Pam Bondi is set to speak with lawmakers on Capitol Hill Friday morning about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files — but not under the terms lawmakers had originally planned for her appearance.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March voted to subpoena Bondi, then the attorney general, as part of the panel’s Epstein investigation — a stunning rebuke of a Trump administration official by members of the president’s own party.
A subpoena would have required Bondi to sit for a formal deposition, meaning she would have to answer questions under oath and the entire event would be videorecorded. But about a month later, President Donald Trump fired Bondi as the head of the Department of Justice. And since that time, Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) made clear her deposition would be downgraded to a transcribed interview, which won’t require that the proceedings be recorded — nor will she have to be sworn in before speaking.
The reversal has frustrated Oversight Committee members who want more information about how DOJ has approached the federal government’s Epstein case, which has captivated Americans and spurred a wave of public fury and conspiracy theories. Members also want to know what steps the department has taken to hold accountable those who might have been complicit in Epstein’s decadeslong sex trafficking scheme, and they see Bondi as key to getting answers.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who brought up the motion to subpoena Bondi in committee, said earlier this month it was “highly disappointing” that Bondi would no longer be appearing for an official deposition.
“She deserves the same treatment as the Clintons and as everybody else,” said Mace. She was referring to Bill and Hillary Clinton, who nearly faced contempt charges for failing to appear for their scheduled depositions with the Oversight panel after months of negotiations over the terms and conditions. They eventually agreed to appear under oath for videotaped interviews.
“I’ll be there, though, with bells on,” Mace added of Bondi’s Friday transcribed interview, “and I’ll be asking her the tough questions.”
Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), another member of the Oversight panel, said in an interview that “the lack of videotape … contributes to the feeling that Americans have that there’s been a cover-up here.”
Of Bondi, he said, “I think she recognizes that she doesn’t have good answers to the questions that we’re going to ask, and a videotape makes it more real and brings more attention to it.” He also speculated that releasing a videorecording would have allowed “the American people [to] see her struggling to answer questions.”
Also clamoring for Bondi’s testimony to be under oath and made public are many of Epstein’s victims, who also intend to be on Capitol Hill Friday morning, with plans to gather outside the room where Bondi will be meeting with committee members.
Comer defended his decision to loosen the testimony’s format last week, telling reporters it was necessary to help encourage witnesses to cooperate with the committee’s ongoing probe.
“Look, she’s coming in. If she says anything that’s not true, that’s a felony. She’ll be prosecuted,” said Comer, who also pointed to the prolonged, dramatic saga that forced both the Clintons to ultimately testify.
“We’ve got to have some incentive to get people in and not do like the Clintons did and delay it for several months,” Comer continued.
The anger at Bondi over her handling of the Epstein matter, in part, grew from a Fox News appearance last year, in which she said she had Epstein’s client list on her desk for review — only for the DOJ and FBI to put out a memo in July saying there was no client list and there were no plans to release further information.
The whiplash quickly drew the ire of Republicans and Democrats alike. Bondi’s then-deputy, Todd Blanche, took over handling some of the ensuing chaos, including interviewing Epstein’s only convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell. He also was the administration official to announce in a press conference that the DOJ had completed its obligations under the law Congress passed last November to force the full release of Epstein-related materials and documents in the federal government’s possession.
Trump has since ousted Bondi, and Blanche has assumed the role of acting attorney general. And though Bondi is now a private citizen, the Oversight Committee still asked that she honor the demand that she speak to lawmakers following the subpoena vote.
The DOJ is also continuing to represent Bondi in her dealings with the Oversight panel regarding the Epstein matter. According to a DOJ spokesperson, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, along with others, will attend the Friday transcribed interview with Bondi to answer questions around the so-called Epstein Files Transparency Act.
“Because former Attorney General Bondi oversaw the Department at the time the Act was enacted and carried out, DOJ’s presence is solely to ensure accurate representation of Department processes, facilitate any necessary clarifications, and support a complete factual record for the Committee,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
In a letter to Comer released Thursday by Oversight Democrats, DOJ clarified Dhillon and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Guynn would appear “as agency counsel, not as [Bondi’s] personal counsel.”
The letter also specified that “the agreed scope of the interview will be the Department of Justice’s compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act and related matters involving the so-called Epstein files during the time Ms. Bondi was the Attorney General at the Department.”
Bondi’s interview Friday is taking place near the end of a weeklong congressional recess, making it unclear which members of the committee will return to Washington early to question her. In addition to Mace, who said she would be attending, Comer also will be there, according to his spokesperson.
Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the panel, intends to be on hand, as does Walkinshaw, according to a person granted anonymity to share Democrats’ plans — alongside Reps. Ro Khanna and Dave Min of California as well as Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia, Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, Maxwell Frost of Florida and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania.
Democrats say they want to know more about the inconsistent, and some have argued sloppy, redactions in the Epstein files released by DOJ, which in some cases were excessive and in others inadvertently revealed private information about Epstein’s victims.
They also are likely to press Bondi on what she knows about Trump’s own relationship with Epstein. The DOJ has been accused of using the redaction process to cover up portions of the Epstein files linking the two men, though Trump has maintained that he broke off his relationship with Epstein before revelations of misconduct. The president has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with any crimes in relation to the late, disgraced financier.
Frost said he wanted to ask Bondi what specific directives she may have received from Trump or others when it came to her handling of the Epstein case. Walkinshaw said he would inquire about conversations between Bondi and Trump, or between the ex-attorney general and the White House, with regards to redactions in the files.
“I spoke with some of the survivors in Florida,” said Subramanyam in an interview. “They were curious why [Bondi has] been hiding so much and what she has to hide herself. Why wouldn’t she be more forthcoming about the files? … Who got to her? What do they have on her? Those are the kinds of questions that the survivors are curious about.”
“So am I, and so are the American people,” he added.
It’s not clear whether Bondi will answer their questions. She could invoke a privilege claim in declining to discuss private DOJ deliberations, or she could argue any query is out of her purview given her recent ousting from the attorney general job. Alternatively, she could filibuster and punt the question back to the Democrats, as she has done during previous House or Senate hearings.
House Democrats walked out of a closed-door briefing Bondi held with the Oversight Committee in March, claiming that she would not commit to testifying before them as part of their Epstein investigation under the terms of the subpoena that had already been issued. Bondi insisted she would “follow the law.”
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), one of the Republicans who voted to subpoena Bondi, said in an interview her appearance was simply “water under the bridge at this point, unfortunately,” adding he would at this point rather hear from Blanche.
“She’s out of office, it doesn’t matter,” Buchett said. “It’s just everybody’s over here playing politics, that’s all.”