That Was On Video!': Pam Bondi Accuses Padilla To His Face Of Storming Kristi Noem At Presser

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing today, which is our, at minimum, annual opportunity to ask questions as we fulfill our obligation to provide accountability over the Department of Justice. So just sort of to level set a little bit for folks in the audience and for folks watching at home, the Department of Justice is supposed to be the nation's guardian of fairness and the rule of law. The power of the Department of Justice is built on public trust and a belief that prosecutions are based on facts and law, not on politics or personal loyalty. And I call that out, Mr. Chairman, because when that breaks down, when the public trust breaks down, then justice itself is at risk. But under this Trump administration and the leadership of Attorney General Bondi, I believe the independence of the Department of Justice has come under attack. The department has been reorganized. It's been realigned and repurposed in ways that we've never seen before. Important offices have been closed, key programs dismantled, and agents diverted, all without congressional authorization or transparent justification. Now, these are not minor bureaucratic changes. They represent a fundamental shift in the Department of Justice's missions and priorities, its policies, and its practices. For example, career prosecutors have been pressured to change decisions in politically sensitive cases. Ethics oversight has been taken away from independent career professionals and handed to political appointees with little experience in these matters. Internal working groups have been created to revisit investigations involving President Trump and his allies. And together, these steps and the dangerous measures that prosecutorial decisions can be driven by political loyalty instead of the law. Even more troubling is that the Department of Justice has pulled resources away from organized crime, away from counterterrorism, away from the protection of civil rights, to focus on immigration enforcement. The American people expect a Department of Justice to pursue violent crime, as do I, to pursue corruption and threats to national security, not to serve as an arm of immigration policy and, in so doing, under-resource other critical missions. The Justice Department's credibility depends on the public's faith in justice, and that the justice will be applied equally to every person and not reserved for the powerful or the connected. And that faith must be protected. And so it's in that spirit that this committee has a duty to ensure the Department's work remains lawful, remains transparent, and remains true to its highest duty, the fair and impartial administration of justice. Now, that being said, I do want to get into some specific items with Attorney General Bondi here, beginning with the firing of Michelle Beckwith. Michelle Beckwith was a 15-year career prosecutor with the Department of Justice. She prosecuted in her career some of the worst of the worst in my home state of California. Sex traffickers, transnational terrorists, those who this administration claims to care about and be targeting, prioritizing in taking them off the streets. And it may surprise some to learn that Ms. Beckwith was unceremoniously marched out of her office and fired from her job in July of this year. Why? Not because she failed to do her job. Quite the opposite. It was because she had the audacity to remind Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino that he was obligated to follow a court order and the Constitution in California. According to reports, she was fired less than six hours after she told Bovino he couldn't arrest people without probable cause. Six hours. So my first question, Attorney General Bondi, is a simple yes-no question. Do you believe that government officials like Gregory Bovino are obligated to follow applicable court orders, whether they agree with them or not, yes or no? First, Senator Padilla, you have gone on for over five minutes, and I wish that you loved your state of California as much as you hate President Trump. We'd be in really good shape then, because violent crime in California is currently 35% higher than the national average. Property crime in California is 18% higher than the national average. That should be something that we should be talking about and working together on, yet we're not. And, no, this is important. You're talking about all of my agencies, and I want to let you know what DEA has been doing, and they are working hand-in-hand. I appreciate that. No, you can't go on for five minutes and criticize my agents who are out working without pay right now because you voted to shut down the government. They're out there working without pay. Mr. Chairman, I ask a simple yes or no question. Attorney General Bondi is refusing to respond, so let me move on to the next topic. DEA, 4,500 kilos of fentanyl and 50 million fentanyl pills off the streets. FBI, 23,000 violent criminals. U.S. Marshals, 51,000 fugitives. I'm not getting answered to my question. I'm trying to move on to the next question or the next topic. Mr. Chairman, order, please. Thank you. Under Attorney General Bondi's watch, criminal prosecutors are being fired for telling agencies to follow the law and uphold the Constitution. Meanwhile, there are instances of allies of the President who seem to be getting let off the hook. I won't reiterate what some of my colleagues have already brought up in terms of the dismissal of the investigation into Tom Homan and his alleged acceptance of $50,000 as payment by undercover FBI agents posing as business executives looking to secure contracts with a future Trump administration, because if the reports are true, it's not just the underlying conduct of Mr. Homan, which would be absolutely unacceptable, but the dismissal of the investigation charges raises concerns about the influence of the White House on the Department of Justice. Again, a simple question, and I'd appreciate a simple and brief answer. Whose decision was it to end this investigation? I have answered that question multiple times, yet you didn't have the courtesy to be sitting in here for the hearing. I'm not going to answer it again. And I find it interesting that you want order in this proceeding now. Excuse me, Senator. You want order in this proceeding now. You sure didn't have order when you stormed Secretary Nome at a press conference in California, did you? I will ask a follow-up question. Would you commit to either releasing the tape or at least making it available for members of this committee to review, yes or no? Senator, you have not been sitting in here this entire hearing. I've answered the question, and I also want to tell you that our ATF agent has seized 25,000 illegal firearms. so we will try again and move on to a different topic. Chairman, order, please. Mr. Chairman, order, please. Thank you. So when I haven't been in this hearing, I've been watching from my office monitoring the entire hearing just so everybody is aware. But since I'm not getting answers to my questions, I'll try to ask one last subject area. Now, again, there's been increasing concerns about the politicized decision-making and the erosion of internal safeguards to protect prosecutorial independence. Before we even get into the integrity and independence of prosecutions, we get into – you have to ask the question about the independence and integrity of investigations themselves. The director of the FBI, Director Patel, was here before us just a few weeks ago, Attorney General Bondi. You are the Attorney General of the United States, Director Patel reports to you. Do you believe he's doing a good job, yes or no? I believe Director Patel is doing a great job. You know where he is right now, Senator Padilla? Right now. You asked me a question. Yes, I know where he is, and I know where he's headed because you said it earlier in the hearing. Fighting to keep Chicago safe. You've said it earlier in the hearing, and yes, I have been paying attention. You know, you want order in here now, yet you stormed the director of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem. You sure didn't have order that day, did you, Senator? Attorney General, you are under oath. I did not storm the secretary, the video. Oh, that was on video. That video has been released, I believe, very publicly. Mr. Chairman, recent actions raise serious concerns about Director Patel's judgment and politicization, including lawsuits from former FBI officials alleging retaliatory firings and his decision to cut off longstanding partnerships with civil rights organizations and his decision to fire an FBI agent for refusing to engage in a, quote, perp walk of James Comey, and on top of all that, his prematurely claiming that subjects were in custody after the shooting of Charlie Kirk. I take Attorney General Bondi's endorsement today of his work as her support for those actions. Thank you, Mr. Chair. May I respond, Senator? Yes. Under Director Patel, 23,000 violent criminals have been arrested, a 91 percent increase over last year. More than 1,500 child predators have been arrested. We are making cases in your jurisdiction constantly in California, and I wish you would care about those cases. We have disrupted 1,600 gangs and criminal enterprises, 1,600 gangs, within this country thanks to Director Patel and the great men and women of the FBI. Senator Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. How are you today, Attorney General? It's good to see you. I have a rough voice. I have to say, I am struck by your work.