U.S. Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi faced a fiery confirmation hearing on Wednesday, clashing with Senate Democrats over President-elect Donald Trump’s controversial pick for FBI director, Kash Patel. The exchanges, particularly with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., centered on Patel’s past remarks and his book, Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy, where he identified a so-called “enemies list” of 60 individuals he claims are part of the “deep state.”
Blumenthal grilled Bondi on Patel’s alleged comments about shutting down FBI headquarters and targeting perceived enemies, demanding she denounce the statements. “Is that a person who, appropriately, should be the FBI director? Aren’t those comments inappropriate? Shouldn’t you disavow them and ask him to recant them?” he pressed.
Bondi, remaining composed, defended Patel’s qualifications while pushing back on Blumenthal’s attempt to characterize him based on selective comments. “Senator, I am not familiar with all those comments. I have not discussed those comments with Mr. Patel,” she responded. She emphasized Patel’s extensive background as a career prosecutor, public defender, and intelligence professional, stating, “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.”
Despite Bondi’s reassurances, Blumenthal expressed dissatisfaction, stating, “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.”
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., also seized on Patel’s “enemies list,” pressing Bondi to distance herself from the claims. Bondi reiterated her commitment to impartiality at the Department of Justice, firmly stating there would never be an “enemies list” under her leadership. “I am here to ensure the DOJ operates with fairness, integrity, and within the bounds of the law,” she assured the committee.
The tense questioning highlights Democrats’ broader concerns about Patel’s nomination and Trump’s administration’s stance on the so-called “deep state.” For conservatives, however, Bondi’s performance demonstrated strength, poise, and a commitment to upholding the rule of law despite partisan theatrics.
This hearing is another example of how Democrats seem more focused on discrediting Trump’s nominees than addressing real issues facing the country. Their fixation on Patel’s “deep state” commentary shows a refusal to engage with the genuine concerns many Americans have about bureaucratic overreach. While Democrats clamor about “chilling” enforcement, conservatives see nominees like Bondi and Patel as a much-needed reset for institutions that have strayed from impartiality and transparency.
As Bondi’s confirmation process continues, one thing is clear: her steadfast defense of the law, despite relentless partisan attacks, is exactly what the DOJ needs to regain the trust of the American people.
