Bondi Is Subpoenaed to Testify About Handling of Epstein Case
INTERVIEW: Tommy Vietor on Bondi subpoena, Noem hearing and Texas primary Subscribe to @podsaveamerica
nytimes.com/live/2026/03/04/us/trump-news-updates
A key House committee voted on Wednesday to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to compel her to testify about the Justice Department’s investigation of the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and its release of investigative material about him, after Republicans sided with Democrats to insist on it.
Over the objection of the panel’s Republican chairman, Representative James R. Comer of Kentucky, five Republicans on the Oversight Committee joined Democrats to force approval of the subpoena, which was introduced by Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina.
The vote, 24 to 19, was a striking rebuke of a top Trump administration official by members of President Trump’s own party at a time when the Republican-controlled Congress has generally marched in lock-step with him.
It was also the second time in the past year that Republican members of the Oversight Committee, the House’s chief investigative panel, had crossed party lines to force action around Mr. Epstein, the disgraced financier who died in federal custody in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges.
The Republicans who voted for the subpoena were Ms. Mace and Representatives Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Michael Cloud of Texas and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania.
Under the committee’s rules, Mr. Comer will be required to issue the subpoena for a closed-door deposition, in which Ms. Bondi will be under oath. The setting may force Ms. Bondi to contend more seriously with lawmakers’ questions than at a congressional hearing, where officials often perform for live television cameras and fall back on prepared talking points.
Though the Oversight Committee tends to be among the most strictly partisan panels in Congress, Republican leaders have repeatedly had to contend with defections connected to the Epstein scandal, which has become a potent political issue that has exposed rifts in Mr. Trump’s political coalition.
Before Wednesday’s vote, Mr. Comer tried to fend off the subpoena, saying that Ms. Bondi’s chief of staff told him that the attorney general would brief lawmakers about her department’s investigation into Mr. Epstein.
During the vote, as Ms. Mace’s effort looked poised to succeed, he made a last-ditch attempt and reminded members that the “attorney general has offered to come in and give briefings.”
But lawmakers from both parties have been angered by the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files, dating back to Ms. Bondi’s reversal last year on a promise to release previously undisclosed material in his case.
Ms. Mace and Ms. Boebert were among just four Republicans who broke with Mr. Trump last year and joined Democrats to force the House to vote on a bill that mandated the release of the files. Faced with the certain prospect of that measure passing, Republican leaders dropped their objections, and Mr. Trump signed the bill into law.
The Justice Department released millions of pages of documents in separate batches in December and January. But instead of quieting the clamor, the disclosures have seemed only to stoke it.
Members of Congress have accused Ms. Bondi and her top deputy, Todd Blanche, of slow-walking the release of the files or improperly withholding material in violation of the law.
Though the Justice Department was instructed to redact sexually explicit imagery and information that could be used to identify victims, it originally published dozens of unredacted nude images on its website, showing young women or possibly teenagers.
And during congressional hearings last month, Ms. Bondi faced withering criticism over the Justice Department’s inadvertent release of victims’ identities and its sweeping redactions that lawmakers said violated the Epstein law.
Representative Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said before Wednesday’s vote that he backed the subpoena because he wanted Ms. Bondi to “directly answer questions about the release of the files” and about “ensuring that victims and survivors are protected.”
Instaurare Omnia in Christo
Lazarus Peter Kalamation.com
The DOJ has been taking down Epstein files. Here's what remains.
After removing tens of thousands of files, the Department of Justice currently makes public about 2.7 million pages of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, a CBS News analysis found, a number below the Department's initial claim of 3 million, and a total that continues to fluctuate.
The Justice Department initially said that its release, made in response to a law passed by Congress compelling the agency to disclose nearly all files related to Epstein, comprised more than 3 million pages. Combined with previously released materials, the Department put the total at 3.5 million pages.
And now, in part in response to widespread criticism and concern from survivors and their attorneys that the files contain nearly 100 survivors' personal information and photos, the DOJ has scrambled to remove documents. A CBS News analysis found that as of late February, the Justice Department has taken down more than 47,000 files comprising about 65,500 pages. Links to those files now return a "page not found" error on the department's website.
Some of those removed documents contained explicit images or survivor information — including one document with unredacted photos of 21 survivors along with most of their birthdates. But the reasons for other files' removal is unclear, such as a call log with all names redacted and images of Epstein's jail bunk where investigators say he hanged himself. The Justice Department appears to be putting some removed files back up.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the department reviewed 6 million total pages, meaning what it initially released constitutes less than half of the total. He said the DOJ withheld files to protect survivors and ongoing investigations, but lawmakers, who have access to the unredacted trove, have criticized the redactions, arguing that some protect powerful men instead of survivors.
In response to inquiries from CBS News, Department of Justice spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said that "CBS's analysis appears to be fundamentally flawed" and that the department has "not deleted any files from the library." But she also wrote that more than 47,000 files remain offline for further review, a file-count similar to what CBS News found had been removed. She added that the files will be ready for re-production by the end of the week.
"Our team is working around the clock to address victim concerns, redact personally identifiable information and any images of a sexual nature," Baldassarre wrote. "All responsive documents will be repopulated online once proper redactions are made."
The records that the Justice Department have released have led to international fallout and high-profile resignations. Journalists, investigators and online sleuths are continuing to uncover new details of Epstein's sex trafficking operation and the figures that remained in his orbit even after his crimes were exposed.
But in many ways, the enormous tranche of files remains a black box due to its scale and lack of organization. The vast majority of the total pages the Justice Department released in response to the new law were made in a massive, three-part document dump on Jan. 30 that lacked chronology or categorization and was rife with duplicates. In addition to removing files, the Justice Department removed the ability to download the files en masse. Although it provided a search engine as mandated by law, the results it returns are inconsistent.
To help readers navigate the Epstein files, CBS News broke them down by their origin and release date. Click on any of the inner circles in the visualizations below to see details on a release and what the documents inside reveal.
Click here to read the full story.
Kristi Noem Asked — With Her Husband Sitting Right Behind Her — If She’s Had ‘...Relations With Corey Lewandowski’
“It is about your judgment and decision making, it is about the 260,000 employees that work under you that want to make sure you are giving information and making decisions clearly,” Kamlager-Dove said. “It is about conflict of interest. It is about national security risk.”
“American lives are at risk,” she added.
Noem did not answer whether she had hooked up with Lewandowski.
She stared forward as Kamlager-Dove read a series of headlines related to Noem and Lewandowski, which she said she wanted entered into the record; Jordan objected to each one. Noem’s husband, Bryon, was sitting behind her during her testimony but was blocked from view as his wife was asked about her reported lover.
The prodding comes a month after the Wall Street Journal reported Noem and Lewandowski had a “close relationship”; the report said President Donald Trump and his advisors were “uncomfortable” with it.
Watch above via C-SPAN’s YouTube account.