The latest development in the ongoing investigation into the handling of Jeffrey Epstein documents saw Pam Bondi appear for a closed-door interview on Friday in Washington, D.C. This high-stakes session followed a formal subpoena issued in March, though the actual format of the appearance seems to have sparked a significant divide within the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
According to The Hill, committee leadership clashed over the specific terms of Bondi’s appearance. While she was originally subpoenaed for a formal deposition, Chair James Comer (R-KY) agreed to allow Bondi to sit for a transcribed interview instead. This format is distinct because it does not require the subject to be sworn in, and notably, the session was not videotaped.
The Democratic members were particularly upset. Ranking member Robert Garcia (D-CA) expressed clear frustration with the decision to forgo a video recording and the lack of an oath. “I just want to be very clear that we continue to be incredibly disappointed of the decision to not have this interview videotaped and then released to the American public. The second thing we asked Chairman Comer is to ensure that this interview was under oath.”
Democrats have been fighting hard to get Bondi to testify under oath, but so far, their efforts seem to be failing
Garcia indicated that just because the Oversight got a win, it didn’t justify Comer’s actions. “We understand the attorney general is going to be there answering questions from Congress, but it should have been under oath and it should be videotaped,” he said.
BBC reported that Bondi defended her actions regarding the release of documents while serving as the Attorney General. In her opening remarks, she stated, “We demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to transparency in the Department’s search for, collection, and review of the Epstein files, producing nearly 3 million pages of material.”
She further asserted, “I am proud of the Department’s record and commitment to transparency under my leadership. This was an enormously complicated and labor-intensive process. To the best of my knowledge, the Department produced everything required under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.” It should be noted that in the past, Bondi admitted that the DOJ botched the release of the files.
The concerns about how her interview was conducted seem to have extended well beyond the committee members. Epstein survivor Danielle Bensky highlighted the potential for crucial information to be lost in a text-only format.
“I do want to make a note also about the importance of body language and inflection in the voice. There’s something called subtext that we all know about, and when we get a transcribed interview, we have no idea. It could be totally lost in translation, so it’s incredibly vital that we see filmed interviews, not just the transcription under oath,” she said.
Comer, however, defended the process, stating that it is a crime to lie to Congress regardless of whether someone is under oath. He addressed the group of survivors directly, saying, “If there are questions that aren’t asked, anything you’re not satisfied, let us know, and we’ll do everything in our ability to get answers for you all.”
Before the interview, Comer told reporters that Bondi was appearing before the committee voluntarily. “She came a few months ago for a briefing. Unfortunately, the Democrats got up and walked out of that briefing. Many of the Republicans asked her questions for a couple of hours during that briefing, and I’m appreciative that she’s coming back today voluntarily for a transcribed interview,” Comer said.
The interview itself, however, was contentious. Three hours into the proceedings, Democrats emerged with sharp accusations.
Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico alleged that the process amounted to a cover-up, claiming, per The Hill that, “The United States Department of Justice is intervening on behalf of Pam Bondi to stop her from answering questions about what happened in the cover-up of this case and her conversations with Donald Trump.”
Garcia added that Bondi was evasive. He noted that “She said she would not speak or respond to any questions that had anything to do with President Trump.”
Bondi later took to X to address Garcia’s claims that she had shifted blame to her former deputy, Todd Blanche. She wrote, “NOT TRUE. I praised Acting AG Blanche’s management of this Herculean task. I said his ethics are beyond reproach and that he is an incredible Attorney General.”
As the investigation continues, the committee seems to have a busy schedule ahead. Comer indicated that other notable figures, including Bill Gates, are expected to appear before the panel in the coming weeks.
Published: May 31, 2026 11:22 am