
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
Grow Therapy Announcer
We're halfway through the year and a lot of people are running on empty without fully realizing it. Grow Therapy helps you find care before burnout hits. Grow makes it easier to find a therapist who fits you, not the other way around. They connect you with thousands of independent licensed therapists across the US Offering both virtual and in person sessions, including nights and weekends. You can search by insurance, specialty identity or availability and get started in as little as two days. And you can cancel up to 24 hours in advance at no cost. No subscriptions, no long term commitments, just pay per session. Whatever challenges you're facing, Grow Therapy is here to help. Grow accepts over 100 insurance plans. Sessions average about $21 with insurance and some pay as little as $0 depending on their plan. Visit growtherapy.com trynow today to get started. That's growtherapy.com trynow availability and coverage vary by state and insurance plan.
Interviewer
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 the Pam Bondi discussion with the OIG investigators. Now Ms. Ansari is asking the questions. Hi, Ms. Bondi. Thank you. All right, I would like to focus questions on failure to comply with the Oversight committee subpoena. On August 5th of last year, Chairman Comer issued a subpoena to the DOJ for all documents and communications from DOJ's Epstein and Maxwell related cases. On August 22nd of last year, DOJ produced approximately 33,000 pages to the committee. Almost all of those materials were already publicly available. And that's all that we have received from the doj in the 10 months since this subpoena was issued. Why was the first production in August made of mostly and all publicly available material? Bondi As I said earlier, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward managed the release of those documents. And since then, the department received and released approximately 3 million documents. Ms. Ansari. But did anyone in the administration direct you to release material that were already publicly available pertaining specifically to the subpoena? Dylan I think we're having some difficulty hearing you. Bondi. Yeah. Ansari. Okay, the question in regards to our subpoena before prior to the Epstein Files Transparency Act. I have to turn. I can't turn my neck, so I have to turn towards you, if that's okay. Ms. Ansari. So the question is, did anyone in the administration direct you to release only public available information in those 33,000 pages? Bondi as I said, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward handled that. Ms. Ansari I understand that But Bondi cuts her off. I had minimum involvement in that. Ansari but he works for you? Bondi yes. ANSARI did someone direct you to only release publicly available information in regard to our subpoena to the Department of Justice? BONDI no. ANSARI okay. Bondi to my knowledge, no. ANSORI do you believe that the department is obligated to respond to the Oversight Committee's subpoena? BONDI yes, and sorry. In November of 2025, President Trump posted on Truth Social about the committee subpoena saying, quote, the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to. Do you agree with President Trump? Bondi can you repeat that? ANSARI In November of 2025, President Trump posted on Truth Social about the committee subpoena, saying, quote, the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to. Do you agree with the president? I agree that you're entitled to everything you're legally entitled to, yes. Ansari okay. And then finally, does the committee need to bring you in for a deposition instead of a transcribed interview to get complete answers? No. ANSARI okay, thank you. Now we have Mr. Submaranium, thank you for coming in today. I was just curious if you went through any of the files yourself. I like, did you read through any of the files yourself? Some of them probably. Sure, some of them. But there were 3 million pages, so very little. Submaranium Right. And you were looking for anything in particular in the files? Bondi no. Mr. Submaranium. And there's rumors of an effort potentially to look through the files for President Trump's name in particular. Are you aware of any sort of effort at the Department of Justice anywhere else in the administration of doing that? BONDI I'm not going to discuss anything with the department or discussions that did or did not take place. I'm asking about your knowledge of any sort of effort to do that, not any sort of discussions that happened. I'm not going to discuss any conversations that did or did not happen regarding that question. I'm not asking about conversations, just to be clear, just your knowledge of any effort to look for President Trump's name during the redaction process or during the release of the files. Bondi what I do know is you can go online. That's why I'm hesitating. And there are 3 million pages, and I believe you can type in a name and it'll come up. So I'm sure many people did that with many individuals and I believe members of Congress names are also listed in there. So to my knowledge, did that Happen. Yes, but not only with President Trump, with multiple people, by many of us, as you will, that was done. Question. Absolutely, you're right. But what I'm asking, though, is before the release of the files, during the process of releasing the files, was there any effort to look through for President Trump's name or any other administration official's name before the release of the files? I don't recall. And are you aware of any effort to do that? You don't recall? I don't recall. Okay. And you suggested he gets cut off by Bondi. Again, the were 3 million pages question. It's not about what's in the files. I'm asking any effort to look for President Trump or any other administration official's name in the files up to the release of the files. And in the process of releasing the files. Bondi. I don't recall. Some Iranian. You don't recall. Okay. And then at various points, you suggested that the DoJ holds a significant volume of child sexual abuse material within the Epstein files. Can you clarify what that means, what you meant by that? BONDI sure. It's called csam, and that is protected, as you know, under the law, highly protected child sexual abuse material. And yes, I'm aware of that. And I'm aware that there was much of that contained in the Epstein files. Question. And would you say that some of the files that would have been withheld are those types of materials? Bondi. To my knowledge, yes. Okay. And last month Mr. Blanche said on a podcast that the FBI did not collect any video of Mr. Epstein or others participating in sex acts. Would you agree with that statement? I don't have direct knowledge of that, but I do know that initially when all those videos were obtained, they were scoured through by attorneys and probably agents to be sure no victims were released. And much of it, if not all of it, ended up being child sexual abuse material that he downloaded, if that makes sense. Question. That makes sense. Thank you. That's very helpful. And you have spoken and have you spoken with any of the survivors? Dylan, you can answer this, but you can answer it again. Bondi. I spoke with one attorney, I believe. Question. One of their attorneys. Bondi. I spoke with one of their attorneys, I believe. I know attorneys in my office have spoken with multiple attorneys who represented or represent the survivors. And as you know, it's not appropriate for us to talk to someone who is represented directly without talking to their attorney. I've spoke with one of the attorneys. Question were they or their attorneys at all consulted in the process of releasing the files? VONDI I don't know. I don't recall. Question you don't recall? And at one point there was talk about giving the survivors access to their own files or statements that they made. Was there any discussion about that or sorry, do you have any knowledge of any sort of or understanding of any sort of effort to do that? BONDI can you repeat that question the survivors have asked for their own files, meaning statements that they gave at the time that they were interviewed. Do you have any awareness of this request I would direct that to the current attorney General. QUESTION but while you were Attorney General. BONDI I don't recall. QUESTION I believe they made that request. You don't recall them requesting that publicly or directly? BONDI Access to the files. Question yes. BONDI Meaning question they have asked for their own statements. There are 302 statements and so they have said that they requested this. I believe it was a public letter too. And I'm wondering if you would have any knowledge of that request. BONDI I don't recall. I would direct that to Deputy Attorney General Blatch. Quote question in your opinion, would you have been willing to fulfill this request? BONDI we have asked multiple times if any victim wants to meet with us that we would meet with them and that would include that information to give them that information to discuss it with them.
Grow Therapy Announcer
In my mind, we're halfway through the year and a lot of people are running on empty without fully realizing it. GROW Therapy helps you find care before burnout hits. Grow makes it easier to find a therapist who fits you, not the other way around. They connect you with thousands of independent licensed therapists across the US Offering both virtual and in person sessions, including nights and weekends. You can search by insurance, specialty, identity or availability and get started in as little as two days. And you can cancel up to 24 hours in advance at no cost. No subscriptions, no long term commitments, just pay per session. Whatever challenges you're facing, Grow Therapy is here to help. Grow accepts over 100 insurance plans. Sessions average about $21 with insurance and some pay as little as $0 depending on their plan. Visit growtherapy.com trynow today to get started. That's growtherapy.com trynow availability and coverage vary by state and insurance plan.
Interviewer
Question Great. And then I believe you answered this earlier, but based on everything you've seen, do you believe that the department should move forward with any effort or prosecution related to the matter? As I said, we had Jay Clayton in the Southern District of New York open an active case on the matter around Jeffrey Epstein and other individuals. When I left office, I believe that was still a pending investigation, so I can't answer. I would direct that to Todd Blanche or Jay Clayton. Question thank you, Mr. Frost thank you. I just have one more question for clarification. In response to one of the questions he just asked about people name searching Donald Trump, you mentioned that maybe he was name searched or members of Congress had been name searched. But then you looked at us and said, y', all, which leads me to believe I just want clarification. Are you saying that you know that members of Congress search for President Trump's name or search for people's names in the files? Ms. Bondi can you repeat that? FROST so when he asked you about was there an effort to search for President Trump's names in the file, you started talking about the fact that, well, people can go online and look up anybody's name. You can look up the president's name, there's members of Congress names in it. Then you looked at us and said, y' all have searched this as well. And I just when you said that, did you mean members of Congress have searched for President Trump's name in the files? BONDI Anyone can It's public. FROST but by the thing you just told us a little earlier, it seemed like you have knowledge of members of Congress name searching President Trump's name. BONDI oh, no, that I don't have knowledge of. I don't recall that. But anyone can go in and search for any name on there, and hopefully the system's working where it will pull it up. Mr. Frost the reason I ask this is because they were reporting of when you were testifying to the Judiciary Committee, that you had information on our search history for when we went to the Department of Justice. Was that something that you were being told to keep? Were you told to keep that information, the spying on members of Congress as they were looking through the Epstein files? BONDI no one told me to spy on members of Congress. FROST so is that a decision you made on your own? BONDI Members of Congress were not spied on. That system downloads, anyone who looks at it, because there are millions of pages of unredacted victims names there faces, names, information that's not public, that's built into the program. In fact, when you go and review it, if we also have had, I don't know if it's still happening, people in the room watching what was happening to be sure no one was walking out with unredacted victims names on a list and in fact, they did find someone doing that. Frost. I'm aware that's how the system might work, but obviously, you know, I'm trying to ask if someone asked you to to or why you had printouts of it in your hearing at Judiciary Committee. Bondi o, a staffer gave me that, a lower level staffer gave me a printout, and I intended to talk to Representative Jay Appel when she was questioning me about it. No one was trying to hide it. I went and I met with her for about an hour and a half after the hearing as well, in person, in my office. And I planned on discussing with that with her, but I couldn't get a word in edgewise on that. And the point of that was to show her that we had been a lot of talk about a particular graphic. I believed it was. It was a circle. There had been a lot of talk that we were trying to hide men's names because a half a graphic showed a man and other half was redacted, when in fact, once anyone went online and saw the unredacted version, you could see that those were women and victims. That's why they had been redacted. Mr. Frost? Uh huh. Thank you. All right, folks, we're gonna wrap up right there. And in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.
Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: June 7, 2026
This episode continues the review and analysis of testimony related to the congressional investigation into the handling of evidence and documents in the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases. The focus is on the questioning of Pam Bondi by members of the House Oversight Committee and other investigators regarding the release of case materials, compliance with subpoenas, handling of sensitive content (notably child sexual abuse material, or CSAM), transparency around survivors' statements, and issues of internal access and monitoring during document reviews.
Bobby Capucci narrates and breaks down detailed exchanges, highlighting the tension between the committee and Department of Justice representatives over perceived transparency and accountability failures.
(01:10 – 03:40)
Scope of Subpoena:
Pam Bondi’s Level of Involvement:
"Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward handled that."
— Pam Bondi (01:54)
Direction from Administration:
"Did someone direct you to only release publicly available information in regard to our subpoena to the Department of Justice?"
"No... To my knowledge, no."
— Pam Bondi (02:10)
Obligation to Cooperate:
Confirms belief that DOJ is obligated to respond to congressional subpoenas.
"Do you believe that the department is obligated to respond to the Oversight Committee’s subpoena?"
"Yes."
— Pam Bondi (02:21)
Agreement with President Trump’s Statement:
Trump’s Truth Social post: "The House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to."
Bondi agrees with the sentiment, reiterating entitlement to lawfully appropriate materials.
"I agree that you’re entitled to everything you’re legally entitled to, yes."
— Pam Bondi (02:35)
(03:45 – 07:15)
Review of Files:
Bondi admits she only looked through "some" of the files herself due to sheer volume (~3 million pages).
"Some of them probably. Sure, some of them. But there were 3 million pages, so very little."
— Pam Bondi (03:53)
Searching for Trump’s or Officials’ Names:
Questioning about efforts to specifically search for President Trump’s or other officials’ names prior to document release.
Bondi avoids specifics, repeats she doesn't recall, and notes that the public can now search names online.
"What I do know is you can go online...and I believe you can type in a name and it'll come up... that was done...not only with President Trump, with multiple people."
— Pam Bondi (04:17)
She insists she has no specific recollection of targeted search or special scrutiny for administration officials before the document release.
"I don’t recall."
— Pam Bondi (04:50, 05:09)
Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM):
Discussion confirms Epstein files contain significant amounts of CSAM, highly protected under law.
Bondi notes such material is a primary reason for redactions and restricted access.
"It's called CSAM, and that is protected, as you know, under the law, highly protected child sexual abuse material. And yes, I'm aware of that. And I'm aware that there was much of that contained in the Epstein files."
— Pam Bondi (05:20)
(07:16 – 09:04)
Contact with Survivors & Attorneys:
Bondi herself spoke with one survivors' attorney; her office staff also engaged with several.
Reveals it is improper to speak directly with represented victims without legal counsel.
"I spoke with one of their attorneys, I believe...It's not appropriate for us to talk to someone who is represented directly without talking to their attorney."
— Pam Bondi (06:12)
Survivors Requesting Their Own Files:
When pressed, Bondi "doesn't recall" whether she knew of survivors requesting access to their own statements (302 statements/public letters).
"I don't recall. I would direct that to Deputy Attorney General Blatch."
— Pam Bondi (07:32)
Expresses willingness in principle to allow survivors access to their information if requested.
"We have asked multiple times if any victim wants to meet with us that we would meet with them and that would include that information to give them that information to discuss it with them."
— Pam Bondi (07:55)
(10:11 – 10:52)
Bondi states she cannot comment on current or future prosecutions, pointing to an active case in SDNY when she left office and referring further questions to other officials.
"When I left office, I believe that was still a pending investigation, so I can't answer. I would direct that to Todd Blanche or Jay Clayton."
— Pam Bondi (10:20)
(10:53 – 12:33)
Discussion on Congress Members’ Search Activity:
Mr. Frost probes whether Bondi has knowledge of members searching for Trump’s or others’ names and on allegations of the DOJ tracking or ‘spying’ on these searches.
Bondi denies any directive for "spying," clarifies that system tracks user activity for security (especially regarding unredacted victims’ information).
"No one told me to spy on members of Congress."
— Pam Bondi (11:16)
"Members of Congress were not spied on. That system downloads anyone who looks at it, because there are millions of pages of unredacted victims names there...that’s built into the program."
— Pam Bondi (11:23)
Bondi explains any system monitoring is standard security to prevent improper dissemination, not targeted surveillance.
"In fact, when you go and review it...people in the room watching what was happening to be sure no one was walking out with unredacted victims names...in fact, they did find someone doing that."
— Pam Bondi (11:35)
Printouts and Testimony:
Frost raises an incident where Bondi was seen with printouts of search histories during Judiciary Committee. She explains these were provided by a lower-level staffer for demonstrating security processes, not for any nefarious intentions.
"A staffer gave me that, a lower level staffer gave me a printout, and I intended to talk to Representative Jay Appel when she was questioning me about it. No one was trying to hide it."
— Pam Bondi (11:52)
On DOJ’s Obligation:
"Do you believe that the department is obligated to respond to the Oversight Committee’s subpoena?
Yes."
— Pam Bondi (02:21)
On Name Searching:
"Anyone can. It's public."
— Pam Bondi, clarifying searchability of files (10:35)
On "Spying" Allegations:
"Members of Congress were not spied on. That system downloads anyone who looks at it, because there are millions of pages of unredacted victims names there..."
— Pam Bondi (11:23)
On Survivors' Rights:
"We have asked multiple times if any victim wants to meet with us that we would meet with them, and that would include that information to give them that information to discuss it with them."
— Pam Bondi (07:55)
This episode offers a window into the procedural and legal wrangling shaping accountability in the Epstein case, with Pam Bondi fielding often pointed questions from congressional investigators. The discussions reveal persistent frustration on the part of Congress about perceived stonewalling and lack of substantive new disclosures from the DOJ, tensions over transparency, and ongoing concerns around the protection of survivors and sensitive material. Bondi’s testimony often circles back to limited recall and responsibility, frequently deferring to other officials, but confirms some key facts about both material withheld (especially CSAM) and standard DOJ security practices. The episode serves as both a record of government oversight efforts and an inside look at bureaucratic process in high-profile, high-sensitivity criminal cases.