16 January—Pam Bondi is the next U.S. Attorney General. Grin and bear it. Forget about her being Trump’s presumptive nominee, as she’s formally referred to pending her confirmation by the Senate. Given the pusillanimously obsequious Republican Senate majority, Bondi’s confirmation is a sure thing, it’s made in the shade, she’s in like Flynn. And any other allusions to certainty you can think of.

Unlike those of most of the likely appointees to Donald Trump’s Second Cabinet of Unqualified Misfits, Bondi’s credentials aren’t technically inappropriate or lacking. She served two terms as Attorney General of Florida and worked on Trump’s legal team during his first impeachment travesty. So she’s probably not unqualified by credentials to be the U.S. Attorney General. She also was a registered foreign agent (obviously not a spy unless spies are required to register) and a lobbyist.

But Pam Bondi certainly is not suitable to be the U.S. Attorney General.

Bondi made the de rigueur pledge to her Senate inquisitors yesterday, “If confirmed as United States Attorney General, my overriding objective would be to return the Department of Justice to its core mission of keeping Americans safe and vigorously enforcing the law.” Sure, they all say something like that because it’s expected. That’s why it’s de rigueur.

But Bondi’s “overriding objective would be to return the DOJ to its core mission.” And in that innocuous little verb lies a large part of her unsuitability to be the U.S. Attorney General. Because you just know what she meant. She declared that under her watch, “the partisan weaponization of the department of Justice will end. America must have one tier of justice for all,” stressing that the American public, not the president, would be her client.

Yeah, right. The irony there, you’ll recall, is that during his first term, Trump weaponized the DOJ to harass his adversaries. And Bondi’s lord and master has made it clear that he would—he will—use the DOJ to exact revenge, for good old-fashioned retribution. If that’s not blatant weaponization on behalf of a client-president, what is?

As if to confirm and amplify her primary allegiance to Trump rather than the American public (and the Constitution), Pam Bondi repeatedly refused to denounce or even talk about her lord and master’s seditious, criminal, and otherwise malevolent stances and behavior. She also wouldn’t answer directly when asked whether Trump had lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden. It must have pained her even to admit that Biden is the president.

Bondi’s political relationship with Trump goes back to 2013, when she was Florida’s Attorney General. Briefly, she declined to join a lawsuit against Trump University, about which her office had received over a score of complaints—after getting a campaign donation from Trump.

In 2013, Bondi persuaded Florida Governor Rick Scott to postpone a scheduled execution because it conflicted with a fundraising event. She later apologized—after media criticism.

And so on.

Is that the sort of person we want to be U.S. Attorney General? Problem is, we don’t matter . . .