Bondi told Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) she would not discuss conversations she had with Trump about Comey’s indictment.
Bondi and Trump met for dinner at the White House the night before the indictment. Bondi also redirected questions about the Epstein investigation into scrutiny toward Democrats.
Bondi asked Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) if he had questioned her predecessor, Merrick Garland, on Epstein. She also brought up Democratic ties to LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, an alleged Epstein associate. Between the lines: Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) also asked Bondi who ordered her to flag Epstein records related to President Trump.
“I’m not going to discuss anything about that with you, senator,” Bondi said. Durbin responded: “Eventually you’re going to have to answer for your conduct in this. You won’t do it today, but eventually you will.”
Bondi refuses legitimate Senate questioning and threatens Senators. She needs to be arrested by the sergeant-at-arms.
The whole thing was so performative that I was seriously expecting her to yell “This whole court room is out of order!” to distract.
Like I’m surprised somebody didn’t just pull a fire alarm to get her out of there. Wtf
M’am this is a Senate hearing, not a community theater in Florida. You’re supposed to be providing testimony. Nobody wants to hear your dramatic monologue, just answer the questions.
“I’m not going to discuss that”
In a senate or house hearing should be followed up with:
“Thats not a choice which is available to you”
And then the master at arms like, jingles some handcuffs.
No no it’s always a choice available to you. It just comes with criminal consequences.
Or at least, it’s supposed to. Liberal politicians who want to show their constituents that they’re willing to ask the fascists hard questions aren’t impressing me at all if they’re unwilling or unable to follow it up with legal teeth. Might as well be helping them by handing them a soapbox they can shout anything from.
Well…it depends.
First, I don’t know if she was under oath.
Second, there is executive privilege. That doesn’t mean that she can apply it in this case (or that she was even trying), but it’s not a blanket “Congress can demand all communications, period”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege
Executive privilege is the right of the president of the United States and other members of the executive branch to maintain confidential communications under certain circumstances within the executive branch and to resist some subpoenas and other oversight by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of particular information or personnel relating to those confidential communications. The right comes into effect when revealing the information would impair governmental functions. Neither executive privilege nor the oversight power of Congress is explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution.[1] However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its area of constitutional activity.[2]
That being said, Congress is expected to perform oversight of the Executive Branch, and you don’t get to just invoke executive privilege every time they require you to provide information, either. I imagine that one could wind up with court cases and more case law finding the limits of the privilege if it comes up, especially if — as I assume will most-likely be the case — the Democrats take the House in the midterm elections and then start promptly use control of the House to start sticking their nose into everything Trump’s been doing.
Jesus christ these senators are so fucking spineless. Hold her in contempt
I think they would still have to vote to hold her in contempt right?
I always thought that refusing to answer congress or senate’s questions in a hearing was a contempt charge…
IIRC, a contempt charge has to be voted on (not happening) and if it passes it is then referred to the US attorney’s office for them to pursue. And since that office is currently held by a Fox News host whose only qualifications are loyalty to Trump and a total lack of ethics, that case wouldn’t go anywhere.
Thanks, this comment is infinitely more helpful than the useless snot who replied in the other comment. I like people who help others a lot more than people who randomly hurt others over nothing more than their own insecurities.
Does Bondi, as USAG not have power over US attorneys?
You always thought wrong then.
It would be great if whoever was heading one of these hearings just said, fine, we can all sit here until you answer our questions.
