By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the controversy surrounding the Trump administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case files, questions arise about who will be held responsible. Recent analysis suggests that Attorney General Pam Bondi finds herself in a precarious position, particularly due to her involvement in the reversal regarding the release of the Epstein files. Bondi’s position is further complicated by the actions of those within the administration, including the FBI Director and the President himself, who have fueled conspiracy theories and may seek someone to blame. Ultimately, Bondi’s future may depend on her ability to appease Trump and potentially manufacture a case against former President Obama, as failing to do so could further anger the base and jeopardize her position.
Read the original article here
Pam Bondi will become Trump’s fall guy for Epstein files chaos, DC insider says: ‘It’s like The Apprentice’. That’s the buzz, isn’t it? The whispers in the halls of power suggest that the former Florida Attorney General, Pam Bondi, is poised to become the scapegoat in the unfolding drama surrounding the Epstein files. The whole situation is being likened to a brutal episode of “The Apprentice,” where loyalty is tested, and ultimately, someone gets “fired.”
It seems the prevailing sentiment is that anyone who signs up to work for Trump understands the inherent risk of being discarded, of becoming a sacrificial lamb. The price of admission to the Trump orbit, it’s argued, is the potential for reputational damage, the loss of career prospects, and a complete erosion of integrity. But did Bondi go in with her eyes open? Perhaps. The common perception is she may have seen this job as a stepping stone to a role at Fox News, and from there, back into conservative politics. The article clearly states, it’s a transactional relationship, pure and simple.
The Epstein files, and the information they contain, won’t vanish just because Bondi is gone. The country will still demand answers, and the pressure will simply shift to whoever steps into her shoes. It’s a cycle of accountability that Trump can’t seem to escape. The people are suffering in the face of his wrong doings. The price for Trump’s supporters is becoming clear: lost benefits, lost income, rising costs of living, and a country falling apart.
Bondi’s potential fall from grace won’t solve the bigger issue, it seems, the public’s questions won’t vanish. It’s as if Trump operates on a level of loyalty that is all about the bottom line, rather than the people he serves. The implication is clear: Trump will happily sacrifice his closest allies to protect himself, even those, like Bondi, who allegedly helped create the problem in the first place. The idea of Trump firing Bondi is a deflection, a strategic move, but not a solution. It is speculated that Bondi would have likely been fired earlier if Trump weren’t being so ‘loyal’ to his team.
The narrative paints a picture of a man who readily uses others, and quickly discards them when they outlive their usefulness. Trump, according to this analysis, understands that the only way to survive is to surround himself with loyalists who are willing to do anything for him, and then discard them when they’re no longer needed. It seems likely that Bondi may face a public shaming and scrutiny.
The idea that Bondi might consider it an “honor” to be thrown under the bus hints at the strange dynamic at play. There is talk of a possible future endorsement from Trump if Bondi is willing to play the role of fall guy. There are whispers that this may come with a large financial payout to keep her silent. It would appear that Bondi is likely to be in a precarious position.
The implication is clear: It’s the classic Trump playbook of self-preservation. The expectation seems to be that Bondi will be blamed, but it won’t matter, and the public will likely see right through the charade. The public is already angry.
The question is, can Trump really get away with it again? The feeling is that even if the powers-that-be replace Bondi with someone else, the issue won’t just disappear. The new person will face the same challenges and the same scrutiny. A great deal of questions and accountability, are yet to be seen.