← The Epstein Chronicles
The Epstein Chronicles
The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 12) (6/9/26)
00:17:38
Pam Bondi’s congressional transcript showed her trying to defend the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files while repeatedly distancing herself from the day-to-day mechanics of the review. She told House Oversight lawmakers that Todd...
Loading summary
Transcript15 lines
- [00:00]
A
What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick up where we left off with Pam Bondi and her chat with the Congressional Oversight Committee. And we're picking up with questioning being done by Ms. Stansberry. While I get started, I'm going to ask if staff can pass out Exhibit F, which is the Epstein File Transparency act, because I'm going to refer to a section in my later question, but former Attorney General, I want to ask about some more specific individuals who were named in the files as potential perpetrators of crimes associated with Epstein. And I want to ask, during your tenure as eag, to your knowledge, did the DOJ investigate any of the following individuals? And so if you would answer yes or no, I'd appreciate it. PRINCE Andrew Bondi I'm not sure if he's subject of a pending investigation. I'm not sure who is or who is not subject to an investigation. As I stated earlier, Jay Clayton had opened an investigation in New York, so I wouldn't be able to give you any names whether they were or were not are or are not being investigated or have been. STANSBERRY I appreciate that. BONDI I refer that to Jay Clayton. STANSBERRY I appreciate that. I'm going to go ahead and go through the names, notwithstanding the comment you just made, because I do think that it's important to have the record. Another prominent name is Leon Black. Do you know if there was any investigation pending or open during your tenure? BONDI I would refer you again to Jay Clayton. Stansberry, Glenn Dubin. Bondi do you want to go through the list? STANSBERRY yeah, I'm gonna go through the list. BONDI do you want to go through it all and then I can answer if any of them STANSBERRY Just for the record, let's do each one. Glenn Dubin, Please. BONDI I would refer it to the deputy attorney General or Jake Layton. STANSBERRY okay. Jess Daley Bondi Same answer. Stansberry Les Wexner Bondi Same answer. Stansberry Alan Dershowitz Bondi Same answer. Stansberry Paulo Zampoli Bondi Same answer. Stansberry Donald Trump. Bondi Same answer. STANSBERRY when you left the department in April, had you been briefed on any investigation or any open cases regarding the Epstein case at all? BONDI I can't answer whether there is or not a pending investigation into anyone, and that includes all the names that you listed. STANSBERRY so as the sitting U.S. attorney General overseeing the case and I understand that you referred to Todd Blanche many times as being the managing supervisor of the case and the release of the files. You were not briefed on any of the prominent names, including the president, and whether or not anyone was investigating their appearance in the files. BONDI it's privileged and protected information and I'm not going to discuss that. STANSBERRY and which privilege which privilege are you asserting? DYLAN yeah, we're not having to assert privilege. This is a transcribed interview. STANSBURY I'm sorry, the AG just asserted a privilege. BONDI I'm not going to answer that. STANSBERRY you're not going to answer what kind of privilege you're asserting or you're not going to answer the question? I'm not going to answer whether there was or was not pending investigations again into anyone. We've said that I've asked and answered and it's been asked and answered this question multiple times. Stansberry well, Madam A.G. the reason why I'm asking is because of Exhibit F, which is the Epstein Files Transparency act, which sets out what files were required under the federal law to be released to Congress and the public. And it specifically states in the second page of the act, as signed into law by the President, that all internal DOJ communication is, including emails, memos, meeting notes concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate or decline to investigate. Epstein or his associates were required to be disclosed by the Epstein File Transparency act, and then it has a list of permitted withholdings. And there is nothing in this law that allows the assertion of any kind of privilege that you've discussed today. In fact, the law was very explicit that that those privileges could not be asserted. And so part of why I'm asking you if there's a pending investigation into some of the individuals is because their names were redacted in the publicly released files. And when we looked at them unredacted as members of Congress, the only redactions that were permitted were for open cases. So I'm asking were there pending investigations into any of these individuals? DYLAN I have. That's asked and answered. BONDI I've answered the question. STANSBERRY okay, well I would assert then that is a breaking of the law, because the law is very clear about what privilege and what material were supposed to be released. And my final question is, you know, the survivors have made very clear the release of their names, their personally identifiable information, home addresses, phone numbers, photographs of many of them when they were minors. We're talking children, we're about talking released publicly. How would you Answer for that. Do you personally feel responsible for that? BONDI As I said earlier, we were given 30 days to release 3 million plus documents and our concern, our primary concern was protecting the identity of the victims. And I believe everyone in the Department of Justice feels horrible when any victim's name or identifying information is released. STANSBERRY but do you feel personally responsible at all? BONDI I believe everyone who was involved in the process would and I believe you should too, because you were oppressing us to get 3 million pages out in 30 days and that was virtually impossible. STANSBERRY oh, I'm not personally responsible for the Department of Justice. I don't work there. Bondi you are telling us she gets cut off by Stansberry? Bondi cuts her off. If I could finish. You are telling us to get STANSBERRY cuts her off. My question is about you. As the sitting Attorney general, you oversaw the implementation. Even if you delegated this, you are responsible. You're the named human in the Epstein files Transparency Act. Do you have any remorse over the release of Dylan jumps in okay, this verges on badgering. BONDI I've she gets cut off by Dylan and tedious Bondi back at it. I've answered this question multiple times that we feel sorry for the victims whose names were released inadvertently. STANSBERRY well, for many of the victims, these women, they will not be able to reclaim their privacy. So I yield to the next member now, it's Mr. Walkinshaw. Ms. Bondi Add my name to the list of folks wishing you a speedy recovery in March of 2025. FBI personnel and we've discussed this already a little bit, reviewed 100,000 Epstein documents. That was long before the Transparency act passed, of course. So there wasn't a statutory framework for that review, at least not one specific to it. Under whose authority was that review conducted? BONDI I'm sorry, what date were you Lock and Shaw picks up in March of 2025. The 100,000 documents, was that under your authority? BONDI yes, and I delegated that to Todd Blanche okay. And do you know what instructions were given to those reviewers? I believe we have released the instructions that were given, but those may have been given later. Have you released all? Because I know that there was a FOIA request. BONDI uh huh. WALKINSHAW to youo knowledge, have all of the instructions to reviewers been released publicly? I don't know. WALKINSHAW okay, Were those reviewers instructed to flag mentions of Donald Trump? BONDI I don't believe so. WALKINSHAW okay, because it's been reported. There's a whistleblower who came forward. There are documents that the media has cited saying those reviewers were instructed to flag mentions of Donald Trump. You don't have any knowledge of that. I have not seen. I have not heard of a whistleblower saying that. I have no knowledge of that.
- [08:13]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [08:13]
A
Okay. Senator Durbin sent you a letter last year citing that whistleblower. To your knowledge, have you responded or did the department. Ms. Dillon, you can feel free to jump in. Did the department respond to that letter that Senator Durbin sent? Bondi. We can ask Patrick Davis, who runs that department.
- [08:32]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [08:32]
A
Okay. To your knowledge, were any records flagged? Flagged for whatever reason, since you don't recall whether they were flags. Oh, of mentions of Donald Trump. Any records that were flagged in the process ultimately withheld or redacted from the Transparency act release. I don't believe reviewers were asked to flag anything, to my knowledge.
- [08:51]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [08:52]
A
Okay. All right. Bondi. There were over 500 attorneys at some point reviewing documents.
- [08:58]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [08:58]
A
Uh huh. Okay. So there was no flag of mentions of Donald Trump. No one came to you and said, we reviewed these hundred thousand documents and and there are x number of mentions of Donald Trump. No one ever said that to you. I don't believe anyone asked to flag anything. Okay. You stated earlier that it's common for the Bureau of Prisons to move prisoners maybe based on their safety. Is it common in your experience for the Deputy Attorney General to personally interview prisoners? Is that common? Can you recall any other instance of the Deputy Attorney General personally interviewing prisoners? Bondi we were in office for a year. Of course not. That was the only prisoner, to my knowledge, that he interviewed and that was because she was living. Epstein's dead and his intent was exactly what this committee is trying to get at to find out if she had evidence of other crimes. Yo, she was in prison. She's already convicted. What does that even mean? That's the most of excuses I've ever heard. It was about the COVID up. It was about the exoneration of Donald Trump. That's all it was.
- [10:05]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [10:06]
A
She was in his inner circle, right? Very close to it. Bondi and you can read the transcribed interview, what he asked her and it's very clear why he asked it. To see if there were other crimes that she knew about that had been committed.
- [10:19]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [10:20]
A
One of the things our investigation has revealed is that other individuals very close to Epstein were never interviewed by the FBI across multiple administrations. Khan Indict the accountant, the lawyer, Les Wexner, whose money financed a lot of Epstein's trafficking. I mean, in your professional opinion, as a former prosecutor, do you find it strange that the FBI never interviewed some of those figures very close to Epstein? And do you think they should? Bondi, you're gonna have to ask Obama and Biden administrations the exact same thing. Nobody's asking them. They're asking you. God, she's disgusting. Walkinshaw, I said it's multiple administrations. I'm asking you, across all those administrations, is it strange to you, do you think those individuals should have perhaps still should be interviewed by the FBI? Bondi, if there was evidence of wrongdoing, yes. And I would direct that to the FBI, and I would also direct that to the Biden administration, who had four years. But it was a memo while you were Attorney General that said the case closed. Nothing else to be seen here. We're not going to investigate anything. Bondi, you are mischaracterizing that. Can you read that to me where I said case closed? Those key figures close to Epstein were not interviewed. Deputy Attorney General Blanche went and spent a lot of time with Clayne Maxwell, but other figures close to Epstein never even got interviewed by the FBI. Why didn't you say to the FBI, y' all need to go and interview some of those folks? Bondi, you are mischaracterizing. Walkinshaw, I'm asking you a question. No, you're mischaracterizing something that you've stated was in the document. Can you read it back to me? Walkinshaw, I'm asking you, why didn't you, as a former prosecutor, a professional who understands these cases, look at it and say these folks who are in the inner circle of Epstein's massive sex trafficking ring were never investigated. My boss, Donald Trump, ran on the issue. I'm going to make sure that they're questioned and interviewed so that we can get to the bottom of it. Why didn't you do that, Ms. Bondi? Bondi. Deputy Attorney General Blanche interviewed Maxwell to see if she had evidence of any other crimes. To the best of my knowledge, that transcript is widely available. Walkinshaw, you asked me to. Gets cut off by Bondi. You criticized him interviewing her, but his interview. To try to answer your question. Wakinshaw, I'm asking why didn't y' all interview anyone else? You said, we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties. Some people who might have had evidence were Epstein's lawyer, his accountant, his financier. Wexner why didn't you direct that they at least be interviewed and questioned? Bondi that statement is very different from the one you asked earlier. Walkinshaw I'm asking you a question. Why didn't you direct that they be interviewed to uncover perhaps evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties? Why didn't you do that? Bondi I've answered that multiple times.
- [13:18]
B
Walkinshaw.
- [13:19]
A
You haven't answered it. You don't have an answer. Bondi, you also misrepresented something that I just had to read it back. Redacted. All right, we've got a few last questions and we're coming to an end. I'll be brief. One question is some members have experienced that in the reading room. Some documents that they go see on redacted still have some redactions on them. Do you have any understanding of how or why a document in the reading room would still have redactions? Bondi yeah, I believe that's because some of the documents were sealed redacted by SDNY when we received them. We received them redacted is my understanding of that. But I would have to look at the specific document and see where it came from. Do you have any recollection of any other category of redaction other than the one you just described? No question. As Attorney General of Florida, did you ever look into potential co conspirators of Epstein's crimes that would have been the state attorney in Palm beach who had jurisdiction over the federal authorities? I was only had the Office of Statewide Prosecutor question a few follow ups on the topic that we discussed earlier of members going to DOJ to review files and records that may have existed of member searches. It came up high profile at one of your hearings. I just want to make sure I understood correctly. Was your description that it was not deliberate change in policy at doj that was just a function of how the DOJ system is set up? Is that fair or correct? Bondi No, I believe this was unprecedented. What we did, putting 3 million pages online and part of the system included monitoring sensitive information that was on there and people reviewing it. It was built into the system and it's still in that system. Question and that's what I was getting at was a deliberate policy choice made to track and monitor member searches under the Epstein file. Answer not to my knowledge. Question okay, as far as you know, if a member went to the DOJ to review some other piece, some other document, some other piece of material, nothing to do with Epstein, would that search typically be tracked in the same way? Answer. I don't believe a member can go look at anything online. The system was set up with over 3 million to 6 million pages of documents to protect victim's identity to the best we could. And of course they all weren't protected. Question and so your knowledge DOJ's usage of the member search history, it sounds like is restricted to protecting survivors identities. Is that your recollection? In other words, how did the DOJ use that information? Can you rephrase the question? Sure. So DOJ has or at least had member search history. When members would come review different files and they choose which files they wanted to review. How. How did the department use that information? To your recollection regarding Epstein? Yes. Specifically tracking member Epstein searches? I don't know. I don't recall. As far as you know, if a member went to review an Epstein file on redacted today at doj, would their search records be tracked in the same way? I believe that's part of the program. And they had to be tracked. I believe. I'm not certain. Question. A couple of last miscellaneous ones. With respect to Mr. Epstein's death, is your personal review that he committed suicide? I would rely on the FBI's investigation. Are you aware of any information indicating that Mr. Epstein worked for a domestic or foreign intelligence service? Not personally. I would rely on the FBI's investigation. Redacted. That concludes my questions. I'll just state for the record that the minority did have additional questions that would have fallen within one of the parameters that you or your counsel described. Specifically with respect to conversations with the President, we withheld some of those questions for your sake. But we want to note for the record that those are important questions to us and we think they deserve to be answered in the investigation. With that, I will thank you for your time today. And we can go off the record. Ms. Bondi. Thank you. All right folks, that's going to do it for the Bondi interview with the House Oversight Committee. And next up we're going to be diving into the Sarah Kellen transcript. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.