Attorney General Pam Bondi appeared on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. What followed was total chaos.
Numerous exchanges devolved into shouting matches, with insults flying and Republican Rep. Jim Jordan (OH-04), the committee's chairman, unable to regain control. At the center of the fireworks were Democrat House members accusing Bondi of impropriety involving Jeffrey Epstein, including repeated allegations that she's protecting "clients" instead of indicting them.
Related: Latest Dump of Epstein Files
In one exchange with Rep. Zoe Lofgren (CA-18), Bondi fired back during questioning, accusing the congresswoman of taking money from Reid Hoffman. Hoffman, a top Democrat donor and the co-founder of LinkedIn, was recently exposed as an Epstein confidant who visited the now-deceased sex-trafficker's island and worked to rehabilitate his image after his first conviction.
Pam Bondi fired back at Rep. Zoe Lofgren during a heated exchange, rejecting what she called grandstanding and questioning Lofgren about donations linked to Reid Hoffman, who has been associated with Jeffrey Epstein.pic.twitter.com/PH17XVbZ2D
— Brandon Straka #WalkAway (@BrandonStraka) February 11, 2026
BONDI: May I answer?
JORDAN: The attorney general may respond.
BONDI: I find it interesting that she keeps going after President Trump, the greatest president in American history, and if they could maintain their composure. This isn't a circus; this is a hearing. I find it interesting she keeps going after Donald Trump. She doesn't say how much money she took from Reid Hoffman. Did you? Nor did she post anything, she posted nothing on her X account, her Twitter account during the Biden years, yet now, all of a sudden...
(Crosstalk and screaming)
Lofgren would then try to make a point of order, claiming she was "personally" attacked, to which Jordan responded that it was "not even close to a point of order."
Regardless, Bondi's central claim is correct. These Democrats had zero interest in anything to do with Epstein until Trump took office. Republicans did. Many of you reading this did. But Lofgren and company couldn't be bothered to say a word while the Biden administration sat on the files for years. Their sudden concern isn't based on any real pursuit of the facts or accountability. It's purely partisan politics, and if they want to play that game, it's only fair that Bondi gets to play it back.
During her opening statement, the attorney general noted that Democrats had dozens of opportunities to interview Biden-era DOJ head Merrick Garland, and not once did they ask him a single question about Jeffrey Epstein.
AG Pam Bondi: "You all should be apologizing. You sit here and you attack the President and I am not going to have it…None of them asked Merrick Garland over the last four years one word about Jeffrey Epstein."
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) February 11, 2026
pic.twitter.com/Rl45qQUCct
Later, Bondi would be questioned by Rep. Jerry Nadler (NY-12), and things would really go off the rails.
Pam Bondi SMACKS DOWN Jerry Nadler and Jamie Raskin's pathetic Epstein stunts:
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) February 11, 2026
"Your theatrics are ridiculous! Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to get into the gutter with these people!"
"You don't tell me anything, you WASHED UP lawyer!" pic.twitter.com/kivEuR9LPV
BONDI: First, you shared, I find it...
NADLER: How many have you indicted...
BONDI: Uh, excuse me. I'm gonna answer my question.
NALDER: Answer my question.
BONDI: No, I'm going to answer the question the way I want to answer the question. Your theatrics are ridiculous.
NADLER: No, you're gonna answer the question the way I asked it.
BONDI: Chairman, I'm not gonna get in the gutter with these people, but I'm going to answer the question.
NADLER: How many have you indicted? Reclaiming my time. (Cross yelling) Reclaiming my time.
BONDI: I think it's very interesting that he talks about they indicted, the president says they indicted him twice (Cross yelling). They sure did!
RASKIN: Mr. Chairman, please stop the clock, stop the clock, and reclaim his time!
(Cross yelling)
JORDAN: The meeting will be in order (Nadler trying to talk over Jordan). The time belongs to the gentlemen from New York. We will give you a few more seconds. (Crosstalk) We will do that, but when you ask a question, you may not like the answer, but she gets to answer...
NADLER: The question was how many of Epstein's...
BONDI: They don't like the answer (Crosstalk) because it's honest, so he asks a four-minute question that I'm going to answer.
RASKIN: Restore 45 seconds (Crosstalk)...Mr. Chairman. (Crosstalk) You can let her filibuster all day long, but not on our watch, not on our time, no way, and I told you about that attorney general before we started.
BONDI: You don't tell me anything!
RASKIN: No, I did tell you because we saw what you did in the Senate!
BONDI: You washed-up loser! You're not even a lawyer.
That's about as wild as I've ever seen a hearing get, and while many on the right have had justifiable frustrations with Bondi, she's right on this. Much of what Democrats are saying about the Epstein issue is purposely dishonest tripe meant to deflect from their years of silence and pretend there's a mountain of indictable "clients" ready to be arrested. To put it simply, that's just not true.
Yes, Epstein was a horrible, evil person. Yes, there are people in the files who had friendships with him post-2008 who should be criticized (Stacey Plaskett, Steven Bannon, Reid Hoffman, etc.). But when it comes to new criminal charges, there's just not much there to go on. Notice that Democrats are really good at grandstanding about this issue, but they never actually give any names of who they think should be indicted. That's because they have no names. This is all theater.
I've always been skeptical that Epstein didn't have at least a few other people he trafficked women to, but you can't build an indictment on broad speculation. Democrats know that, which is why they never once demanded to know why the Biden DOJ didn't indict anyone in connection with Epstein.
Lastly, and this is something even many on the right aren't ready to accept, but a lot of the redactions you see in the files are presumably victims turned recruiters or adult prostitutes who willingly took part. I know that's uncomfortable to talk about, but the situation was not black and white. Some girls were groomed and ended up helping Epstein later in adulthood. Likewise, some adult women were consensually involved from the beginning in much the same way Ghislaine Maxwell was.
Again, Democrats know that, but they are trying to play a game of gotcha, knowing that the only people likely indictable based on the files started out as victims. There is no evidence of a "client list," nor any basis to the idea that Bondi and the DOJ are protecting "co-conspirators." If that were true, the Biden administration had ample opportunity to charge them.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy RedState’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join RedState VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member