It’s Pam Bondi.
Ugh.
- She was the Ethics Alarms Unethical Prosecutor of the Year in 2016.
- That year I wrote,
“Florida’s attorney general Pam Bondi personally solicited a political contribution from Donald Trump while she considered joining an investigation of alleged fraud at Trump University and its affiliates, AP reports Trump’s $25,000 donation to Bondi came from a Trump family foundation in a likely violation of rules surrounding legitimate activities by 501 C (3) charities, which are not allowed to engage in political grant-making. And Justice for All, a political group backing Bondi’s re-election, reported receiving the check on Sept. 17, 2013 — four days after Bondi’s office publicly announced she was considering joining a New York state probe of Trump University’s activities.”
- Still later, after the 2016 election, I wrote,
After his election victory, Donald Trump agreed to pay out $25 million in settlement of claims against the new defunct Trump University. In September, before the election, the Florida Attorney General’s office had announced that that there were “insufficient grounds” to proceed with a fraud probe of the school. Three years earlier, it had announced that it was considering such a probe in anticipation of legal action against Trump University.
Four days after that threat, Donald Trump’s personal charity illegally donated $25,000 to a political group supporting Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi’s re-election campaign. Bondi personally solicited that donation from Trump just as her office was deciding whether to pursue the Trump U. investigation. (This is almost certainly an prosecutorial ethics violation, as well as being obviously corrupt.) This revelation by the Associated Pressemerged during the campaign, and was swamped by all the other Trump controversies at the time.
Yesterday, Trump’s transition team told Bloomberg that Pam Bondi has accepted a job in Trump’s White House.
As with other apparent bribes via campaign contributions, proving a quid pro quo is nigh impossible. It would be hard to even pin an “appearance of impropriety” charge on the Trump Administration, since appointments, never mind jobs, have gone to allies and financial supporters of Presidents since the first primordial presidential ooze crawled into the White House. Is it unethical? Of course.
Legal ethics might be the best way to nail Bondi, even though Trump is untouchable on this. The Florida Bar is one of the strictest on lawyer ethics in the nation, and even if she’s in Washington, Florida can suspend or disbar her for putting up justice for sale. I’ve got to check and see if Florida is one the states where anyone can file an ethics complaint. I might file one myself.
She took a bribe.
Matt Gaetz was an unqualified pick for AG.
Pam Bondi is a corrupt one.
Out of the ethics frying pan, into the fire.
Nice.
(I’m sure she’s loyal, though.)
Ethics Alarms 
I sure hope you are able to file the ethics complaint concerning Ms. Bondi. I truly do wonder about Trump’s ethics , he sure surrounds himself with unethical people.
He doesn’t really have many ethics. I do believe he wants to do a good job as President; however, he is stymied by:
His political opponents who go into totalitarian mode and threaten, dox and otherwise harass any qualified candidates he may nominate.
The candidates he gets stuck with who are sunshine patriots and miss no opportunity to bail when it suits their interests, betraying him by leaks and self-serving memoirs after the fact.
So he chooses people he believes will be loyal to him and won’t undermine his administration. They are, contrary to his pronouncements, not the best people.
And some of them are probably not loyal either.
One could hope he is strategizing to get wackos like Gaetz out of the way (maybe he should nominate Marjorie Taylor-Greene and Lauren Boebert for Cabinet positions and watch them fail, too, so we get rid ourselves of them, as well?), but I suspect one would be wrong.
To be perfectly honest; I really don’t know much about the intricate details of legal ethics or bar complaints, how they’re investigated, and how punishment (if any) is handed out. I’ve learned a lot here regarding ethics but there is a fair amount that’s outside of my knowledge base regarding the legal profession.
Knowing that, can someone tell me why apparently no one has filed a bar complaint for this accused de facto bribe since 2013, that’s 11 years??
Seriously, since this lawyer seems to be a Trump supporter, why hasn’t the 65 Project filed a bar complaint against this lawyer?
Is there some kind of statute of limitations for bar complaints?
What am I missing?
can someone tell me why apparently no one has filed a bar complaint for this accused de facto bribe since 2013, that’s 11 years??
1. I can. There were bar complaints made against her. Nothing came of them. Nothing comes of most bar complaints, and the investiagtions, if any, are confidential Prosecutors in particular are almost never sanctioned.
Since this lawyer seems to be a Trump supporter, why hasn’t the 65 Project filed a bar complaint against this lawyer?
2. She hasn’t been practicing law for a while. She’s been a lobbyist.
3.Is there some kind of statute of limitations for bar complaints?
Nope!
Jack wrote, “There were bar complaints made against her. Nothing came of them. Nothing comes of most bar complaints, and the investigations, if any, are confidential Prosecutors in particular are almost never sanctioned.”
So is filing a bar complaint now a futile exercise kinda like beating a dead horse?
Most of the time. Remember that John Edwards’ never lost his bar license despite dozens of complaints over his lies regarding his mistress and their lovechild while running for President. Unless the complaint involves neglecting a client or stealing his money or being convicted of a crime(or representing Donald Trump) most complaints go nowhere.
Hah!
I am not going to comment on Bondi’s character but how do we say she is worse than Gaetz if Gaetz was the epitome of bad character. I will however weigh in on the suit against Trump university for fraud.
I always wondered about Trump university. How can any school not be sued for fraud when students are charged astronomical sums, where faculty make as much as $500,000 to teach one class but use TA’s to actual deliver lectures, and then the government feels it necessary to forgive the loans these students took out because they ere promised big salaries because of their degree. Oh shoot that’s the Ivy League or the University of Pheonix. I wonder how many graduates of these prestigious or even high priced state schools could sue their university for creating a false impression that the degree would ensure financial success?
I dont know if Trump U was in any way different than any of the other Real Estate with OPM (other peoples money) programs offered today. In 2008 I went to one of these solicitations to see what they were selling. They make lots of claims but in the end the only a few will be successful because the “secret” making money in real estate is like getting laid, if you ask enough people you will find someone so in need they will allow you to screw them or get them to sell you their house for pennies on the dollar, which is the same thing. You will know who went to one of these courses if you see signs or get calls about buying your home for cash.
The prices for these programs can mount up and the greedy are easily taken by the lure of “easy money”. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that the only ones making money are the ones selling the techniques and the “lists of investors”. No one teaches (for money) others the keys to success in a given industry it they are in it themselves. Why would they want competition. What they want students become is their eyes and ears on the ground to find people in distress. It gets worse from there. There is no easy money in this racket because you constantly seeking out people in financial distress. The plaintiffs in the Trump University case were not seeking knowledge they were seeking a means to a promised big easy payday. I consider their losses condign justice.
New York sued Trump University because they said its use of the word university would confuse the public because it did not confer degrees or grade students.
If Bondi took a bribe it is up the courts to decide that. If lawyers rarely sanction another lawyer for misdeeds that cast a negative light on their profession then they are no better than the ones they let slide. Because no action was taken I will assume there is no substantial evidence against her.
I’m more concerned with some of Pam Bondhi’s ties to other forms of corruption, such as the George Zimmerman trial. I don’t think this is a good selection. Of course, my concerns are related more to politics than to ethics. Personally, I don’t care if they hire Hannibal Lector to eat the DOJ.
NP
Other than she and Governor Scott appointed a special prosecutor at the behest of Seminole County AG who was attempting to create better transparency, what did she do that was unethical. It would seem she simply granted the request and was not part of Zimmerman’s prosecution.
God* help us, Jack. I feel like I’m stuck on a roller coaster and my car is upside down. Aside from her ethics baggage (I of course cannot put that aside), does she know anything about how the the role of DOJ w/r/t urban crime? Can she command the respect of experienced AUSA prosecutors. Do my questions answer themselves?
*not to be construed as an assertion that there is a God, or gods, who could help us
Yeah, This depressed me greatly…and I was already depressed.
Color me unsurprised.
As we work diligently to condemn his choices I have to ask who should he pick who will straighten out the DOJ. Which General should lead the DoD. Let’s construct a list of people who we believe are strong candidates for the position instead of bashing those choices made. It seems to me that unless you are ready to offer solutions simply criticizing seems unethical. I see this as a golden rule violation. Don’t condemn another’s choice without offering a better way if you don’t want to have all your choices condemned without a solution offered.
I am not familiar with all the rules associated with PACs but my understanding is that there are PACs that are committed to a particular candidate and those that are more issue oriented. The PAC in question was supporting Bondi but is not required to disclose its funding.
I also understand that political campaigns and PACs cannot coordinate their activities so if that is the case and the PAC receiving the donation cannot share information with individual campaigns how does a 2,500 dollar donation to the PAC get associated with Bondi even if the goal was to promote Bondi?
Oh, I don’t know, sure there are experienced and ethical lawyers with organizational management experience who haven’t accepted bribes to drop prosecutions. Surely.
I am not so sure. Where are the lawyers who are not pushing for a criminal indictment for the alleged bribe. I am concerned that we are convicting people here without a trial based on scant evidence of quid pro quo. If the case were that strong, why didn’t Eric Holder’s DOJ step in and seek to prosecute? He could have in 2015 We have eliminated the presumption of innocence because who the players are.
I know the old saying if it walks like a duck etc. but that does not carry a lot of weight in a trial. I can contemplate any number of reasons to drop an investigation. First, both Texas and New York were already investigating and that the Florida organization was not Trump University and was owned by two other people who licensed his name. Secondly even if there was alleged wrongdoing in Florida was there adequate evidence to pursue action against Trump himself? I don’t know and so far as I can tell no other prosecutor does either.
From Wikipedia:
The Trump Institute was a separate business. It was licensed by Trump University, and Trump received a cut of every seat sold,[24] but Trump University owned no part of it.[25] It was owned and operated by Irene and Mike Milin of Boca Raton, Florida.[24] It offered real estate seminars from 2006 to 2009, at which point the licensing agreement expired and was not renewed.[25] Trump was not involved in the operation of the Trump Institute, but he recorded a broadcast infomercial promoting it and appeared in an introductory video before each seminar.[26][24]
Did Bondi realize that the two were not associated and she lacked jurisdiction? Trump sells his name to brand various products. Without actual management involvement how could he be liable. Could there be an action against anyone in Florida after the organizational relationship (if any) ceased to exist before her tenure as AG
I don’t want unethical officials in charge of anything but I am not ready to strike down every candidate the president puts up because some allegation that no one ever seems to feel necessary to pursue formally casts a cloud over the nominee for the sole purpose of undermining that nominee for political reasons. I find that to be as unethical as the unsubstantiated claims against the nominee.
Same reason Clinton taking a bribe to pardon Marc Rich, a fugitive, wasn’t prosecuted, and the same reason the Governor of Virginia’s graft conviction was over-turned. Bondi’s scheme was pure appearance of impropriety stuff: her reward came after the prize. Bribery is usually only provable when the pay-off comes before what’s being paid for. Otherwise the miscreant can claim that the two things weren’t tied or related.
Then I must presume their innocence. That is the only ethical stance I can take from a Constitutional perspective.
Maybe there are some who haven’t taken bribes. However, every DA I have ever looked into ended up suspicious at least. In every prosecution that makes headlines, the prosecutor always seems to violate the law, be on the take, etc. Look at all the prosecutions of Trump, the big prosecutions like Enron or the Oklahoma City Bombings, the Watergate investigation…
The DA of a town I lived in refused to prosecute a $1million+ embezzlement charge from a church (was friends with the embezllee). Another DA where I lived once helped his friend stalk a woman he had raped and eventually dropped the prosecution because she went into hiding. A successor to that DA was Mike Nifong, who prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse Players. Another DA of the town where I lived dropped child molestation charges numerous times because the school superintendent asked him to (eventually, a deputy went to the press). Another town had a DA and judges that allowed an attorney to represent indigent teen boys so he could molest them for over a decade before he was caught. The DA’s refused to investigate any of the allegations of molestation brought by the teens or their parents (eventually, a parent went to the press). I can go on and on. I don’t think I have ever lived in a town with an upstanding DA. The last one we elected looked pretty good, but he died mysteriously 3 days after the election…
Maybe I just know too much about local politics.