In an incident dating back to 2013, both Kamala Harris and Pam Bondi, then state attorneys general of California and Florida respectively, received complaints regarding the credibility of Trump University. Despite accusations of unjustifiable charges for the institution’s courses – allegations of as much as $35,000 for supposedly inferior business classes – neither decided to pursue the case. Their failure to investigate was curious and some raised questions over potential influence due to both having benefited from political contributions from Donald Trump. Yet, both Harris and Bondi vehemently deny these insinuations.
Harris and Bondi navigated different political trails in the subsequent years. Harris was an enduring antagonist of Trump in the electoral cycles of 2020 and 2024, putting forth allegations that portrayed Trump as a fraudulent businessman and potential peril to democratic order. Astonishingly, Trump emerged as the victor in his re-election bid earlier in the month.
Bondi, on the other hand, spent the last decade as a staunch supporter of Trump, ready to fight back against those who dared to investigate him. Now, she is likely to ascend to the esteemed position of Trump’s attorney general, pending Senate confirmation. Last year, in a Fox News appearance, she boldly dismissed the serious charges against Trump in Georgia related to the alleged overturning of the 2020 election results.
Going even further, Bondi labelled the prosecutors of Trump’s case as members of the ‘deep state’, introducing an unproven conspiracy theory that suggests the DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents are a covert group aiming to destabilize Trump’s administration. Asserting baselessly that these secret actors have come out of the shadows, she hinted that they could all become subjects of investigation.
Reactions are mixed among Department of Justice officials with respect to the potential appointment of Bondi, which followed the withdrawal of Rep. Matt Gaetz from consideration, who is himself embroiled in numerous controversial allegations. While some DOJ officials seem to give a nod to Bondi due to her extensive background as a prosecutor and Florida attorney general, others are concerned about her unwavering loyalty to Trump.
Evidently, they worry that this loyalty may stand in the way of justice and impartiality, with fears of her willingness to act on Trump’s desire to investigate his adversaries. This concern surfaces particularly due to the nature of conduct by Trump’s last attorney general, William Barr.
Barr, despite Trump’s pressure, declined to initiate DOJ investigations into allegations of election fraud from 2020, simply due to the absence of credible evidence. After publicly rejecting the notion of widespread fraud, he took the radical step of resigning from office.
Trump’s subsequent attempt to appoint an acting attorney general, Jeffrey Clark, who was supportive of his baseless fraud allegations, risked the integrity of the DOJ. This worrisome attempt was met with strong opposition as numerous senior DOJ leaders threatened mass resignation.
Just days later, a shocking display of unrest occurred as Trump’s supporters mounted an attack on the U.S. Capitol in defiance of Trump’s electoral defeat. Bondi, as part of this narrative of turmoil, backed up Trump’s unfounded claims of fraud.
In the middle of the unrest, she was spotted in Philadelphia where she took part in media briefings that propagated misinformation of extensive ballot fraud and alleged theft of the election from Trump. Bondi was even part of the defense team that represented Trump during his initial impeachment trial, attempting to bemoan the scrutiny faced by the president.
Currently, Bondi is a partner of the Ballard Partners lobbying firm, where she heads the firm’s corporate regulatory compliance practice. Some attorneys from her native Florida have rallied to Bondi’s corner, claiming that she abided by generally accepted practices as the state attorney general.
However, the current situation raises a considerable question: Will Bondi, if confirmed as the attorney general, make good on her public pledge that these prosecutors will be held accountable? Moreover, should she refrain from targeting these prosecutors due to political motives, will she have to face the music like her predecessors and be ousted by Trump?