I think there's a bigger question here that perhaps we're not considering fully. Prior to her latest appointment, Pam Bondi was the Attorney General for the State of Florida. She was admitted to the Florida Bar in June 1991 and was an assistant state attorney at least as early as 2006 - almost 20 years ago. In other words, Pam knew or should have known that this ludicrous case was going to be thrown out.
But she filed it anyway.
There may be several explanations for this, but I think we can probably discount, "Because she thought this was the right response in the circumstances." One doesn't develop the employment history of Pam Bondi by being this stupid. So what does that leave us?
Well, option one would be because the President instructed her to do so and even though she felt it was the wrong thing to do, she was a willing co-conspirator and simply acquiesced to the President's wishes.
Option two could be because, even though she felt this was unlikely to succeed, she felt that it was "performatively necessary". Now this second option sub-divides. For example, it could be because she felt that it would be useful to have some "red meat" to throw out for the President's base - for example because this could be portrayed as yet more evidence of a "Deep State".
But a second option could be because this is part of a determined effort to undermine the credibility of the judiciary, by continuing to file insanely stupid cases, expecting them to be thrown out, but being prepared in advice to spin the rejection as evidence of a "Deep State Judiciary" as a pretext for more dramatic steps in the future.
There's a lot of discussion in the media to the effect that Donald Trump doesn't play three-dimensional chess, that he's simply instinctive. And there's a lot of evidence for this - his recent attempt to overturn the E. Jean Carroll verdict is reflex not strategy. But the same rules likely don't apply to former ADAs now serving as AG.
We could probably all agree that if a rank-and-file disgruntled private practice attorney filed a case like this that they would if lucky get a tongue-lashing during a bench conference, while if unlucky or had taken other steps might find themselves on the end of sanctions, but that isn't likely when the instigator is the AG.
But I think we need to parse some of this stuff carefully. If it's clearly a performance for an audience of one, then meh. But if it's part of a broader play aimed at undermining the judiciary, then it might be worth parsing in more detail, if only to help us figure out possible next moves.
After all, we've ample evidence of the Howler Monkey branch of SCotUS actively asking for cases to help them rewrite precedent. What's to say that similar moves aren't in play here?
The face of incompetence and appearently short term memory loss, like the law degree. Does she remember anything about Constitutional Law, oh that’s right she went to Roy Cohn School of Meritless Lawsuits, Lawsuits Lawsuit, bury them in Meritless lawsuits.
Office of Public Affairs | Justice Department Disrupts Covert Russian Government-Sponsored Foreign Malign Influence Operation Targeting Audiences in the United States and Elsewhere | United States Department of Justice https://share.google/qSyKz6YTaSC56KnRp
Stupid stupid Trunts everywhere
Encouraging to hear the legal perspectives! Liz Dye you ate on fire!!
Why isn’t she being disbarred? There are other leaders and orgs that could do more. They are not.
Well done Judge Cullen
I think there's a bigger question here that perhaps we're not considering fully. Prior to her latest appointment, Pam Bondi was the Attorney General for the State of Florida. She was admitted to the Florida Bar in June 1991 and was an assistant state attorney at least as early as 2006 - almost 20 years ago. In other words, Pam knew or should have known that this ludicrous case was going to be thrown out.
But she filed it anyway.
There may be several explanations for this, but I think we can probably discount, "Because she thought this was the right response in the circumstances." One doesn't develop the employment history of Pam Bondi by being this stupid. So what does that leave us?
Well, option one would be because the President instructed her to do so and even though she felt it was the wrong thing to do, she was a willing co-conspirator and simply acquiesced to the President's wishes.
Option two could be because, even though she felt this was unlikely to succeed, she felt that it was "performatively necessary". Now this second option sub-divides. For example, it could be because she felt that it would be useful to have some "red meat" to throw out for the President's base - for example because this could be portrayed as yet more evidence of a "Deep State".
But a second option could be because this is part of a determined effort to undermine the credibility of the judiciary, by continuing to file insanely stupid cases, expecting them to be thrown out, but being prepared in advice to spin the rejection as evidence of a "Deep State Judiciary" as a pretext for more dramatic steps in the future.
There's a lot of discussion in the media to the effect that Donald Trump doesn't play three-dimensional chess, that he's simply instinctive. And there's a lot of evidence for this - his recent attempt to overturn the E. Jean Carroll verdict is reflex not strategy. But the same rules likely don't apply to former ADAs now serving as AG.
We could probably all agree that if a rank-and-file disgruntled private practice attorney filed a case like this that they would if lucky get a tongue-lashing during a bench conference, while if unlucky or had taken other steps might find themselves on the end of sanctions, but that isn't likely when the instigator is the AG.
But I think we need to parse some of this stuff carefully. If it's clearly a performance for an audience of one, then meh. But if it's part of a broader play aimed at undermining the judiciary, then it might be worth parsing in more detail, if only to help us figure out possible next moves.
After all, we've ample evidence of the Howler Monkey branch of SCotUS actively asking for cases to help them rewrite precedent. What's to say that similar moves aren't in play here?
Appreciate your excellent critical thinking through of the issues, versus personalizing this by name calling.
Power is the ability to determine what is an issue.
The face of incompetence and appearently short term memory loss, like the law degree. Does she remember anything about Constitutional Law, oh that’s right she went to Roy Cohn School of Meritless Lawsuits, Lawsuits Lawsuit, bury them in Meritless lawsuits.
Great news! One step at a time. I'm glad the right people are paying attention. At all levels.
Fuck you blondie cunt bondi .. you lose AGAIN .. now go fuck urself ..
Thank you for this- benchslapping is my absolute new favorite word. Well done!
Thank you. It's nice to see a ray of light in this bleak landscape.
Thank you for this.
The photo of Bribable Bondi must have been photoshopped, because that is NOT the finger she is holding up to We The People.
FUCK you Pam Bondi
Eat shit Pam you bitch
The bags under her eyes are getting bigger and blacker by the day and no cover up foundation is equal to the demands she puts it to.
“Benchslapped” is such a wonderful word! Thank you!!!
Office of Public Affairs | Justice Department Disrupts Covert Russian Government-Sponsored Foreign Malign Influence Operation Targeting Audiences in the United States and Elsewhere | United States Department of Justice https://share.google/qSyKz6YTaSC56KnRp