← The Epstein Chronicles
The Epstein Chronicles
House Oversight Committee Subpoenas Pam Bondi Over Epstein Files Handling
00:14:06
The House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify about the Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, a move that reflected growing frustration in Congress over what lawmakers say has been a deeply...
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. We've been talking a lot about subpoenas lately, and in this episode, we're talking about another one, and this time it's Pam Bondi who's on the clock because the House Oversight Committee has now subpoenaed her for a testimony about the Epstein files. Now, under normal circumstances, this would be very, very dangerous for Pam Bondi as far as perjuring herself and telling falsehoods. But considering that Donald Trump is just gonna pardon her anyway, I expect Pam Bondi to be the same way that she was during the last committee meeting when she made a fool of herself and the administration. And unfortunately, nothing I've seen from her leads me to believe that it's going to be anything but the same kind of song and dance. However, I do think that she'll probably decide not to talk about the stock market this time. Remember that one? I don't know what you're laughing at, Raskin. The dow is over 50,000. As if that has anything to do with what we're talking about. Now, don't get it twisted. It's always good when the stock market's banging. Certainly not, you know, downplaying that good for everybody's 401k, etc. Great, but that's not the topic of conversation. Stop trying to move the goalposts. Stop trying to gaslight people. And furthermore, Pam Bondi, stop lying to the American public, especially while you're under oath. Today's article is from NBC News and the headline, house Oversight Committee Votes to Subpoena Pam Bondi for Testimony on the Epstein Files. This article was authored by Dara Gregorian, Kyle Stewart, Owen Hayes, and Michael Kosner. The Republican led House Oversight Committee voted Wednesday to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi for testimony on the department's handling of records related to Jeffrey Epstein. The motion to subpoena Bondi passed by a vote of 2419. Five Republicans voted for it, including Nancy Mace of South Carolina, who put the motion forward. The Republicans voting with Mace and the Democrats were Tim Burchette of Tennessee, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Michael Cloud of Texas, and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania. And good on all of them. And shame on the Republicans who voted against this. What's wrong with you? And honestly, I don't want to hear about. Oh, the kids, the kids, the kids. You people don't care about the kids. You care about yourselves and winning elections. That's what you care about. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for Comment the department acknowledged Wednesday that tens of thousands of Epstein files are offline as it deals with redactions and privacy issues that it hopes to have addressed by the end of the week. AG Bondi claims the DOJ has released all the Epstein files. The record is clear. They have not. Mace wrote on X. She's not wrong. They have not released all the files and they continue to play Koi oh well, we're going to release this one, but not that one. Oh, this one has some damning information about Santa Claus in it, so we can't release it. And what vexes me is the fact that there is no sort of teeth within the law. Nobody can force their hand. Bondi and the administration can just do whatever they want. There is no oversight whatsoever. The Epstein case is one of the greatest cover ups in American history. His global sex trafficking network is larger than what is being revealed. Three million documents have been released and we still don't have the full truth. Videos are missing, audio is missing, logs are missing. There are millions more documents out there. We want to know why the DOJ is more focused on shielding the powerful than delivering justice. And you know what's crazy? All these clowns are more mad at people like Haley Robson than they are at people like Leon Black or Les Wexner. It is just bananas to me, mace told reporters after the vote. I know that Bondi has testified before the Judiciary Committee, but she's not testified before me or the Oversight Committee. I need to get to the bottom of this. For other survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, well, props to Nancy Mace for at least trying to make this happen and for moving this forward. Now, look, I'm not going to say that I'm a big Nancy Mace fan. I'm not a big fan of any politician. But anybody that's trying to move this forward here, somebody I can at least nod to and say thank you. But of course I remain cynical about the whole thing and about her motivations and the motivations of everybody else involved. There's a lot at play here, a lot of politics, a lot of maneuvering and a lot of people trying to gain political ground when it comes to this topic so they can talk all they want. It's action I'm looking for. I have a lot more questions and I don't expect to be talking about the stock market. So she better not bring those notes when she comes to the Oversight Committee, may said, referring to Bondi's contentious hearing with the House Judiciary Committee last month when she brought up the stock market's performance Under President Donald Trump. It was so disgustingly ridiculous. I have never been more turned off watching one of those hearings ever in my life. And in the old days, I watched a lot of hearings like that. I went to school for political science, and for me, the process of the government and how it works has always been fascinating. And I can't ever remember a time where somebody carried on the way Pam Bondi did. It was an embarrassment, not only to herself, but to the administration and the country as a whole. And she needs to do better. So I hope that this committee holds her to a standard, and I hope Mace isn't just talking nonsense. Mace said the subpoena is for a closed door testimony with video that would be released to the public afterward. There's no date yet for the testimony. It should be public. Sorry. Why closed door? She's a sitting attorney general. Right. She owes that to us. And this is why nobody trusts them. Oh, let's have a closed door meeting and then we'll release the video. Why not just have an open door meeting and let everybody see it? What's the difference? That way you can go off the record so you guys can do your kayfabe and make pretend you hate each other, only to be buddies afterwards. I'm not buying it. At last month's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Bondi touted the Justice Department's efforts to comply with the Epstein File Transparency act, which mandated the public release of most information from the investigative files. And Epstein and his co conspirator, Ghisaine Maxwell, more than 500 attorneys and reviewers spent thousands of hours painstakingly reviewing millions of pages to comply with Congress's law. We've released more than 3 million pages, including 180,000 images, all to the public while doing our very best in that time frame allotted by the legislation to protect victims. Bondi said, well, she's, you know, doing a great job. Literally failed at all of it. But sure, let's trust Pam Bondi, the paragon of truth. Congress passed the bill after the Justice Department and the FBI sent in a memo in July that they had conducted an exhaustive review of the files and would not charge anyone else as part of Epstein's sex trafficking ring, which they said affected over 1,000 victims and would not release any more information about the case. Yo, a thousand victims, no arrests besides Glenn Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein and Jean Luc Brunel. And we're closing the case, huh? And we should stop asking questions. We should talk about the dao. Are you on mushrooms? You can't be sober and talking like this, right? That can't be the case. You have to be on some kind of hallucinogenic. The Oversight Committee then subpoenaed the Justice Department to turn over the files to Congress, but it had turned over only about 30,000 documents, most of which had already been made public. And it was a gigantic kick to the nards, right? Oh, here you go. Wait, hold on a minute. We've seen all of this already. Weren't those files in the binders that you passed out to all the idiots who carry water for you? Talk about audacious. The Epstein Files Transparency act, which Trump signed into law in November, required that all documents be made public within 30 days, with some exceptions. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch announced the release of 3 million pages of files at the end of January, but he said the department was withholding roughly 3 million more documents. Blanche has said that many of them were duplicates, but some were being withheld for various privileges, including deliberative process privilege, the work product doctrine, and attorney client privilege. In other words, screw you, Todd. Blanche can do whatever he wants. The bill's co authors, Representative Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna, say that that's a violation of the law, which mandates the department to turn over internal DOJ communication and including emails, memos, meeting notes concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates. Yeah, we haven't seen any of that, huh? And my guess is it's all by design. They want it to be as confusing as possible, blanche said. Other documents that have been withheld include some that are in a foreign language and others that have been sealed by judges. Lawmakers and many Epstein survivors have repeatedly criticized how many of the documents have been redacted, with information about possible accomplices blacked out, while some information about victims was not redacted when it should have been. Again, my guess by design, and I'm sorry, but I'm not giving the doj, Pam Bondi, Todd Blanche and Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt. They have not earned that. The Justice Department has also been criticized for repeatedly taking down a number of files, sometimes for unspecified reasons, after a Wall Street Journal article this week said tens of thousands of pages are missing from the files. A department spokesperson told NBC News in a statement that it has not deleted any files in compliance with the efta. Our team is working around the clock to address victim concerns, redact personally identifiable information, and any images of a sexual nature, the statement said, referring to the bill Trump signed into law in November. The statement added that as of Monday, 47,635 files were offline for further review and should be ready for reproduction by the end of the week. This is the most transparent Department of Justice in history, and all responsive documents will be repopulated online with once proper redactions are made. So let's just go back and redact things retroactively. What exactly were those hundreds of lawyers doing when they were working on the redactions? The missing documents include summaries and notes from three interviews the FBI conducted with a South Carolina woman who alleged that she was a sexual assault victim along of Epstein and also made sexual abuse allegations against Trump. According to an NBC News analysis of the Epstein files and information provided by a source familiar with the investigation, it's not clear whether the sexual abuse allegations against Trump were discussed in other interviews that the Justice Department did not release. All of it needs to be released. I'm sorry, but that's how it goes. As for comment on the documents, last week, the White House referred to a statement the Justice Department issued when the Epstein files were released. It said some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false. And if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly will have been weaponized against President Trump already, which is incorrect. Mutually assured destruction. They didn't want to light the whole thing on fire, okay? That's why this stuff was never opened. That's why this information was never used, because if you tried to use it on Trump, you have to use it on everybody. And they can't have that, can they? Who's going to pay the bills? Trump, whom law enforcement is not accused of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein, has said that he stopped socializing with Epstein in the early 2000s because he thought he was a creep. Well, okay, I thought it was because he was stealing workers or because of a business deal, but I guess we'll just go with he was a creep. And as far as Bondi goes, look, this woman is an embarrassment. And the fact that she's up there representing the United States of America as the Attorney General is a dark stain. And in my opinion, she needs to be held accountable by Congress for her behavior. Will she be? Unfortunately, I highly doubt it. But either way, we'll keep an eye on things. And when we get a date, we'll make sure we add it to the catalog. As far as this one, well, that's gonna do it. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.