AG Pam Bondi Unleashes Fiery Tirade On Dems During House Judiciary Appearance
If Wednesday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing was meant to project calm oversight, it veered sharply off course. Attorney General Pam Bondi delivered testimony that quickly spiraled into open confrontation, trading barbs with Democrats — and even a Republican — as the long-simmering controversy over the Epstein files boiled over.
The hearing followed the release of more than three million pages of investigative records tied to Jeffrey Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell. Several victims were present in the room, underscoring the emotional weight of the proceedings.
Yet instead of a sober, methodical examination of the documents, lawmakers and the attorney general collided in a spectacle that revealed just how politically radioactive the Epstein saga remains.
House Judiciary Ranking Member Jamie Raskin pressed Bondi over whether the Department of Justice plans to pursue additional indictments against alleged Epstein co-conspirators. When Rep. Jerry Nadler’s time expired during questioning, Raskin demanded that Chairman Jim Jordan restore it, accusing Bondi of filibustering.
Bondi fired back with open hostility. “You don’t tell me anything,” she shot back, before calling Raskin a “washed-up, loser lawyer.” The exchange set the tone for a hearing that quickly devolved into accusations of hypocrisy, selective outrage, and political grandstanding.
Democrats argued that the DOJ mishandled the document release, alleging that some victims’ identities were improperly revealed while the names of powerful associates were heavily redacted. Bondi rejected those claims, insisting any improper redactions or disclosures would be corrected. “If any man’s name was redacted that should not have been, we will of course unredact it,” she said. “If a victim’s name was unredacted, please bring it to us, and we will redact it.”
The controversy was not limited to one party. Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican who co-authored the transparency bill that led to the document release, pressed Bondi over what he described as failures to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Bondi dismissed his criticism, accusing him of having “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and labeling him a “failed politician.”
Throughout her testimony, Bondi pivoted repeatedly to argue that Democrats showed little interest in pursuing Epstein-related accountability during the Biden administration. She contended that political attention to the case has intensified only because President Trump is now back in office.
The broader constitutional and political questions loom large. The Epstein case has long fueled public suspicion about elite protection, incomplete accountability, and institutional opacity. The release of millions of pages was intended to address that distrust. Instead, it has reignited arguments over transparency, redactions, and whether justice is being applied evenly.