Never pass up a chance to sit down or relieve yourself. -old Apache saying

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

videographer

I still feel it in my bones that the 2024 election was stolen from Harris and Walz. Greg Palast claims that several million Democratic voters were disenfranchised due to purges of voter rolls, the multiple challenges to actual votes, the tossing of provisional ballots, and making it harder to vote in blue areas. I don't put any of this past Republicans. Then toss in a bunch of Silicon Valley tech bros who had some knowledge of voting software systems, and you have a silent coup.

We may never be able to prove it, but I feel it. Putting Trump back in the White House just makes no sense. I refuse to believe that millions and millions of people wish to dismantle the government. Trump would like to. So would Putin. And many who have marinated in the right-wing sewage wish it because Trump does.

Anyway, this Slate article below is not really about that. But I still feel it. Fucking bastards taking advantage of the non-insane non-hothead Democrats. Trying to steal our future and our past, and all of our Treasury.


I Was Kamala Harris' Videographer: The Experience Completely Changed Me


Today, at the entrance of the White House, they took down the official portrait of Vice President Kamala Harris. It was the first time a woman’s face had hung there. As I walk out of the White House for the last time, I worry that this will be forgotten, that history will write her historic achievement out of the frame. I worry that Americans aren’t being given the chance to celebrate what she accomplished.

Over the past few years, as the official videographer and director of video to Vice President Kamala Harris, I traveled the world with her, watching her navigate the White House and the world stage. I observed and documented nearly everything she did every day through my trusty White House–issued Sony FX3. I filmed her in 11 countries and in 91 cities across 27 U.S. states. I observed her with prime ministers and presidents and chancellors and kings—almost all of them men—and with hostile Republicans and their spouses who wouldn’t shake her hand. I saw her with the wives of world leaders, bullied teenagers, doctors, doulas, CEOs, proud grandmothers, and excited grandchildren. I saw as she charmed skeptics and commanded rooms, as she considered reporters’ questions, as she walked across a stage with 70,000 eyes watching her every move. I was there when the Somdet Phra Sangkharat Sakonmahasangkhaparinayok, Thailand’s highest-ranking Buddhist monk, didn’t shake her hand.

As a filmmaker, this was a dream: filming history in action, documenting the first woman to serve in this role. And even though my heart is broken that she lost the election, and I was continuously enraged by the ways sexism and racism made everything harder for her, something unexpected happened to me on the job: I witnessed Harris’ impact, and it began to change me.

The best thing about working for Kamala Harris was watching a phenomenally competent and successful woman own her power in the most challenging of circumstances. Unfortunately, despite my best efforts, you didn’t get to see that often enough.

Vice President Harris never called a little girl cute or commented on her outfit; instead, she’d say, “You look like the smartest person in your class.” The vice president would say, “Let me hear you say, ‘I am a leader,’ ” and even the youngest girls would say it back. I filmed hundreds of clips of Kamala Harris telling young people to believe in themselves because they can achieve anything. And I noticed myself changing my conversations with my nieces, stopping myself from commenting on their outfits and asking instead about the thoughts in their heads.

One time, I needed the vice president to redo a line for a video, and I started out by apologizing, saying, “Ma’am, I’m so sorry, just one more time” before she interrupted me, “Don’t apologize for doing your job well.” From then on, whenever my instinct was to minimize myself, I would consider what my boss had told—and showed—me.

I started asking myself, “Would Kamala Harris apologize for this? Would she undermine herself like this?” I started to apologize less and stand my ground more. When I was often the only, or one of few, women behind the camera in a scrum, I would politely elbow my way to get the best angle and stop worrying whether I was blocking someone else’s shot. I grew taller. I stopped shrinking. In August 2023, as I took the best spot in the room, a male videographer said of me, “Fuck her,” loud enough so I could hear. I turned around just as the vice president walked in, and said, “Don’t talk to me like that.”

In September 2023 at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, I seemed to be the only woman in a group of official photographers and videographers from across Asia. The men all breezed through, but I got stopped by a security person, who asked what my job was, even though I had the same yellow arm band reading “OFFICIAL.” I pushed past and said, “The same as those guys. I need to go film the vice president of the United States.” An earlier me might have been frightened or disheartened, but I needed to get my shot.

Once, at an emergency briefing with local first responders in the wake of a hurricane, after five men spoke, the vice president extended the meeting so she could hear from the female fire chief, whose comments proved essential. With my camera, I started to make sure I had enough shots not just of women in the audience, listening, but of women speaking.

In a photo line in Miami, a 7-year-old girl told the vice president she liked writing, so naturally Harris suggested she write a book. The girl then literally wrote a book and sent it to our office. This is the importance of Kamala Harris. This is the impact that her style of leadership had on so many. Millions across America and the world are shattered today because Harris won’t be inaugurated as president, not just because she is a woman, but because she is exceptionally qualified. Her intentional, dignified ambition and confidence rubbed off on so many others, just like it rubbed off on me.

When the vice president asked me a few days ago about my post–White House plans, I told her that I’m starting my own production company with my wife. I joked, “Madam Vice President, if I can’t work for you, I’m going to work for myself. And my wife.” We laughed, but the truth is that before working for her, I would never have had the guts to start a company. Now, I think, why not me?

As I treasured my final days in the White House, I walked past the vice president’s ceremonial office and took a few moments to appreciate the photo of Midshipman 1st Class Sydney Barber, the first Black woman to serve as brigade commander at the United States Naval Academy. I passed the vice president’s west wing office, where she prominently displayed biographies of Rosa Parks and Constance Baker Motley and a painting of Amelia Boynton on Bloody Sunday hung on the wall. As I walked past the plaque of the “office of the second gentleman,” my heart broke yet again with the realization that this too was historic.

As I walked out of the doors of the west wing for the last time, it felt like the door was closing on the possibility of a woman ever leading from the Oval Office. Today, I am full of rage and devastation. But tomorrow, I will wake up with gratitude for all that I learned from Kamala Harris and will greet the future with defiance and hope—ready to take her lessons forward. Indeed, she may have been the first, but her leadership style reached so many others, guaranteeing that she will not be the last.

Original.


Thursday, January 23, 2025

MAGA Granny

For the first time in my memory, a MAGAt has seen the light and escaped from the cult. When "MAGA Granny" was given a pardon by Trump, she didn't want it, and for a very good reason....

Trump Pardoned Her for Storming the Capitol. 'Absolutely No,' She Said.

Pamela Hemphill, 71, of Boise, Idaho, who served 60 days in prison, said it would be “an insult to the Capitol Police” if she accepted the pardon.

Pam Hemphill was sentenced to 60 days in prison and three years of probation for her role in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol.Credit...Matt Kelley/Associated Press


by Michael Levenson

Jan 22, 2025

Many of those convicted of storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, have celebrated the pardons or commutations that they received this week from President Trump.

Not Pamela Hemphill. A retired drug and alcohol counselor who lives in Boise, Idaho, she pleaded guilty in January 2022 to a misdemeanor offense for entering the Capitol during the riot and was sentenced to 60 days in prison and three years of probation.

She said she did not want a pardon.

“Absolutely not,” Ms. Hemphill said in an interview on Wednesday. “It’s an insult to the Capitol Police, to the rule of law and to the nation. If I accept a pardon, I’m continuing their propaganda, their gaslighting and all their falsehoods they’re putting out there about Jan. 6.”

Ms. Hemphill, 71, who was called “MAGA Granny” in some news headlines, has said that she no longer supports Mr. Trump or believes his lie that the 2020 election was stolen. She said that a therapist had helped change her view of the attack by telling her she was “not a victim of Jan. 6; I was a volunteer.”


“I lost my critical thinking,” she said on Wednesday, reflecting on her involvement in the riot and the “Stop the Steal” movement. “Now I know it was a cult, and I was in a cult.”

Her wish to reject the pardon was previously reported by The Idaho Statesman. Ms. Hemphill said she had spoken with a lawyer about spurning the grant of clemency but had not taken any legal action to do so.

It is not clear that she can legally reject the pardon.

“It would be a novel act to file a court case to reject a pardon of a misdemeanor, in part because of the low stakes,” Mark Osler, a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law in Minneapolis, said in an interview.

There is some legal precedent, however, suggesting that any such request could face an uphill battle.

In December, two federal prisoners whose death sentences were commuted last year by President Biden asked a judge to block the reduction in their sentences, arguing that it could jeopardize their appeals. Judge James R. Sweeney II of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana dismissed the prisoners’ requests last week, ruling that the prisoners could not reject their commutations, even if they did not ask for them or want them.


Judge Sweeney pointed to a 1927 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found that a prisoner who had been sentenced to death could not reject a commutation from President William Howard Taft. (Taft, by then the chief justice, did not take part in the case.)

The prisoner argued that the commutation had been issued without his consent. But Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote that the president did not need the prisoner’s consent for the commutation to take effect.

“Just as the original punishment would be imposed without regard to the prisoner’s consent and in the teeth of his will, whether he liked it or not, the public welfare, not his consent, determines what shall be done,” Holmes wrote.

Judge Sweeney wrote that the decision, although nearly a century old, “remains good law.”

Original.


Wednesday, January 22, 2025

WSJ

Oh, NOW the Wall Street Journal wants us to think that they are shocked, just SHOCKED at Trump's pardon of all of the J6 attackers. In the headline, they ask "Law and order? Back the blue? What happened to that GOP?"

Donald J. Trump happened to that GOP, you assholes. You know it, and you at the Wall Street Journal helped him along. You cannot now act like you are shocked that Trump pardoned every attacker. The WSJ media is just as rotten as most of the other "mainstream" media. They were all so afraid to call Trump out when they had the chance. They sane-washed Trump as much as anyone. And why not? After all, News Corp now owns the paper. Rupert Murdoch, anyone? It may be that the Editorial Board still exercises a wee bit of independence from the slimy clutches of Murdoch, but the paper as a whole falls in line. 

So, now, if and when people get murdered at the hands of these hardened criminals who Trump set free, it is on your heads, Wall Street Journal, as much as anyone's.

Trump Pardons the Jan. 6 Cop Beaters

Law and order? Back the blue? What happened to that GOP?


 ET

Republicans are busy denouncing President Biden’s pre-emptive pardons for his family and political allies, and deservedly so. But then it’s a shame you don’t hear many, if any, ruing President Trump’s proclamation to pardon unconditionally nearly all of the people who rioted at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. This includes those convicted of bludgeoning, chemical spraying, and electroshocking police to try to keep Mr. Trump in power. Now he’s springing them from prison.

This is a rotten message from a President about political violence done on his behalf, and it’s a bait and switch. Asked about Jan. 6 pardons in late November, Mr. Trump projected caution. “I’m going to do case-by-case, and if they were nonviolent, I think they’ve been greatly punished,” he said. “We’re going to look at each individual case.”

Taking cues from the boss, last week Vice President JD Vance drew a clear line: “If you committed violence on that day, obviously you shouldn’t be pardoned.”

So much for that. The President’s clemency proclamation commutes prison sentences to time served for 14 named people, including prominent leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, who were organized and ready for violence. Then Mr. Trump tries to wipe Jan. 6 clean, with “a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals.” The conceit is that there are hundreds of polite Trump supporters who ended up in the wrong place that day and have since rotted in jail.

Out of roughly 1,600 cases filed by the feds, more than a third included accusations of “assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement.” The U.S. Attorney’s office said it declined “hundreds” of prosecutions against people whose only offense was entering restricted grounds near the Capitol. Of the 1,100 sentences handed down by this year, more than a third didn’t involve prison time. The rioters who did get jail often were charged with brutal violence, including:

• Daniel Joseph “DJ” Rodriguez, sentenced to 151 months, who can be seen on video, federal prosecutors said, deploying an “electroshock weapon” against a policeman who was dragged out of the defensive line, by “plunging it into the officer’s neck.” The night before, he promised in a MAGA chat group: “There will be blood.”

• William Lewis, given 37 months, “sprayed streams of Wasp and Hornet Killer spray at multiple police officers on four distinct occasions,” forcing several to flee the line and “seek treatment for their eyes.”

• Isreal James Easterday, 30 months, blasted a cop “in the face with pepper spray at point-blank range,” after which the officer “collapsed and temporarily lost consciousness, which enabled another rioter to steal his baton.”

• Thomas Andrew Casselman, 40 months, hit multiple officers “near their faces” with pepper spray. His later internet searches included, “The statute of limitations for assault on a police officer.”

• Curtis Davis, 24 months, punched two police officers in the head. That night he filmed a video of his fist, in which he bragged: “Them knuckles right there, from one of those m— faces at the Capitol.”

• Ronald Colton McAbee, 70 months, hit a cop while wearing “reinforced brass knuckle gloves,” and he held one down on the ground as “other rioters assailed the officer for over 20 seconds,” causing a concussion.

• Michael Joseph Foy, 40 months, brought a hockey stick with a TRUMP 2020 flag attached, which he swung “over his head and downward at police officers as if he were chopping wood.”

There are more like this, which everyone understood on Jan. 6 and shortly afterward. “There is nothing patriotic about what is occurring on Capitol Hill,” one GOP official tweeted. “This is 3rd world style anti-American anarchy.” That was Marco Rubio, now Mr. Trump’s Secretary of State. He was right. What happened that day is a stain on Mr. Trump’s legacy. By setting free the cop beaters, the President adds another.


Tuesday, January 21, 2025

Mother Jones

Mother Jones is one of the few independent, indispensable journalistic voices that we have to support. I may not agree with every single thing that they produce, but their voice is going to be even more essential going forward into the Trump fog.

Trump's pardoning of the J6 attackers is way beyond the norm. Even public opinion was 70/30 against pardoning these thugs. Many of them assaulted police officers with baseball bats, clubs, even American flags. All in the name of a LIE. Is this what we should expect from the party of "Law and Order?" Pardoning violent criminals? It does not matter that they believed Trump when he lied that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Ignorance is no excuse. Anyone with a functioning brain, even a partisan, could see that Trump was lying. This absurd act on Day 1 of Trump's presidency must NEVER be forgotten, and any and every Republican should be grilled about it, CONSTANTLY.

Trump Frees Violent January 6 Attackers

Granted impunity for his own conduct, Trump extends it to the rioters.



President Donald Trump on Monday granted clemency to nearly 1,600 people who joined in the January 6 attack on Congress that he himself caused.

Hours after returning to office, Trump announced he was giving “full, complete and unconditional” pardons to nearly all “individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

Trump also announced commutations of prison sentences for the handful of January 6 convicts not given full pardons—14 top members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia and Proud Boys—freeing them from lengthy prison sentences.

These actions mean that Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers leader who was sentenced to 18 years in prison following his conviction for seditious conspiracy and other crimes for planning violence on January 6, is a free man. 

Trump also freed Enrique Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader who was serving a 22-year sentence following his conviction for seditious conspiracy and other crimes for his role in planning the violence on January 6.

Tarrio was the “the ultimate leader, the ultimate person who organized, who was motivated by revolutionary zeal,” US District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, said in sentencing Tarrio in 2023 after applying an enhancement for terrorism.

Trump himself faced felony charges for allegedly conspiring to use a fake elector scheme as a means to remain in power in 2021. His election victory in November caused special counsel Jack Smith to drop that case to comply with a Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president.

In pardoning or commuting the sentences of his insurrectionist supporters, Trump has used his newly restored power to extend to his followers the impunity the presidency gives to him. More broadly, Trump is using the clemency authority to try to erase the stain of his botched self-coup attempt as he continues to insist that he actually won in 2020.

In informal, rambling remarks that followed his mostly scripted inaugural speech Wednesday, Trump picked up where he left off four years ago. He called the 2020 election “totally rigged,” claimed the January 6 attack was largely nonviolent, and called the people prosecuted for their role in it “patriots” and “hostages.”

That language signaled that Trump’s clemency grants, more than just a legal effort, are part of a renewed campaign to force government institutions and the American public to accept his false and self-serving version of reality.

Trump’s sweeping actions Monday seemed to be a rejection of suggestions by advisers that he deny clemency to rioters who were convicted of violent acts and that he consider clemency applications on a case-by-case basis.

The pardons came after an inaugural speech in which Trump promised to restore “law and order” in American cities. 

Earlier on Monday, Joe Biden issued preemptive pardons to public figures who Trump has threatened to use the Justice Department to target. These included former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark MilleyDr. Anthony Fauci and members and staffers of the House January 6 committee, as well as Washington, DC, and Capitol police officers who testified before the committee about the attack. Minutes before leaving office, Biden also issued pardons for members of his family: his brothers James and Frank, his sister Valerie, and their respective spouses. Those pardons follow Biden’s widely criticized pardon last month of his son Hunter, who was convicted last year of lying about his drug use and, through a guilty plea, of tax evasion.

“My family has been subjected to unrelenting attacks and threats, motivated solely by a desire to hurt me—the worst kind of partisan politics,” Biden said in a statement released Monday while Trump’s inauguration ceremony was underway. “Unfortunately, I have no reason to believe these attacks will end.”

Trump—who, during his first term, engaged in a historically unprecedented effort to use his pardon power to reward supporters and to undermine investigations into his own alleged crimes—had the chutzpah to crticize Biden’s pardons on Monday.

Taylor Budowich, Trump’s incoming deputy chief of staff, tweeted that Biden’s pardons “will go down as the greatest attack on America’s justice system in history.” (Budowich personally earned nearly $20,000 from helping to organize protest activity on January 6, I reported last year.)

Trump seemed especially irked that Biden’s pardons covered the two Republican lawmakers who served on the January 6 committee, both of whom he described as tearful. Former Rep. Liz Cheney is a “crying lunatic,” Trump said, adding that former Rep. Adam Kinzinger “is always crying.”

Trump repeated a false claim that the January 6 committee had destroyed evidence gather in its investigation. The committee’s final report, transcripts of hundreds of depositions and other investigative material remain available online—a reminder that Trump, for all his powers, cannot erase the history of January 6. His clemency actions, in fact, deepen his connection to that event.

BEFORE YOU CLICK AWAY!

Mother Jones was founded to do journalism differently. We stand for justice and democracy. We reject false equivalence. We go after stories others don’t. We’re a nonprofit newsroom, because the kind of truth-telling investigations we do doesn’t happen under corporate ownership. 

And the essential ingredient that makes all this possible? Readers like you.

It’s reader support that enables Mother Jones to devote the time and resources to report the facts that are too difficult, expensive, or inconvenient for other news outlets to uncover. Please help with a donation today if you can—even a few bucks will make a real difference. A monthly gift would be incredible.

Original.


Friday, January 17, 2025

Charlie Sykes

Charlie Sykes is another Republican who opposes Donald Trump. They are a small but influential number. We cannot turn away allies like Charlie, Steve Schmidt, Tim Miller, and Rick Wilson just because they were once, and maybe still are, Republicans. At least they have the good sense to reject Donald Trump, unlike most of the Republican Party that marches in goose-step to every Trump utterance. It's still so odd and rather shocking to me that a once-Grand Old Party is now a malevolent, pernicious cult that seems to have no problem with lying fascists. The item below is from Charlie Sykes Substack writing. 


The Senate defines deviancy down

by Charlie Sykes

January 16, 2025

In 1993, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan published his essay, “Defining Deviancy Down” in which he described how society was lowering the standards of acceptable behavior as a response to the increase of deviant behavior in society. Things that were once considered abnormal or immoral, he wrote, were being redefined as “normal” or “acceptable” as society began to adjust its standards so that it could tolerate the previously intolerable. 

Moynihan was largely concerned with social breakdowns — the rise of out-of -wedlock births, and criminal and other anti-social behaviors. But if Moynihan were amongst us now, I suspect he would be gobsmacked at the degree we have also normalized deviancy in our politics, including in the august body in which he once served.

**

You will have to take my word for it, but at one time, the U.S. Senate was a serious place.

In March 1989, the U.S. Senate voted 53 to 47 to reject the nomination of John Tower, President George H.W. Bush’s pick for Secretary of Defense.

Tower’s rejection was remarkable on a number of levels: He was former senior member of the Senate — the first Republican senator from Texas since Reconstruction — and a former chairman of the Senate’s Armed Services Committee. No presidential cabinet pick had been voted down in 30 years.

But there were problems. “Concerns about Tower’s personal life played a major role. He was accused of being a drunk and a womanizer.”

“Have I ever drunk to excess? Yes,” he said. “Am I alcohol-dependent? No. Have I always been a good boy? Of course not. But I’ve never done anything disqualifying. That’s the point.”

His former colleagues disagreed. (Bush’s next nominee— Dick Cheney — was confirmed easily.)

**

Fast forward to this week’s absurd hearings for absurd nominees.

After hours of denials, evasions, fumbles, and cliches, we are told that the deeply absurd Pete Hegseth — a man who makes John Tower’s transgressions seem quaint by comparison —emerged “largely unscathed”from his Senate confirmation hearing. His confirmation as the nation’s Secretary of Defense — which just weeks ago seemed improbable — now seems likely.

Hegseth’s hearing was followed by the hearing for AG-designate Pam Bondi, who alone would define the unseriousness of this moment, except in comparison with the egregious Matt Gaetz. 

Thus, the world’s greatest deliberative body defined deviancy down with barely a whimper. 

“What America and the world saw today,” wrote Tom Nichols in the Atlantic, “was not a serious examination of a serious man. Instead, Republicans on the committee showed that they would rather elevate an unqualified and unfitnominee to a position of immense responsibility than cross Donald Trump, Elon Musk, or the most ardent Republican voters in their home states. America’s allies should be deeply concerned; America’s enemies, meanwhile, are almost certainly laughing in amazement at their unexpected good fortune….”

How dumbed down was the senate’s charade?

“The words ‘Russia’ and ‘Ukraine’ barely came up today,” notes Lawfare’s Ben Wittes. “The words ‘China’ and ‘Taiwan’ made only marginally more conspicuous an appearance. The defense of Europe? One would hardly know such a place as Europe even existed.

“By contrast, the words ‘lethality,’ ‘woke,’ and ‘DEI’ came up repeatedly.…”

Hegseth was neither an outlier nor an aberration. One of the central tenets of Trumpism, writes Wittes, is “the contempt for expertise and traditional qualifications; the insistence that the only real qualification is authenticity—and that authenticity is somehow wrapped up in performative masculinity; the belief that sounding tough and being tough are the same thing; and the conviction that complexity necessarily reduces to weakness.”

It’s all right there in the nomination of a proudly unqualified individual who frames his lack of qualifications as qualification of a different, more authentic, variety that reflects what he calls a “warrior ethos” America has somehow lost in its infatuation with equity. And this idea has the apparently silent assent of all of the Republican members of the committee and a few, at least, enthusiastic takers.

…This is the philosophical core of the Trump era. And it is interesting to watch it migrating from Trump himself down to his cabinet. In the first term, after all, Trump’s defense secretaries and cabinet officers were, generally speaking, well qualified in the traditional sense of qualifications. The cult of unqualified authenticity was then mostly confined to Trump himself. But in the Hegseth hearing, you can see it trickling downward.

Meanwhile, it’s not immediately self-evident that Trump’s picks for sensitive positions are wildly popular amongst the electorate. “Few think Trump's FBI and Justice Department will act fairly: AP-NORC poll.”

The poll finds that only about 2 in 10 Americans approve of Pete Hegseth’s nomination as secretary of defense… A similarly small share say they “somewhat” or “strongly” approve of Tulsi Gabbard being tapped to serve as intelligence chief and Patel being selected as FBI director. About one-third of Americans disapprove of each of the picks, while the rest either don’t have an opinion or don’t know enough to say.

**

And yet the redefining of deviancy continues apace — by both the GOP and what used to be the mainstream media. Consider the contribution of Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post, which issued a mass endorsement of nearly every Trump cabinet-level nominee all of whom, according to the Post, are free of “disqualifying deficiencies in competence, temperament or philosophy.”

Jamison Foser offers a list of the worst of the Washington Post’s endorsements — starting with its thumbs up for Pam Bondi (FFS).

On November 22, 2024 the Washington Post editorial board wrote of the relationship between Donald Trump and Pam Bondi:

Mr. Trump’s charity contributed $25,000 to a political group backing Ms. Bondi in 2013, around the time she decided not to pursue fraud complaints against Mr. Trump’s for-profit seminar business, Trump University. Both Mr. Trump and Ms. Bondi denied wrongdoing. […]

More important than any of that, however, is her view about the proper role of the Justice Department. Mr. Trump has been explicit that he doesn’t value or respect the traditional independence of the federal government’s law enforcement function. He soured on both his attorneys general during his first term when they showed independence […]

In contrast, Ms. Bondi led chants of “lock her up” about Hillary Clinton in 2016 and parroted false claims about fraud on television in 2020. She was one of his impeachment defense attorneys and has led the legal arm of the Trump-tied America First Policy Institute.”

Seems bad!

Last month, the news side of The Washington Post published a lengthy report about Bondi’s “baseless claims about election fraud” in 2020, noting “Pennsylvania officials from both parties say there were consequences to her actions, arguing that Bondi spread misinformation that helped wreak long-lasting damage to the electoral system.”

Original.