last four years. that is a grotesque violation. of the obligation of the department of justice and the fbi. so i want to start with just a very simple question. if you are confirmed as attorney

general, will you pledge to fairly and faithfully uphold the law regardless of party? >> so help me god. amen. >> look, i want to be clear for folks at home, i don't want a republican department of justice. i don't want a democrat department of justice. i want a department of justice that follows the law. and i think the american people do, too. that shouldn't be too much to expect. >> this is cnn breaking news. >> the breaking news coming in to cnn. a senior biden administration official confirming that hamas has agreed to a hostage release and ceasefire deal. i want to go straight to senior white house correspondent m.j. lee with the latest m.j. m.j., what can you tell us about this deal that hamas has agreed to? all

right. m.j. can not hear us. i'm going to go to alex marquardt. this is a massive deal. weeks in the making, alex. >> it certainly is, if not longer. pam. we have been waiting for more than 13 months since the last cease fire deal and the last since the last time there was an exchange of hostages and prisoners. for this moment, it appears that this deal is imminent. if not done already. we're reporting that hamas has agreed to the deal. there was certainly an expectation from the israeli side that they would agree to a deal. all of this, of course, brokered after intensive negotiations with the mediators, the united states, qatar and egypt. so this is obviously extremely welcome news. after some 14 months of fighting and what we expect to happen, if indeed this this deal goes into effect, is that over the course of some six weeks, we would see more than 30 israeli hostages released by

hamas and other groups who are holding them in gaza. i don't think we have the exact number of palestinian prisoners who would be released by israel. and then there are all they're a bunch of other different elements that would go into effect. palestinians would be allowed to go home in the gaza strip. more humanitarian aid would get to go in. but i think that the point here, pam, is that after weeks of feverish work on the u.s. side with both biden administration officials and officials from the incoming trump team working in coordination with each other, they and the other mediators have managed to get the israelis and hamas. it appears across the finish line where we are going to get a truce. a pause in this fighting. one thing i really want to emphasize is this does not mean the end of this war. this means a break in this war. hopefully, this break will last at least six weeks, if not longer. hopefully all of these people will come home who are supposed to come home. but there are big

questions about what would happen after this first phase of a ceasefire, which, as it stands now and this plan has been in place for quite some time since president biden laid it out in may. this is expected to last around six weeks, so we're still waiting for final word, i believe, from all of the parties, but this certainly seems imminent, if not a done deal already. >> i want to go back to mj lee at the white house. i believe we're reconnected. mj, what can you tell us about this plan? >> well, pam, according to a senior administration official telling cnn it is done. it is confirmed, meaning that hamas has given that final green light, agreeing to the ceasefire and hostage release deal that had been on the table for a while. and based on all of our reporting, we knew that this really was the final step, that all of the parties were waiting for, that it really came down to this group agreeing to the parameters that everybody else had agreed to.

part of the reason we have been so cautious in our reporting all of this time is precisely that, that just that in the end, it came down to hamas giving this final green light. and when we have spoken to at least u.s. officials involved in these discussions and with knowledge of the situation, they always pointed to the fact that it was impossible to make any kind of predictions with certainty, because at the end of the day, they were dealing with hamas. but again, here we have a confirmation from a senior administration official that hamas has finally given the green light and there is a deal for a ceasefire in gaza and for the hostages to be released. this is a deal, as you were talking about just now with alex, that has been elusive for the biden administration and for the u.s. for so many months. you know, we had that initial ceasefire back more than a year ago around thanksgiving, two thanksgivings ago, when a number of hostages

came out. that ceasefire ended up being temporary, only lasting a number of days. and really, since then, u.s. officials have been working to get a second part of the ceasefire in place. but it has been so, so challenging. there were so many moments throughout the last year plus where we reported that things looked like they were maybe getting close, that we had reason for optimism based on our sources and our reporting. but even in these final days, you know, everybody we had talked to were so careful to almost not get their hopes up too much. i think we should spend a good deal amount of time talking about donald trump and the incoming president's desire to get this done. that had been really so decisive in the end in helping to get this across the finish line. >> certainly. and just for our viewers, just to remind you in terms of the numbers, hamas and its allies hold, 94 people taken from israel on october 7th, 2023. the majority are

civilians, 34 are confirmed dead, but the number is almost certainly higher than that. 81 are men and 13 women, and there are two under the age of five. and of course, there's going to be phases, as alex has laid out. some will be released in the first phase during the expected ceasefire. i want to go straight to jeremy diamond, who is on the ground there, and israel to get the israel part of this, because there is a process in israel, right, jeremy, walk us through that. >> yeah, that's exactly right, pam. and first of all, i think it's important to note that for the last two days, the israeli government and israeli government officials who i've been speaking with have been saying this is in hamas's hands. we need hamas to say yes in order to get to a deal. and that is indeed what has now happened. and so, for all intents and purposes, we do indeed now have an agreement between these parties to go into a ceasefire that is expected to last six weeks, during which you will see 33 israeli hostages released, hundreds of palestinian

prisoners released from israeli jails in exchange, the much needed entry of humanitarian aid. but the process that now needs to happen here in israel in order for this deal to actually become a reality, this agreement will now go from the israeli prime minister. he will take this agreement before his security cabinet, which is a smaller group of his governing coalition. some of his top ministers, primarily involved in security affairs. they will then give an up or down vote on this. if it is approved, it will then go to the full cabinet for approval, and only then will the israeli government be able to officially sign off on this deal and begin marching towards implementation. there is one additional hurdle before implementation, and that is giving the individuals who were impacted by those palestinian prisoners who will be released, the opportunity to petition the supreme court against their release. that is largely a formality. the israeli government has enormous leverage, and the prime

minister in particular has enormous freedom to release those prisoners as it relates to security matters. so that will likely be a 24 hour period that will go by, and that likely takes us most likely to sunday, which is what i've been told is the most likely date when this deal will actually be implemented on the ground. that will mean that we will see the first israeli hostages in more than a year be released as part of a diplomatic agreement here for these hostages to come out of gaza, you will see the release of palestinian prisoners from israeli jails. and in addition to that, of course, you will see israeli jets, israeli troops on the ground lower their weapons. and for the first time in, in, in, in over a year, you will finally see the guns be silenced here. and the people of gaza will finally get a much needed reprieve from the military assault that they have been undergoing over the last

year. >> all right. thank you so much, jeremy. i want to go to cnn foreign policy. reporter barak ravid. what can you tell us about this deal? and when the hamas prisoners will be released, those held hostage, i should say, and the palestinian prisoners as well. what more can you tell us about that? >> so i think one of the most important things that our viewers need to know right now is that there are seven americans held by hamas in gaza, two of them are expected to be released in this initial phase of the hostage deal. one of them is u.s. citizen keith segal. that a video of him from captivity was aired a few months ago, and he is in the list for this first phase. another u.s., u.s. citizen is sajid khan, another u.s. citizen who is on the list of the 33 hostages expected to be released in this initial

phase. and i think what is very interesting is that this deal has been in the making for months since president biden laid out his plan, his proposal last may. and u.s. negotiators, qatari negotiators, egyptian negotiators, israeli negotiators have been working on this for months. i think the breakthrough came when the deal with hezbollah on the ceasefire in lebanon happened because then hamas in gaza understood that it has been left alone and that no one is coming to save them. and since then, what i hear from israeli and u.s. officials is since then they saw a change in how hamas is negotiating this deal, and this is how we got to this point. >> what about donald trump's role in all of this? of course, he had been saying that he wanted a deal made by the time that he was inaugurated. of course, coming up. and, you know, he he is a popular political figure there in israel. tell us more about that. and also, it is worth

noting here, barack, that this comes against the backdrop of the u.s. assessment from secretary blinken that hamas has recruited almost as many new militants as it has lost. >> yes. so, first of all, donald trump, i think donald trump was a an important factor in this deal. um, his involvement, i think, was, you know, the the, you know, $0.05 to the dollar that was missing. uh, i think his public statement, uh, threatening that there will be hell to pay in the middle east if there is no deal was extremely important. i think the fact that he, he and the biden administration, i think joe biden and donald trump did something that i think no u.s. presidents and president elect ever did. they worked together during the transition period on a huge diplomatic deal and got it. biden's envoy, brett mcgurk, and trump's

envoy, steve witkoff, set together in the meetings in doha. in the negotiations, they were together in the meeting with netanyahu and his negotiation team. they were together in a meeting with the emir of qatar just the other day. and i think that because of both sides working together, both sides of the, you know, the incoming administration, the outgoing administration working together, this is something that made this deal possible. >> all right. barak ravid, thank you so much for bringing us the latest there. again, we are learning the israeli government and hamas have agreed to a hostage release and ceasefire deal. of course, we're waiting to learn more details of that. but this is a huge development. months in the making. thank you so much for joining us. i'm pamela brown. our coverage of this breaking news continues right now on inside politics with dana bash. >> this is cnn breaking news. >>