Title: Chris Wright and Pam Bondi's Senate Confirmation Hearings

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, again, everyone. Now we'll hear some key excerpts from two of yesterday's confirmation hearings for Trump nominees. We've chosen the nominees for energy secretary and attorney general to focus on. Energy secretary first, the nominee, Chris Wright, is the CEO of the country's second largest fracking company, Liberty Energy, based in Denver. His nomination has been alarming to people concerned about climate change because of comments like this that he posted in 2023 on his LinkedIn.

Chris Wright: There is no climate crisis, and we're not in the midst of an energy transition either.

Brian Lehrer: No climate crisis, no energy transition. A New York Times article about Chris Wright this week called him an evangelist for fossil fuels. It may have sounded like he was softening his position some when he testified yesterday and was asked about those topics.

Chris Wright: I've studied and followed the data and the evolution of climate change for at least 20 years now. It is a global issue. It is a real issue. It's a challenging issue. The solution to climate change is to evolve our energy system. I've worked on that most all of my career, again in nuclear and solar and geothermal and new battery storage technology now. Do I wish we could make faster progress? Absolutely.

Are there things we can do, investments together, through the Department of Energy, to accelerate development of new energy technologies that are really the only pathway to address climate change? Absolutely. We should have nothing but American leadership in this area. Energy and climate is a global problem, but America should be the leader. I think President Trump is firmly aligned with that position as well.

Brian Lehrer: There he does seem to accept that climate change is real and solutions have to do with renewable energy sources. Energy secretary nominee Chris Wright there, he was answering a question from Democratic Senator Hickenlooper of Colorado. They actually know each other from Colorado. Things got more heated when Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California pressed Wright about something Wright posted on social media about the California wildfires.

Democratic Senator Alex Padilla: You've seen the conditions evolve firsthand. Got to tell, it's pretty disappointed to come across some social media posts of yours. I'll, quote, understand you've written that, "The hype over wildfires is just hype to justify more impoverishment from bad government policies." Given the devastation that we're currently experiencing in Los Angeles, do you still believe that wildfires are just hype?

Chris Wright: Sir, it is with great sorrow and fear that I watch what's happening in your city of LA and those fires.

Democratic Senator Alex Padilla: Do you think it's just hype, or not?

Chris Wright: Climate change is a real and global phenomenon.

Democratic Senator Alex Padilla: Is it hype or not?

Chris Wright: I stand by my past comment.

Democratic Senator Alex Padilla: You believe it's hype.

Brian Lehrer: He stands by his past comment. Senator Padilla and energy secretary nominee Chris Wright. With us for more on that, Timothy Gardner, climate and energy correspondent at Reuters. Timothy, thanks for joining us on WNYC today. Hi

Timothy Gardner: Brian, good to be with you again.

Brian Lehrer: We played the short clip from his LinkedIn post in 2023 saying there is no climate crisis and no energy transition, followed by his statement in the confirmation hearing yesterday that climate change is real, and he will preside over development of renewable energy sources. Are those two clips contradictory, or is there some big picture of Chris Wright's views that encompasses both things?

Timothy Gardner: Well, Chris Wright admits that climate change is real, but he says it's distant, it's a distant threat. There's a greater threat, which he calls energy impoverishment, which he points to having visited 55 countries in his life. Many developing countries don't have the advantages on energy that the US And Europe have, say. He says that that's a bigger problem because hundreds of millions of people rely on things like charcoal to burn in their kitchens or animal dung to burn in their kitchens, and that leads to all kinds of health problems. His idea is that fossil fuels are the solution to that. Fossil fuels should be expanded, and that alternative energies are not working fast enough to provide that kind of solution.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, we can take a few quick phone calls on Chris Wright as the nominee for energy secretary, if you have a specific question or comment for our guest, Timothy Gardner, climate and energy correspondent at Reuters. The exchange with Senator Padilla about Wright's social media post on the California wildfires being a lot of hype, can you further explain what Wright meant by his remark?

Timothy Gardner: I would say the timing of those LinkedIn posts for Wright was unfortunate. It actually came out in July of 2023. That was two weeks before the Maui fires that wildfires that wiped out neighborhoods and killed more than 100 people. Of course, it was before the California fires that have so far, sadly, 25 people at least have been killed by that. It was in response to Senator Padilla who is from LA and who pointed out that the dogs are still going through the neighborhoods, looking in LA, looking for cadavers.

Wright's response to that was that he stands by his comments on LinkedIn from 2023, which surprised a lot of people in the hearing. Wright mentioned that it's a human tragedy, and it's devastating and heart wrenching, but, obviously, some of the senators wanted more.

Brian Lehrer: Was he indicating that he didn't think the wildfires or the increasing predominance of wildfires and other extreme weather events are linked to climate change?

Timothy Gardner: I think he's trying to say that government policies addressing wildfires are at risk of being overhyped. That's his opinion after reading-- Well, I mean, let's go back to the original LinkedIn comments. He was responding to a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Bjorn Lomborg, who's a political scientist from Denmark, who said, overall in the world, wildfires are not a huge impact from climate change. Wright was agreeing with that opinion piece. It's not sure what Wright will make of it from here.

Senator Hirono from Hawaii asked him if the Department of Energy would continue to support efforts to make energy systems protected from wildfires and not lead to wildfires. He said he would follow the law on that. The Energy Department does have a role in protecting from wildfires, a small role.

Brian Lehrer: Well, as energy secretary, would he have the power to slow down any transition to renewable energy sources because he's more interested in emphasizing fossil fuels? Can he slow down wind and solar development or end subsidies for Americans who do some conversions in their homes or anything else?

Timothy Gardner: That's an open question that we'll be looking at when President Elect Trump takes over on Monday, whether he will try to claw back any of the funding and subsidies that were passed in President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. There are hundreds of millions of dollars in there for renewable energy. It could be very hard for Trump to pull that back because a lot of those subsidies are going to parts of the country where Republicans are the politicians there. It could be hard for this administration, incoming administration, to do a lot of that. Whether they try to do some of that at the edges is-- We'll be looking to see if they try to do that.

Brian Lehrer: You noted in your article about yesterday's hearing, and I saw it as I was watching, that Wright is interested in geothermal energy and what you call small nuclear reactors. Do you think there may be more interest in nuclear now by environmentalists since nuclear is clean energy in a climate sense, and nuclear has pretty good safety record in this country despite we know there are potential catastrophic failures if there's a nuclear accident?

Timothy Gardner: There is more interest. As you said, he's on the board of a small modular nuclear company called Oklo. He will have to leave that position if he is confirmed, which looks very likely. As was pointed out in the hearing yesterday, US power demand is rising for the first time in decades, and is expected to rise 15% in the next 15 years, according to Senator Heinrich from New Mexico. There's all kinds of estimates, but one thing is for sure, the power demand in the US is rising on data centers and artificial intelligence.

Many big tech companies have suggested that they want to use nuclear to get there; Google, Microsoft, et cetera, Amazon. Environmentalists, yes, I think some environmentalists are open to exploring whether nuclear can satisfy some of that demand. Getting those projects approved is difficult. There's a Nuclear Regulatory Commission that has a lot of projects that it's considering. It has to take a very close look at technologies that are very new. That takes time.

Brian Lehrer: A listener writes in a text message, "July 2023, when he posted that LinkedIn, is also weeks after the sky turned orange here in New York City from the Canadian wildfires. There is nothing 'unfortunate,' meaning it's more serious than that, about Mr. Wright's comments." Last question. If he's pooh-poohing, calling hype, the link alleged between climate change and wildfires, what about stronger hurricanes? I mean, 2024 was just the latest year to have a global record high average temperature for the year. The extreme weather events happening that they say are from warmer ocean waters creating stronger hurricanes seems solid from the reporting I've read. Does he deny that?

Timothy Gardner: I've not seen him deny that. Again, I think it's the way he positions it and saying that energy bills and energy-- the developing world not having access to fossil fuels is the way he puts it, that that's a bigger threat. That's just the way he sees the world. Whether Americans want to have an energy secretary who believes that is-- We'll see how this plays out. US production of gas and oil hit records under President Biden. Apparently we'll see an effort to produce even more.

Brian Lehrer: Timothy Gardner, climate and energy correspondent at Reuters, thank you very much.

Timothy Gardner: Thank you, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Now we'll go on to the nominee for attorney general, Pam Bondi. She's been a longtime prosecutor and the attorney general of Florida. She's pretty MAGA, but many Democrats are relieved that at least it's not going to be Matt Gaetz. Bondi represented Trump in some of the election denying cases in 2020. She refused yesterday to acknowledge that Joe Biden won that election. She has also said she would prosecute the prosecutors, implying she'll be part of a Donald Trump revenge tour and will use the Justice Department to that end.

With that in mind, we've pulled an extended excerpt of Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island pressing Ms. Bondi on that and other justice issues. We can do this because we have the luxury of time on this long-form show. This clip, that goes very much to the heart of Democratic Party concerns about Trump and Bondi, runs four minutes.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: You have said that Department of Justice prosecutors will be prosecuted in the Trump administration. What Department of Justice prosecutors will be prosecuted, and why?

Pam Bondi: I said that on TV. I said prosecutors will be prosecuted to finish the quote, if bad, investigators will be investigated. We all take an oath, senator, to uphold the law. None of us are above the law. Let me give you a really good example of a bad lawyer within the Justice Department, a guy named Klein Smith, who altered a FISA warrant, one of the most important things we can do in this country. Will everyone be held to an equal, equal, fair system of justice if I am the next attorney general? Absolutely. No one is above the law.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: Under what circumstances will you prosecute journalists for what they write?

Pam Bondi: I believe in the freedom of speech. Only if anyone commits a crime. It's pretty basic, senator, with anything, with any victim. This goes back to my entire career for 18 years as a prosecutor, and then 8 years as Florida's attorney general. You find the facts of the case, you apply the law in good faith, and you treat everyone fairly.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: It would not be appropriate for a prosecutor to start with a name and look for a crime. It's a prosecutor's job to start with a crime and look for a name, correct?

Pam Bondi: Senator, I think that is the whole problem with the weaponization that we have seen the last four years and what's been happening to Donald Trump. They targeted Donald Trump. They went after him. Actually, starting back in 2016, they targeted his campaign. They have launched countless investigations against him. That will not be the case if I am attorney general. I will not politicize that office. I will not target people simply because of their political affiliation. Justice will be administered evenhandedly throughout this country. Senator, we've got to bring this country back together. We've got to move forward, or we're going to lose our country.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: I think the concern is that weaponization of the Justice Department may well occur under your tenure. We want to make sure that that's not the case. That you remain independent, that you remain able to and willing to tell the president no when that's necessary to protect the Constitution and the integrity of the department. That's why I'm asking these questions. We talked in the meeting about the contacts policy that has prevailed, really, since Senator Hatch sat in that chair and demanded it of the Clinton Justice Department.

Through all the administrations since then, with the exception of a brief period under Attorney General Gonzalez, which he corrected, and which did not end well for him, there has been a contacts policy that limits contacts between the White House and the Department of Justice to a very few senior officials on each side. In your role as attorney general, if you are confirmed, will you maintain, defend, and enforce that longstanding contacts policy?

Pam Bondi: Senator, yes, I will meet with White House counsel, and I will meet with the appropriate officials and follow the contacts policy.

Brian Lehrer: Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi with Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse at Bondi's confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday. With us now for a few minutes, Aysha Bagchi, Justice Department correspondent at USA Today. Aysha, thanks for coming on. Welcome to WNYC.

Aysha Bagchi: Thank you, Brian. I'm happy to be here.

Brian Lehrer: Was Pam Bondi playing nice yesterday compared to things she has said or posted on social media? One might get that impression listening to that clip.

Aysha Bagchi: Yes, I think that's fair to say. Through much of her hearing yesterday, she basically was trying to reassure senators who are concerned about this topic, about White House interference in the Justice Department or using the Justice Department to exact retribution against President-elect Donald Trump's perceived enemies. She really opened the proceedings by saying that she believes in one tier of justice.

She argued that Americans don't have as much faith in the Justice Department based on what she described as its weaponization over the past four years. She said that she wanted to restore it. Most of the note that she rang was about not using the Justice Department to exact vengeance, but it is true that she did not promise that she wasn't going to "investigate the investigators" when it comes to people who were involved in the Justice Department prosecutions of Donald Trump.

Brian Lehrer: The last part of that clip was about what they were calling the contacts policy. Can you explain that to our listeners? Is that so the president, whoever the president is, can't call up the attorney general and say or hint that they would like the AG to investigate someone?

Aysha Bagchi: I'm not familiar with the exact contacts policy that Senator Whitehouse was talking about, but I can tell you, generally speaking, since the Nixon administration, there has been this norm post-Nixon that there isn't supposed to be White House interference with Justice Department investigations precisely for this reason. The Justice Department is there to enforce all the laws that apply to the United States. It's not there to be kind of a political branch. It's supposed to investigate in a fair and independent way.

That's part of the reason that Merrick Garland, as Attorney General, appointed special counsels for the investigations into Donald Trump, into Joe Biden, and into Hunter Biden. It was to, again, allay some concerns about the idea that he might even be too close to the White House to be being very involved in those investigations. There is this strong norm that the White House isn't supposed to get involved. There are a lot of fears for reasons that those norms might be increasingly undermined in the next administration.

There were reports even in Trump's first White House that he tried to do this. According to the Mueller report, Jeff Sessions, who was Trump's first Attorney general, was asked by Trump to unrecuse himself from investigations into the political campaign and to pursue a prosecution against Hillary Clinton. The Mueller report says that Jeff Sessions told federal investigators that. It's not just kind of a hypothetical random fear going on. There is really a concern about the independence of the Justice Department from the White House.

Brian Lehrer: Listener writes, "Play the clip where she didn't know what the 14th amendment was." If that happened, I didn't see that part of the hearing. Are you familiar with this?

Aysha Bagchi: I don't remember her saying that she didn't know what the 14th amendment was. I do remember an exchange where she was asked what it was. I think this was with Senator Padilla from California, who got into a heated exchange with Pam Bondi where she said that, "I'm not here to do your research for you. That's your job." To be frank, Pam Bondi is a lawyer, and she was the Attorney General for Florida. I'm sure she does know what the 14th amendment is.

That's a provision in the Constitution that protects Americans' due process rights. It's also come up because there's a part of the 14th amendment that has to do with citizenship and with the idea of birthright citizenship. It may be that she was anticipating that the Senator was asking for her views about that. Since the Trump White House, there have been some indications that they might want to undermine the idea that the Constitution guarantee citizenship based on being born in the United States.

Brian Lehrer: Were there things in her background as Florida AG that indicate what she might emphasize as attorney general? Will she enforce civil rights laws, environmental laws, consumer protection laws? She was asked about that at one point by Senator Whitehouse. These are all jobs of the attorney general and the Justice Department, not just political corruption or terrorist or regular crime fighting, if we want to call it that, that we may think of first.

Aysha Bagchi: Pam Bondi said a lot that seemed aimed at qualming some of those fears that her Justice Department, if she is confirmed, won't be interested in bringing those kinds of cases. That's kind of the bread and butter of what the Justice Department does. With Senator Whitehouse, as you mentioned, he asked her about environmental cases in particular. He said that there had been a decline in the number of cases brought in certain areas having to do with the environment during the first Trump White House.

He was concerned that something like that might happen again and was basically trying to remind her that the job of the Justice Department and the attorney general is to enforce all the laws of the United States, not just the laws that a current president might like. She told him, she said that when she met with him privately before the hearing, that he had raised those issues with her then, too. She rang a conciliatory note. She said that, "I'm not very familiar with this area, but I'm open to learning about it."

She agreed with the basic principle that the attorney general's job is to enforce the laws, and she encouraged him to continue to educate her on those issues. She at least wasn't saying that she planned to walk back enforcement of environmental laws. The same rang true for other parts of the Justice Department. She did say that she would be interested in civil rights cases. She talked about the consumer protection work that the Justice Department does, and she talked about antitrust.

This is kind of a weedy issue probably for a lot of American voters. The Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission under President Biden has really ramped up some of its antitrust enforcement and gone after major companies. This is an issue that actually divides Republicans. JD Vance has said some things that are sympathetic to that ramped up enforcement, but then there are some Republicans who are also troubled by it. She did have positive words to say about Gail Slater, who is Trump's pick to head the antitrust division of the Justice Department.

Gail Slater is seen as a kind of more traditional choice. Pam Bondi at least didn't express that she's hell bent on walking back, the type of ramped up enforcement that we have seen under the Biden administration when it comes to antitrust. To be frank with a lot of these issues, we're at a confirmation hearing. Words matter. Someone is testifying under oath. It does look like Pam Bondi is very likely to be confirmed. If she is, time will sort of tell about what we're going to see with these spaces, but for now, she said yes. She's interested in--

Brian Lehrer: Yes, time will tell. The other way to look at that is we're at a confirmation hearing, so words don't matter. It's not necessarily what she's going to do as opposed to what she's saying to get through the process.

Aysha Bagchi: Well, you can probably get yourself into trouble, a lot of trouble, by saying words that are a bad idea. Words matter in that way. Saying all the things that please your listeners, it's just one step. You're right. We're going to have to wait and see what comes from the administration in both directions when it comes to whether that type of enforcement will be maintained across different areas of cases and whether the Justice Department will really be focused on bread-and-butter issues of what it does at a time when there is a lot of concern about politicization and maybe using it to exact retribution.

Brian Lehrer: Aysha Bagchi, Justice Department correspondent for USA Today, thanks so much for coming on with us.

Aysha Bagchi: Thanks for having me.

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.