Pam Bondi Responds To Questions During Confirmation Hearing

By
Billy Costigan
-

Pam Bondi’s confirmation hearing as Attorney General nominee turned into a political spectacle on Wednesday, with much of the attention falling on Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI), whose questioning became a masterclass in how not to interrogate a nominee. Hirono’s signature style—an aggressive but scattershot approach—was on full display, as she lobbed broad accusations, innuendos, and gotcha-style questions that ultimately backfired spectacularly. Bondi, calm and composed, dismantled Hirono’s lines of attack with surgical precision, leaving the senator scrambling.

This wasn’t an isolated incident. Hirono has become known for her penchant for over-the-top theatrics during hearings. Her questioning often feels more like a dramatic reading of pre-written scripts than a substantive probe into the qualifications of nominees. Yesterday, her attempts to grill Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth fell flat, with Hegseth easily brushing aside her recycled allegations as old news from biased media outlets. Today, Hirono tried the same strategy with Bondi, and the results were no different—except this time, Bondi turned the tables with devastating effectiveness.

The senator’s first misstep came when she criticized Bondi for allegedly refusing to meet with her ahead of the hearing. Bondi didn’t hesitate to correct the record, pointing out that she had not refused a meeting but had received no communication from Hirono’s office to schedule one. In a matter of seconds, Hirono’s entire premise collapsed. It was a moment that exposed Hirono’s reliance on scripted attacks rather than facts, and Bondi didn’t let it slide.

The awkwardness didn’t end there. Hirono, like several of her Democratic colleagues, seemed fixated on asking Bondi who won the 2020 election—a question that, by now, feels more like a political litmus test than a genuine inquiry. Bondi answered clearly and factually, but Hirono’s reaction suggested she was fishing for a soundbite rather than engaging in serious discussion. The entire exchange felt performative, with Hirono looking for a moment to go viral rather than contribute meaningfully to the confirmation process.

The low point of Hirono’s questioning, however, came when she took a drink from her sippy cup mid-hearing. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with hydrating during a long session, the moment quickly became fodder for ridicule, especially given the senator’s history of dramatic posturing. It’s a strange image: a lawmaker known for fiery rhetoric pausing to sip from what resembled a child’s cup while floundering against a nominee. Social media, as expected, had a field day.

Hirono’s broader performance highlights a recurring issue for Democrats during these hearings. Instead of engaging in substantive policy debates or pressing nominees on their qualifications, many Democratic senators seem intent on using these moments to score political points. This strategy often backfires, as it did today, when Bondi’s calm and fact-based responses made Hirono’s questions appear unfocused and unserious.

Hirono’s obsession with personal habits—whether Bondi’s refusal to engage in hypotheticals, or Hegseth’s occasional social drinking—further underscores how detached some Democrats have become from the concerns of everyday Americans. These hearings, ideally an opportunity to assess a nominee’s qualifications, too often devolve into performative outrage over issues that have little to do with the nominee’s ability to govern effectively.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR