Bondi isn’t Gaetz but don't 'recalibrate' — this can't be 'new normal': Ex-prosecutor

A former Florida Republican said he's breathing a "sigh of relief" that Pam Bondi is now Donald Trump's new attorney general choice, noting that she's not only qualified, she hasn't been embroiled in any sex scandals.

Legal analysts debated ethics and experiences during Friday's MSNBC discussion about Bondi. Former Rep. David Jolly (R-FL) confessed that he's a friend of Bondi's and he sees her as completely qualified for the job.

She also has the added benefit of not having had any sex scandal, he said.

The previous appointee was former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who resigned from Congress ahead of an Ethics Committee vote on whether to release a report on an investigation into allegations against him. Some details of the report have dripped out, including testimony from two witnesses who spoke to the committee.

Also Read: Pro-Trump super PAC fined for election law violation

Despite calls from Trump and lobbying efforts with Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, Gaetz withdrew his promised nomination on Thursday.

"We should breathe a little sigh of relief," said Jolly about Bondi. "The big difference between Matt Gaetz and Pam Bondi is this. Pam Bondi is qualified to run the department. ... She hasn't been accused of sexual misconduct or sex trafficking."

But it was Andrew Weissmann, former top prosecutor for special counsel Robert Mueller, who said that the standard should be higher than not having been investigated by the Justice Department.

"One thing that is important is for our viewers not to recalibrate simply because there is a new normal that she is not Matt Gaetz," said Weissmann. "That's not the standard for whether somebody should be the attorney general of the United States."

He pointed out that it is also not a qualification to be a state prosecutor for years.

"Absolutely, she has that experience, but the real issue is, I think, sort of the second part of what David was talking about, which is, one: Does she believe that facts and law are what is supposed to govern the Department of Justice and all decision-making?" asked Weissmann.

"Two: Do you think it is right for the president to say who you should prosecute and who you should not prosecute?" he continued. "And so, questions like 'Do you believe there is a stolen election in 2020,' are totally appropriate ones. When she talks about going after, you know, political enemies of Donald Trump, is that the appropriate role for the Department of Justice? She shouldn't have to walk them back because that is the critical issue."

See the discussion below or at the link here.

- YouTube www.youtube.com