id,deposition_id,segment_index,speaker,start_seconds,end_seconds,text
9110,10,0,Page 1,,,"COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WASHINGTON, D.C. INTERVIEW OF: PAMELA J. BONDI Friday, May 29, 2026 Washington, D.C. The interview in the above matter was held in Room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 9:05 a.m. Present: Representatives Comer, Garcia, Khanna, Stansbury, Frost, Lee, Subramanyam, Ansari, Min, and Walkinshaw."
9111,10,1,Page 2,,,"Appearances: For the COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM: DANIEL ASHWORTH, GENERAL COUNSEL STACY BAKER, DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BRITTANY BRIGNAC, SENIOR COUNSEL MALLORY COGAR, CHIEF CLERK AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS JESSICA COLLINS, COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR JACK EMMER, CHIEF COUNSEL FOR INVESTIGATIONS EMILY FEYERABEND, COUNSEL RYAN GIACHETTI, CHIEF COUNSEL BILLY GRANT, DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL FOR INVESTIGATIONS AUSTIN HACKER, DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR BAILEE JUSZCZYK, UNDERGRADUATE FELLOW NICHOLAS LANGMAN, UNDERGRADUATE FELLOW MARK MARIN, STAFF DIRECTOR MELVIN SOTO, DIGITAL DIRECTOR ELLISON TOLAN, COUNSEL ASHLEE VINYARD, DEPUTY STAFF DIRECTOR , MINORITY DEPUTY STAFF DIRECTOR , MINORITY POLICY DIRECTOR , MINORITY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR , MINORITY RESEARCH ASSISTANT"
9112,10,2,Page 3,,,", MINORITY RESEARCH ANALYST , MINORITY INTERN , MINORITY PRESS SECRETARY , MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL MINORITY INTERN , MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL , MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL , MINORITY OPERATIONS SPECIALIST , MINORITY FELLOW , MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL , MINORITY FELLOW , MINORITY SENIOR ADVISOR , MINORITY CHIEF COUNSEL"
9113,10,3,Page 4,,,"For the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: HARMEET DHILLON, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CIVIL RIGHTS JONATHAN D. GUYNN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE TORTS BRANCH OF THE CIVIL DIVISION ERNESTO SAMPERA, ADVISOR TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RACHEL JAG, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL KISA MOTIWALA, CHIEF OF STAFF AND COUNSEL, OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS Mr. Emmer. We will go on the record. This is a transcribed interview of former Attorney General Pamela J. Bondi, conducted by the"
9114,10,4,Page 5,,,"House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform under the authority granted to it pursuant to House rule X. Accordingly, House rule X grants the Committee broad jurisdiction for the Committee to conduct investigations of any matter at any time. This interview was requested by Chairman James Comer as part of the Committee's investigation into the circumstances and subsequent investigations into the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, the operation of sex-trafficking rings and ways for the Federal Government to effectively combat them, the ways in which Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell sought to curry favor and exercise influence to protect their illegal activities, and potential violations of ethics rules related to elected officials. Can the witness please state her name and spell her last name for the record? Ms. Bondi. Sure. Pamela Bondi, B-o-n-d-i. Mr. Emmer. Thank you. My name is Jack Emmer, and I am chief counsel for investigations for Chairman James Comer. Under the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's rules, you are allowed to have counsel present to advise you during this interview. Do you have counsel representing you in a personal capacity present with you today? Ms. Bondi. Only as my -- when I was Attorney General for the United States, and that's Harmeet Dhillon. Mr. Emmer. Will counsel please identify themselves for the record? Ms. Dhillon. Yes. I'm Harmeet Dhillon, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. And I'm here on behalf of the United States Department of Justice, as the former Attorney General was subpoenaed and is appearing here voluntarily in her official capacity only. And, accordingly, I am here to represent the interests of the DOJ and its interest in effectuating the Transparency Act, and solely to be here on behalf of the DOJ. I am also accompanied by one of my colleagues, and he will state his appearance as well."
9115,10,5,Page 6,,,"Mr. Guynn. I'm Jonathan Guynn, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Division. And I'm here appearing in the same capacity as Ms. Dhillon. Mr. Emmer. We have Members of Congress here with us today. For the record, starting with the Chairman, can Members please identify themselves for the record? Chairman Comer. James Comer, Chairman, Kentucky. Mr. Garcia. Ranking Member Robert Garcia, Democrat. Mr. Subramanyam. Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia's 10th District. Ms. Ansari. Yassamin Ansari, Arizona's Third Congressional District. Mr. Walkinshaw. James Walkinshaw, Virginia's 11th. Mr. Frost. Maxwell Frost, Florida's 10th. Ms. Stansbury. Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico. Mr. Emmer. For the record, starting with the majority staff, can the additional staff members please introduce themselves with their name, title, and affiliation? Mr. Grant. Billy Grant, deputy chief counsel for investigations, Chairman Comer. Mr. Ashworth. Daniel Ashworth, general counsel for Chairman James Comer. Mr. Giachetti. Ryan Giachetti, chief counsel for Chairman Comer. Ms. Tolan. Ellison Tolan, counsel for Chairman Comer. Ms. Feyerabend. Emily Feyerabend, counsel for Chairman Comer. Ms. Brignac. Brittany Brignac, senior counsel for Chairman Comer. Mr. Soto. Melvin Soto, videographer for Chairman Comer. Ms. Collins. Jessica Collins, communications director for Chairman Comer. Ms. Cogar. Mallory Cogar, director of operations and chief clerk, Chairman Comer. Mr. Hacker. Austin Hacker, deputy communications director for Chairman Comer. Ms. Vinyard. Ashlee Vinyard, deputy staff director for Chairman Comer. Mr. Marin. Mark Marin, staff director, Chairman Comer."
9116,10,6,Page 7,,,"Ms. Baker. Stacy Baker, director of technology, Chairman Comer. , chief counsel for Ranking Member Garcia. , research analyst for Ranking Member Garcia. , research assistant, Ranking Member Garcia. , senior counsel, Ranking Member Garcia. , communications director, Ranking Member Garcia. , deputy staff director, Ranking Member Garcia. , fellow, Ranking Member Garcia. , senior counsel, Ranking Member Garcia. , intern, Ranking Member Garcia. , intern, Ranking Member Garcia. , director of oversight and policy, Ranking Member Garcia. , deputy chief counsel for Ranking Member Garcia. , press secretary for Ranking Member Garcia. , senior advisor for Ranking Member Garcia. Mr. Emmer. Thank you all. Attorney General Bondi, before we begin, I would like to go over the ground rules for this transcribed interview. The questioning will proceed in rounds. The majority will ask questions for up to an hour, and then the minority will have an opportunity to ask questions for an hour if they choose. To the extent Members have questions for the witness, they will be propounded during their side's respective rounds. The clock will stop if you need to confer with counsel, your counsel is speaking, and when Members or staff are speaking during the opposing side's rounds of questions. We will alternate back and forth until there are no more questions."
9117,10,7,Page 8,,,"Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. There is a court reporter taking down everything I say and everything you say to make a written record of the interview. For the record to be clear, please wait until the staffer questioning you finishes each question before you begin your answer, and the staffer will wait until you finish your response before proceeding to the next question. Further, to ensure the court reporter can properly record this transcribed interview, please speak clearly, concisely, and slowly. Also, the court reporter cannot record nonverbal answers, such as nodding or shaking your head, so it is important that you answer each question with an audible, verbal answer. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. Exhibits may be entered into the record. Majority exhibits will be identified numerically. Minority exhibits will be identified alphabetically. We want you to answer our questions in the most complete and truthful manner possible, so we will take our time. If you have any questions or do not fully understand the question, please let us know. We will attempt to clarify, add context to, or rephrase our questions. If we ask about specific conversations or events in the past and you are unable to recall the exact words or details, you should testify to the substance of those conversations or events to the best of your recollection. If you recall only a part of a conversation or event, you should give us your best recollection of those events or parts of conversations that you do recall. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. Although you are here voluntarily, you are required by law, pursuant to Title 18"
9118,10,8,Page 9,,,"of the United States Code, section 1001, to answer questions from Congress truthfully. This also applies to questions posed by congressional staff in this interview. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. If at any time you knowingly make false statements, you could be subject to criminal prosecution. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. This includes both knowingly providing false testimony but also stating you do not recall or remember something when, in fact, you do. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. Furthermore, you cannot tell half-truths or exclude information necessary to make statements accurate. You are required to provide all information that would make your response truthful. A deliberate failure to disclose information can constitute a false statement. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. Is there any reason you are unable to provide truthful testimony in today's interview? Ms. Bondi. No. Mr. Emmer. Please note that if you wish to assert a privilege over any statement today, that assertion must comply with the rules of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Pursuant to that, Committee rule 16(c)(1) states, ""For the Chair to consider assertions of privilege over testimony or statements, witnesses or entities must clearly state the specific privilege being asserted and the reason for the assertion on or before the scheduled date of testimony or appearance."" Do you understand?"
9119,10,9,Page 10,,,"Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. Ordinarily, we take a 5-minute break at the end of each hour of questioning, but if you need a longer break or a break before that, please let us know, and we will be happy to accommodate. However, to the extent that there is a pending question, we would ask that you finish answering the question before we take a break. Do you understand? Ms. Bondi. Yes. Mr. Emmer. I would like to remind everyone here today that the taking of still photography and the recording of video of any part of today's proceeding is prohibited. Attorney General Bondi, do you have any other questions before we begin? Ms. Bondi. No. Mr. Emmer. Do you have an opening statement that you will be reading into the record? Ms. Bondi. Yes, please. Mr. Emmer. You may proceed. Ms. Bondi. Good morning. Before we start today, I want to reiterate what I have said many times regarding the Department's handling during my tenure as Attorney General of the voluminous materials that are now commonly known as the ""Epstein files"": I am proud of the Department's record and commitment to transparency under my leadership. 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, including thousands of videos and hundreds of thousands of images. These investigations span four administrations, dating back to the Bush administration, and have gone on through the Obama administration, the first Trump administration, the Biden"
9120,10,10,Page 11,,,"administration. The only time Federal prosecutors were permitted to launch investigations against Epstein and Maxwell was when President Trump occupied the White House. Only under President Trump were 3 million Epstein-related documents released. 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. Our diligent and good-faith effort to collect materials ensured that all potentially responsive documents that could be reasonably located would see the light of day. All Department components were directed to submit any potential responsive records, resulting in a comprehensive review of millions of documents. As the head of a large department with broad responsibilities, I did not lead every aspect of this effort nor conduct that document review myself. I delegated that oversight over this process to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. The team of professionals who reviewed all of the materials that we collected assured me, the only materials that were withheld were either non-responsive, privileged, or duplicative. Although not required by the act, the Department has given Congress access to unredacted duplicative materials in the Reading Room in an effort at maximum transparency. There were redaction errors, but since day one of this process, the Department has been committed to accountability and transparency. Our stance has always been that the Department stands ready to review any potential evidence of criminal activity related to Epstein and his associates and would pursue the appropriate investigative or prosecutorial actions wherever the facts and law warrant. I would like to repeat what I shared before the House Judiciary Committee in February. I have spent my entire career fighting for victims, and I will continue to do so. I am deeply sorry for what any victim has been through, especially as a result of that monster. If they have any information to share with law enforcement about anyone who has hurt them or abused them, the"
9121,10,11,Page 12,,,"FBI is waiting to hear from them. The bottom line is, justice and transparency in this matter have been delivered at the direction of President Trump and his administration. Thank you. Mr. Emmer. Thank you. We've had another Member of Congress join. Can he please identify himself for the record? Mr. Min. Congressman Dave Min. Mr. Emmer. Thank you. The time reads 9:18, and the majority's time will begin now. EXAMINATION BY MR. EMMER: Q Attorney General Bondi, I just want to thank you again for participating in today's proceeding and your years of public service, both for our country and the State of Florida. I want to recognize that you are currently undergoing cancer treatment, and I will say that we will do our best to ask all of the questions in the most efficient and timely way possible. So let's start by briefly discussing your education and experience. I understand you've had a long career, but can you summarize it for the record? A Sure. I went to University of Florida, undergraduate. I graduated from Stetson College of Law. I was a prosecutor in Hillsborough County, Florida, for 18 years, prosecuting almost every kind of crime imaginable, from first-degree murders all the way to domestic violence. I was felony bureau chief there as well. I also then became attorney general for the State of Florida, where I served for 8 years. And then for the past year, I was Attorney General of the United States. Q So let's talk about your time as Attorney General. You started in February 2025. Is"
9122,10,12,Page 13,,,"that correct? A Yes. Q And as it relates to the Jeffrey Epstein matter, when you assumed office, what was DOJ doing? A When I assumed -- regarding Epstein? Q Yes. A When I assumed office, nothing, to my knowledge. And nothing had been released, and I don't know if it had been requested to be released. Q Did you direct the Department to conduct a review of the Epstein and Maxwell investigation? A Immediately. I mean, within weeks of assuming office. Q Can you describe for the Committee what that looked like? A Yes. I spoke to the FBI, and we asked them to turn over all documents in their possession related to Epstein. Q And as far as turning over those documents, what was the DOJ going to do with those documents? A Provide transparency and release them to the public -- and to Congress, of course. Q And I believe you said that started immediately upon you assuming office. Is that right? A I believe within weeks. Q And as far as providing transparency, was there a specific timeline that you provided the FBI to follow as far as releasing these documents? A Yeah, it was prior to Director Patel becoming confirmed, I believe, when this process started, and we received from the FBI approximately 300 documents that were released. Q And, to be clear, you directed this internal review of the Epstein matter. There was no"
9123,10,13,Page 14,,,"other review that was occurring prior to you assuming office? A Not to my knowledge. Q Also for the record, the Epstein and Maxwell investigation was considered closed upon you taking office? A To my knowledge, yes. Q When were you first briefed on the Epstein and Maxwell matter? A Initially, after we received, again, approximately 300 documents, and those were released, and we believed that that was the tip of the iceberg, that that -- the FBI had not turned over all of the documents. Director Patel eventually was confirmed, and I sent him a letter asking him to look into that and to give us any other documents in the FBI's possession anywhere in the country. And, ultimately, we received much more. Q And, for the record, who would've been briefing you on the Epstein matter as far as when you took office? A Todd Blanche. Q What specific concerns did the Department have as it related to Epstein and Maxwell when you assumed office? A That nothing had been released. And, again, to my knowledge, no one that spanned the Biden administration or previously had sought to release any of this information. And I believe it was within weeks of me assuming office that we asked for and demanded all of these documents. Q Do you recall whether there were concerns that there were potentially unindicted co-conspirators? A Always, yes. Q So, at the time that you directed this review, was there any sort of plan of what that review would consist of?"
9124,10,14,Page 15,,,"A Well, initially, again, we only received several hundred documents, and they were released upon redaction by the FBI. Then, once Director Patel assumed his position, we found many more documents. And, as we received those, those were reviewed and released. And we have always made it very clear that if anyone is the victim of Jeffrey Epstein -- and I count Ghislaine Maxwell in there too. She is just as evil as Jeffrey Epstein was -- that they come forward to us, to the FBI -- many of these victims are represented by lawyers -- and talk to us. Q Upon taking office, did any victims or victims' attorneys reach out to the Department? A Yes. Q How many? A I can't recall how many. I know multiple -- there were multiple victims, and many of which, I believe the majority, are represented by attorneys. Q Did you meet with them personally, or would that have been something that Todd Blanche would've done? A No. I spoke to one attorney. I cannot recall her name. She was a former prosecutor. And she seemed to deeply care about these victims, of course. And I spoke to her, and I believe I referred her to the FBI. You know, when a victim is represented, you go through their attorney. And I spoke to her directly. And then I know many of the lawyers in my office spoke to other attorneys. And I believe the FBI spoke to multiple victims as well, but I would direct that to Deputy Attorney General, now-Acting Attorney General Blanche and also Director Patel. Q You would've been briefed on these meetings with the victims and their attorneys. Is that right? A I have not been after the fact. Q Okay. Do you have any idea what the victims and their attorneys were concerned about during this time period of February and spring of 2025?"
9125,10,15,Page 16,,,"A Only the attorney that I spoke to, and she was just concerned about being heard and these victims being heard. Q Uh-huh. Were they interested in files being released at that time? A I don't recall. Q Okay. You mentioned Director Patel and the FBI. Were there any other agencies that were involved in the review of documents during this period? A The FBI, DOJ -- multiple components at DOJ, my National Security Division at the time. And then, ultimately, when we received multiple documents, we used attorneys from around the country, including Florida and New York. Q And I know I asked you about potential co-conspirators earlier, but when you were reviewing these initial documents in the spring of 2025, were there ever any plans to pursue investigations into potential co-conspirators? A I'm sorry. What month did you say? Q Upon assuming office and during the spring of 2025. A If there were co-conspirators or evidence that anyone committed a crime that could be proven in a courtroom, it's any prosecutor's duty to pursue that. Q Attorney General Bondi, on February 21st of 2025, just over 2 weeks after you were sworn in as AG, you responded to a question in an interview about a purported list of Epstein's clients by saying, ""It's sitting on my desk right now."" Is that an accurate characterization of your statements during that interview? A If you listen to the entire interview, I was referring to the file. And I also included -- I don't have a copy of the transcript of that interview, but I kept going and said -- the question was, I believe, a list of clients, and I said, ""It's sitting on my desk to review, along with JFK files, MLK files."" I wasn't -- I meant the files, to review. I had not reviewed them at that time. And I made that"
9126,10,16,Page 17,,,"clear. Q And I'm assuming you did ultimately review those files. Is that right? A Yes, along with multiple attorneys in my office. Q And were those files the ones that you referred to previously that the FBI produced to DOJ and -- A Yes. Q -- upon assuming office? A Yes. Q Thank you. A And I think you clarified something for me. It was within 2 weeks of assuming office that I received those. So, really, within just a week or more, I had requested all the Epstein documents. Q And during this period upon assuming office, you were interested in whether or not there was a client list of Epstein? A Yes. Q And you directed the Department to review whether there was a client list? A Yes. Q And those documents that you refer to that were sitting on your desk, were those ultimately produced publicly? A Yes. Q A week later, on February 27, 2025, a group of select individuals left the White House holding white binders that contained the DOJ seal and were labeled ""The Epstein Files: Phase 1."" Do you recall this occurring? A Yes. And that would include the approximately -- I'm saying ""approximate"" -- 300 pages, and I believe that included flight logs and other things. But those were the initial documents"
9127,10,17,Page 18,,,"we received. Q Were you involved in providing these documents to these individuals? A Yes. Q And ultimately whose decision was it to release these documents? A Ultimately mine, to release as much as we could while protecting victims' identities. Q How were the recipients of this phase-one release selected? A We were seeing them that day; they were in the White House. And we handed them the binders. And then it was released to the general public as well. Q Were these recipients of the phase-one release also provided an opportunity to review the documents at DOJ headquarters? A I don't believe so. Q So the label ""Epstein Files: Phase 1"" -- at that point, was it presumed that there would be a phase two? A Yes, because I didn't believe there were only 300, approximately, pages of Epstein documents. And I had sent the FBI a letter demanding everything they had -- and that meant around this country -- on Epstein, and that was all we received. Q And, to be clear, was there any other release of documents prior to this Committee's investigation or the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Yes, multiple ones. Multiple ones. Q At this time, I'd like to introduce what will be marked as majority exhibit 1. [Bondi Majority Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.] BY MR. EMMER: Q And I'll give you a moment to review. Attorney General Bondi, do you recognize this letter?"
9128,10,18,Page 19,,,"A Yes. This is the letter that I referred to earlier, dated February 27th, 2025, that I sent to Director Patel. And, to clarify, I had said we released approximately 300, maybe, earlier, documents. There were about 200 pages, according to the letter I sent him. Q So, in the letter, you claimed that you learned from a source that the FBI field office in New York was withholding thousands of pages of Epstein documents despite the FBI's assurances that all relevant documents had been delivered to the Department of Justice already. In this letter, you say that you only received about 200 pages and requested an investigation into the document shortfall. Is that an accurate summary of what occurred? A Yes. Q Why do you think that this field office was withholding documents? A I asked Director Patel to look into that. Q Who told -- or -- who told you or brought these concerns to you that they may have been withholding documents? A I believe it was one of the attorneys in my office who said -- I believe it was a career prosecutor -- who said, ""I think there are more documents, and they're in New York."" I don't believe it was an FBI agent. And then that's when I contacted Director Patel -- Q Uh-huh. A -- who, by that time, had assumed office. Q You also stated in the letter that the FBI failed to disclose the existence of these documents after your repeated requests to turn over all documents. Is that correct? A That is correct. And I said, ""By 8:00 a.m. tomorrow, the FBI will deliver the full and complete Epstein files to"
9129,10,19,Page 20,,,"my office, including all records, documents, audio and video recordings, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and his clients, regardless of how such information was obtained. There will be no withholdings or limitations to my or your access. The Department of Justice will ensure that any public disclosure of these files will be done in a manner to protect the privacy of victims and in accordance with law, as I have done my entire career as a prosecutor."" And the letter continues. Q And you already mentioned that you discussed this with Director Patel. Did you also discuss it with Deputy Director Bongino? A I don't know if Deputy Director Bongino had assumed office at that point. Q And pursuant to your letter, did Director Patel initiate an investigation into that field office? A I believe he did. Q Do you know what the results of that investigation were? A I don't recall. Q Given this letter, what other steps did you take to ensure the FBI turned over any and all of the remaining withheld documents? A I relied on Director Patel and Deputy Attorney General Blanche. Q So you, yourself, did you ever confirm that the FBI turned over all relevant documents following this incident? A You would have to ask Director Patel. Q At this time, I would like to introduce what will be marked as majority exhibit 2. [Bondi Majority Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.] BY MR. EMMER: Q Attorney General Bondi, do you recognize this statement?"
9130,10,20,Page 21,,,"A Yes. Q What role did you have in issuing this statement? A This was -- I did not have a role in issuing this statement. I believe this was done by Deputy Attorney General Blanche in conjunction with the FBI, I believe. Q And, for the record, this is the July 7, 2025, DOJ and FBI joint statement. A Yes. Q The statement said that there was no evidence that Epstein kept a client list of associates whom he blackmailed or conspired with to victimize dozens of women. Do you know which documents the DOJ and FBI relied on in issuing this statement? A I do not. You'd have to ask Deputy Attorney General, now-Acting Attorney General Blanche and Director Patel. Q Prior to this statement being issued, were you briefed on the review's findings that informed this statement? A Yes. Q What were you told? A I don't recall, other than what's in this letter. Q As far as the conclusions of the letter itself, did you have concerns? A At that time, no. We relied on the documents that the FBI and DOJ received. Q And the letter says that there was -- DOJ was not able to locate a client list. Did DOJ compile a list of individuals, as far as its review, that may have been associated with Epstein and Maxwell? A Not to my knowledge. They didn't compile a client list, to my knowledge. Q So, for the record, is it your testimony today that the Department of Justice never had a list of Epstein's clients or associates in its possession? A Not to my knowledge."
9131,10,21,Page 22,,,"Q The joint statement also said neither the DOJ nor the FBI uncovered evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties. What process did the Department of Justice undergo to determine there was no evidence to investigate any third parties? A I believe the FBI thoroughly reviewed all the documents in its possession to make that determination. They are the investigative agency. Q Uh-huh. During this time when this statement was issued -- you've mentioned that Blanche was heavily involved -- were you ever briefed on individuals of concern related to Epstein or Maxwell? A I don't recall, other than they were scouring through the documents, and I believe there were multiple videos as well. Q As far as this initial review, did the Department of Justice conduct any interviews or meetings with any individuals in its efforts to determine whether further investigation was necessary? A Could you repeat that? Q As part of its review that informed the July 7th joint statement, did the Department of Justice interview any individuals outside of the DOJ to inform its conclusions? A I believe the FBI did, but that's a question for Director Patel. Q On July 24th and July 25th of 2025, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Ghislaine Maxwell, and the DOJ released the transcript a month later. Attorney General Bondi, why did the Department of Justice conduct this interview? A I believe Deputy Attorney General, now-Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has said on several occasions that Epstein, by that time, was dead and no one had taken -- had made an effort to interview Ghislaine Maxwell to see if she had evidence of co-conspirators and other crimes, and that was why he interviewed her."
9132,10,22,Page 23,,,"Q Are you aware of whether Maxwell reached out to the Department of Justice to request this interview? A I don't recall how that was initiated. Q So would it be safe to assume that you had no role in the determination that then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche would perform this interview? A Oh, I knew Todd Blanche was going to interview her, yes. Q Uh-huh. A I believe -- I don't believe who initiated it. If she reached out to us, I believe -- I don't want to speculate, but I believe Deputy Attorney General Blanche, at the time, reached out to them because there was someone, still living, in prison, who had potential information about other co-conspirators and crimes. Q Were there any concerns at the DOJ about conducting this interview with Ghislaine Maxwell? A No. Not to my knowledge. Q And based on Maxwell's testimony to Todd Blanche, did the Department of Justice take any subsequent actions that were informed by this testimony? A I don't believe so. Mr. Grant. And do you know why or how it became that then-Deputy Attorney General Blanche would be the one to take the interview of Ms. Maxwell? Ms. Bondi. He was leading the Epstein matter and the release of everything from the beginning. Deputy Attorney General, now-Acting U.S. Attorney Blanche was. BY MR. EMMER: Q Maxwell's attorneys stated publicly that Maxwell had provided the names of 100 different people connected to Jeffrey Epstein in the course of her 2-day interview. Did the Department of Justice investigate any of the individuals named in Maxwell's"
9133,10,23,Page 24,,,"testimony? A And I believe that entire transcript has been released and that the FBI would have looked into all of that. That was the purpose of taking her statement. Q As far as the transcript itself and what has been released publicly, how did the Department of Justice determine which individuals would be redacted from the transcript? A Deputy Attorney General Blanche made that determination based on the law and what privileges would apply. Q Do you know what types of individuals' names were redacted in the Maxwell transcript? A I don't recall. Q Are you aware of whether there were any redaction errors in the transcript? A I don't recall. Ultimately, of course, there were millions of documents released, so I don't recall regarding the transcript. But if there were, I do believe Deputy Attorney General Blanche, now-Acting AG Blanche, did everything to be sure we had complete transparency under the law. Q Following this interview, Ghislaine Maxwell was moved by the Bureau of Prisons from a maximum-security prison in Florida to a low-security Federal prison in Texas on August 1st, 2025. Why was that? A I read about it in the newspaper, or online, after it happened. I had nothing to do with that. I don't want to speculate, but I believe it was for security reasons. You'd have to ask the Bureau of Prisons that question. Q Would then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche know the answer to that question? A He may, and I'm not sure if he'd addressed that publicly. Probably. But transferring a prisoner is the decision of the Bureau of Prisons. Q To be clear, and to your knowledge, do you know if her transfer had anything to do with her participating in the interview with Todd Blanche?"
9134,10,24,Page 25,,,"A I have no knowledge of that. Again, I found out about it after the transfer when it became public. Q Attorney General Bondi, do you believe that Ghislaine Maxwell should receive a pardon? A No. I believe she should die in prison. Q Why? A She was a monster, just like Jeffrey Epstein. She recruited these young women to a life of prostitution and abuse. And I often think the women that do that are just as bad, if not worse, than the men, because she participated in it. Q Thank you. BY MR. GRANT: Q On August 22nd, 2025, this Committee issued a subpoena to the Department of Justice for documents pertaining to the Epstein matter. The DOJ subsequently produced approximately 33,000 documents to the Committee. In this production, the DOJ indicated that multiple responsive records must also be withheld or redacted, as required by applicable law, including certain grand jury materials and documents containing personally identifiable information. Are you aware, Attorney General Bondi, how the DOJ initially gathered or collected the necessary documents under this Committee's subpoena? A No. And that task, I believe, was -- the 33,000 pages -- was delegated to Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. He handled that batch of releases -- release. Excuse me. Q And so it would be Mr. Woodward that would know more about the process -- A Yes. Q -- to determine which documents fell under that subpoena? A Yes."
9135,10,25,Page 26,,,"Q Were you ever briefed on the documents underneath that subpoena? A Maybe briefly, after they were released. Our goal was to get as much out publicly that was legally permissible as fast as we could. Q And would the redaction process for those documents be similar to what the Department of Justice was already doing as far as making sure no personal information was getting out there because it was required by law? A Yes. And I believe Stanley Woodward was the one, again, who supervised that release. Q And, in this matter, who at the Department of Justice would've been actually doing those redactions? Staff attorneys? Other attorneys at Main Justice? Someone else? A I believe it was attorneys, multiple attorneys, at the Department of Justice, even some, again, from the National Security Division. And, again, ultimately, attorneys from all over the country were pulled in to help, once we received the millions of pages of documents. But, initially, we did have attorneys from within the Department of Justice and the FBI, I believe, working on those redactions. Q And are you aware of attorneys at the Department of Justice having to undergo any type of training as far as redactions go? A I believe they did. And that would've been supervised by Todd Blanche. Q Was there any criteria for which attorneys get selected to do a redactions process that you're aware of? A I recall we used attorneys from the National Security Division as much as we could, because they have top security clearance, and the goal was to protect the victims' identities. Q And are you aware of why the DOJ only produced 33,000 documents pursuant to this Committee's subpoena? A I believe because that was what they had at the time. And we would have to ask Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward that question."
9136,10,26,Page 27,,,"BY MR. EMMER: Q Let's talk about the Epstein Files Transparency Act. And, for the record, the EFTA was signed into law November 19th of 2025, requiring you, the Attorney General at the time, to release all documents related to the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein within 30 days and making them publicly available in a searchable format. What was your role in carrying out the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Todd Blanche supervised that entire process. To back up for a minute, though, the office did ask that files, prior to the Transparency Act, be unsealed by courts in multiple jurisdictions -- I believe it was SDFL and SDNY -- and those requests were denied. And it was not until the Transparency Act that we were able to receive those documents. Q So there were existing efforts to release documents prior to the Epstein Files Transparency Act. A Yes. Q So what was your response to the Epstein Files Transparency Act being passed? A We were able to receive many more documents based on the act. We were able to unseal the grand jury -- we made a motion to unseal the grand jury documents in Epstein and Maxwell. And that also included the Epstein, when he died -- excuse me. That also included when Epstein died in prison. It included, I believe, a prison guard case somewhere, Epstein's cases in both jurisdictions, and Maxwell's cases. Q And you said this effort was directed to Todd Blanche. Is that right? A Yes. Q How frequently did you meet with Todd Blanche after the Epstein Files Transparency Act was passed, as it relates to that -- A I spoke with the Deputy Attorney General practically every day about countless issues"
9137,10,27,Page 28,,,"around not only the country but the world that we were dealing with. As to details on it, I don't know how -- I don't recall how often. Q In relation to EFTA and the Department's obligations thereunder, what concerns was -- or, did Todd Blanche express concerns as far as releasing documents? What was he saying? Ms. Dhillon. I'm just going to point out that you can answer that to the extent that it doesn't reveal protected communications. Ms. Bondi. I can say I believe everyone was concerned about protecting victims' identities, given the 6 million pages of documents that was received and a 30-day timeline to comply with that process. BY MR. EMMER: Q And we're going to talk in more detail about what was produced. But, to start, how did the Department of Justice initially gather or collect the necessary documents or materials that complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Can you repeat that? Q How did the Department of Justice initially gather or collect the necessary documents or materials that complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Well, as I stated earlier, we -- the Department made motions to unseal things that were previously withheld from us by the courts and requested everything we possibly could, which is why there was an over-collection in documents, as well, from all the jurisdictions. And, again, that included the death of Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell's case, both of -- all of Epstein's cases in the multiple jurisdictions. Q To the best of your knowledge, what was the process to determine which documents or materials fell under the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A I believe we collected everything possibly out there related to Epstein, which is why there was such an over-collection as well."
9138,10,28,Page 29,,,"Q And, again, then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was overseeing these efforts. Is that right? A Yes. Todd Blanche oversaw the entire investigation, and he has made multiple statements and done multiple interviews regarding that. Q So let's talk about the 30-day timeline. Was the Department of Justice able to produce all documents within the 30 days? A No. And that is when I became more involved. Because we had over 500 attorneys, I believe, working around the clock to do the best we could, in good faith, to release as many documents as we could within 30 days while protecting the identity of victims. And I do recall very vividly that these lawyers were working over Christmas, New Year's, holidays to get that done, some late into the night -- I mean, 1:00, 2:00 a.m. Q And you mentioned 500 attorneys. A Plus. Q Where did they come from? A They came from our National Security Division. They came from, I believe, SDNY, the Northern District of New York, and Florida. Todd Blanche recruited attorneys within our office to come in and complete this Herculean task of millions of documents within 30 days to the best that we could to protect victims. Q I would presume that the 500 attorneys had other roles and responsibilities that they were to handle at the Department during this period? A They absolutely did, yes. Q Were there concerns about diverting resources? A Yes. And, to clarify, some may have taken this on full-time, but I believe many of them had other roles going on at the same time as well."
9139,10,29,Page 30,,,"Mr. Emmer. We've had another Member join us. Can he please identify himself for the record? Mr. Khanna. Ro Khanna, California 17. BY MR. EMMER: Q I know that you've already mentioned how many documents were produced, but, again, for the record, how many total documents or materials did the Department of Justice produce to the public pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Approximately 3 million. Q And there has been public statements, I believe, that then-Deputy Attorney General Blanche had said that, at one point, there were 6 million total potentially responsive materials. Is that right? A He did. And he has clarified that multiple times, I believe, publicly, indicating that a lot of -- much of it was duplicative because it was coming from two districts and some was privileged. And, also, he stated that some of the material had absolutely nothing to do with Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein. It was over-collection, in an effort to ensure radical transparency for the country. Q So, to be clear, there has been a lot said and accusations that the Department didn't produce everything. Attorney General Bondi, are there any documents remaining in possession of the Department of Justice that are required to be released pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A To my knowledge, they've all been released. To my knowledge. Q Why do people keep asking for the files to be released then? A The unredacted versions are also available to Members of Congress, including the duplicative material, so -- and I believe that's still available -- so people can -- so Congress can go in and see for themselves the 6 million pages versus why 3 million was released, and much of it was duplicative or privileged or completely unrelated to Jeffrey Epstein."
9140,10,30,Page 31,,,"Q At this time, I would like to introduce what will be marked as majority exhibit 3. And this is a letter that was sent from the Department of Justice to Senators and Members of Congress on January 30th. [Bondi Majority Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.] Mr. Emmer. I would also like to introduce what will be marked as majority exhibit 4. This is also a letter that was sent on February 14th of 2026. [Bondi Majority Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.] BY MR. EMMER: Q And I will give you a moment to review. Attorney General Bondi, you've had a chance to review the documents. These are the notifications that you provided Congress pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A Yes. Q And, again, you touched on it previously, but there were certain categories of documents that were not produced. Isn't that right? A Yes. Q And, again, you -- I believe one class was duplicative documents. And for the record -- I know you've been an attorney for many years, but can you just explain again what qualifies as a duplicative document? A Sure. The same document being released twice. And that occurred, I believe, because there were documents in multiple districts within the country -- specifically, I believe, the Southern District of Florida and the Southern District of New York. Q And understanding that then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was overseeing"
9141,10,31,Page 32,,,"these efforts, did he ever brief you on how many documents were considered to be duplicative? A Not specifically, but I believe it was approximately 3 million, I believe -- oh, duplicative. No, I don't -- I'm sorry -- I don't recall how many were duplicative. Q And there were certain documents that were privileged. A Yes. Q Can you elaborate more on why those cannot be produced? A I can give you an example, which would be, a prosecution memo is privileged. Q And who made the determination whether a document was considered to be privileged? A Todd Blanche, while following the law."
9142,10,32,Page 33,,,"[10:05 a.m.] BY MR. EMMER: Q And Todd Blanche never approached you about any specific documents as it relates to privilege? A Probably. I don't recall specifically, but we probably talked about it. I talked to him every day about multiple issues around the country and the world. Q And I know you touched on this previously, but the Department of Justice, according to these letters, said that there were certain files that were withheld because they are not a part of the case file for Epstein or Maxwell and were completely unrelated to these cases. Is that right? A Yes. Q Can you give us an example of what that would -- what would've been captured by that? A I believe an example that Todd Blanche used was there was someone else in south Florida with the name of Epstein, an entire case that had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. That would be an example of it. Q And, for the record, recognizing that you had to conduct a search and it produced millions of documents, if those documents were determined to have nothing to do with the Epstein or Maxwell cases, why were they originally included in this search that the Department of Justice conducted? A We wanted to have radical transparency and find everything that was related to Jeffrey Epstein, and that's why the search was overbroad. Q Thank you. I want to talk about the redactions that were in the files. What was the Department of Justice's redaction process for documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A I believe that is listed in one of Todd Blanche's memos, and he was in charge of the process and the entire release of the Epstein files."
9143,10,33,Page 34,,,"Q And, during this process, when you were preparing documents to be produced, were there concerns about what should or should not be redacted? A I believe so. Q Did you have concerns? A Yes. I had grave concerns about victims' names being released because of the volume of documents and the timeframe in which those documents had to be released, and I believe most people in my office shared those same concerns. Q And were there guidelines in place for DOJ employees on how to make redactions? A I believe Deputy Attorney General Blanche, now Acting Attorney General Blanche, laid out those guidelines for the reviewers, the attorneys who reviewed the material. And I believe some of it -- the protocol is listed in these memos as well. Q Are you aware of whether the DOJ employees tasked with conducting redactions, whether they had to undergo any kind of training? A I don't recall. I believe so. I'm not certain. Q And I recognize that you may have briefly touched on this, but were there any criteria for the attorneys that were selected to make redactions? A Criteria about the attorneys themselves? Q As far as the 500 attorneys that were selected to contribute to this effort. A Yeah. As I recall, we used many from our National Security Division because they are highly qualified and also deal with protecting victims and confidential information on a routine basis, but as well as prosecutors from multiple jurisdictions. But how they were specifically chosen, I'm not sure. Q Attorney General Bondi, did you, yourself, ever redact documents produced under the Epstein Files Transparency Act? A No."
9144,10,34,Page 35,,,"Q Were you consulted as to whether or not something should be redacted? A I don't believe so. Mr. Emmer. I would now like to introduce what will be marked majority exhibit 5, and I will give you a moment to review. [Bondi Majority Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.] BY MR. EMMER: Q This is a Department of Justice memorandum dated January 4, 2026, entitled ""Attorney Review Protocol for Epstein Files?"" A Yes. And this is from the Deputy Attorney General's Office, yes. Q Attorney General Bondi, do you recognize this document? A Yes. I have not read it in its entirety. Q Is this the document that you were referring to when I asked you whether there was a process for DOJ employees to redact? A Yes. You asked about training, yes, and this is a very detailed memo as to what specifically, under the law, can be released and what should be redacted. Q According to this document, and specifically on the top of page 6, there is a highly confidential list of victim names that must be redacted. Are you aware of a list of victim names that needed to be redacted? A Yes, not specifically what victims, but I believe that list kept growing as well. Q And I believe that you mentioned this before, this was one of your main concerns as part of producing the documents under the EFTA. Is that right? A Yes. Q Were any victims or their attorneys contacted for the creation of this list? A I believe so."
9145,10,35,Page 36,,,"Q Was the Department of Justice contacted by victims or their attorneys to create this list? A I believe so. I also believe the list was ongoing, and while the redactions were being done, I recall we would receive more victims' names. Therefore, the attorneys doing the redactions would have to go back and search for the additional names as well. Q What information would have been used to inform the list of victim names for redactions? A I don't recall. Q Is it safe to assume that Todd Blanche would've been the individual who would've approved -- A Yes. Q -- this list? A Yes. Q Understanding the time constraints related to 30 days of redacting millions of pages of documents, it seems that there were still some redaction mistakes. A Yes. Q Is that correct? And these redaction mistakes were both underinclusive and overinclusive. How did that happen? A I believe, given the volume of documents and, again, the intense, short timeframe in which hundreds of lawyers were working around the clock even on holidays to get these documents out, there were mistakes. I believe Todd Blanche said it was about a 1 percent error rate. But I would say we all believed if one victim's name is inadvertently released, that's a failure. Q If the Department was made aware of a mistake, how did it respond? A By correcting that mistake as fast as we could. Q And, again, would that have been -- fallen to then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche?"
9146,10,36,Page 37,,,"A Yes. Q Did he brief you on certain mistakes? A Not specifically, just that I recall when a victim's name -- everyone was upset when a victim's name got released inadvertently. Q As far as the victims themselves and those that may have been inadvertently unredacted in the files, did any reach out to you directly? A I don't believe so. And I believe I saw online once a victim's name, and that she said she had -- her name had been released, and that was really the extent of my involvement on that. I called Todd right away and said, ""A victim is saying her name was released, and it shouldn't have been."" But it would've been something that I saw online. Q Did the Department of Justice have any avenues for individuals whose names may have been unredacted in the files to reach out to the Department and remedy the situation? A I don't recall that process -- how that process worked, and that could've also been done with the FBI. Q Was there a team in charge of checking for and correcting any errors made in the release of the files? A Yes, done at the direction of Todd Blanche. Q Do you have an idea of how many corrections were made? A I don't. Q Before you left your position as Attorney General, were there attorneys or other DOJ employees still working to rectify redaction errors in the files? A I believe so, especially if anyone reached out to us saying there was an error, including Members of Congress, who have the ability to look at the unredacted versions. I believe they still have that ability. Mr. Emmer. We are at the end of the majority's hour, so we will go off the record."
9147,10,37,Page 38,,,"[Recess.] . We can go back on the record. Before we get started, I understand the witness has a clarification that she would like to make. Ms. Bondi. Yes. I believe one of the questions that was posed to me pertaining to Ghislaine Maxwell being transferred from a prison was phrased -- the question was phrased that she was transferred from a maximum-security prison to a low-security prison, and I don't believe she was ever in a maximum-security prison. I believe it was a lower facility prison that she was initially in, and when she was transferred, it was to a comparable prison. But, as my answer was, that would have to be for Bureau of Prisons to answer that. . Thank you for the clarification. We appreciate it. With that, we can start the hour for our round of questioning. EXAMINATION : Q Good morning, Ms. Bondi. I'll be doing most of the questioning for the minority today. Before we get started, I want to say that we are aware of your recent health diagnosis. We wish you a full and speedy recovery. A Thank you. Q If you need a break at any point today, please just let us know. I also want to thank you for your long career in public service. A Thank you. Q As you know, our conversation today will focus on the DOJ's investigations of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and on DOJ's compliance with this Committee's subpoena and the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Just a few things before we get started. First, I will note for the record that today's"
9148,10,38,Page 39,,,"interview is not being videotaped. Committee Democrats strongly disagree with that decision. We believe that Jeffrey Epstein survivors and the American people deserve to watch today's interview and reach their own conclusions, and the lack of video here today is another failure in transparency and accountability for the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. . To that end, I will introduce as minority exhibit A, this letter from a group of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors to Chairman Comer, dated May 20th, requesting that this interview be videotaped. [Bondi Minority Exhibit A was marked for identification.] : Q Ms. Bondi, I know you may have discussed today's questions in other forums. Our goal here is to create one single record that addresses as many of these issues as possible. We appreciate your patience, and we'll try to have you repeat yourself as little as possible. To the extent that any of my questions or your answers involve survivor names or other survivor identifying information, we would ask that the majority redacts that information prior to releasing the transcript publicly. And with that, we can get started. I just had sort of a preliminary global question. We will ask everything today to the best of your recollection, but the impression I got from the last round was that in a general sense on a day-to-day basis, then-Deputy Attorney General Blanche, now Acting Attorney General Blanche, had a more direct, day-to-day supervisory role over the Epstein files and related matters. Would you tend to agree with that? A Yes. He supervised the Epstein files release. Q And, with respect to Epstein files related matters that link directly to the FBI, is it correct that Director Patel would have a more intimate, detailed understanding of that than you probably would?"
9149,10,39,Page 40,,,"A Yes. Q And I think, if I heard correctly, it sounded like, with respect to this Committee's subpoena, a DOJ official named Stanley Woodward was the person to whom that topic was generally delegated. Is that right? A On a portion of the documents being released. I believe it was when 33,000 documents were released, Stanley Woodward supervised that release. Q Okay. I can ask later when we get to it, but is there a different official who has sort of been the person in charge of this Committee's subpoena since then other than Mr. Woodward? A No. Todd Blanche, I believe. Q Okay. To the extent that this is the case for other topics we discuss today, where you yourself are not sure but there's somebody else that either was managing it or in charge of it, if you could just let us know when that's the case. That's very helpful for us, and we'd appreciate it. Ms. Bondi, have you ever met Jeffrey Epstein? A Not to my knowledge. Q Is there any uncertainty on your part about whether you may have without knowing? A I was Attorney General for the State of Florida for 8 years and probably met thousands and thousands of individuals at events, but to my knowledge, I have never met him. Q Have you ever met Ghislaine Maxwell? A To my knowledge, no. Same answer. Q I'd like to ask about some potential investigative leads linked to the Epstein files that DOJ has released. During your tenure at DOJ, were you aware of any open investigations into any individual or entity related to participation in Mr. Epstein's crimes? A At one point, we asked Jay Clayton in the Southern District of New York to open an investigation, and I don't know whether that's still open or not. Q What was the extent of your knowledge of the status of that investigation as of your last"
9150,10,40,Page 41,,,"day as Attorney General? A I don't recall my last day, what was the status of it. Q Was it open as far as you knew? A I don't recall. Q Who would be most likely to know that one? Would that be Mr. Clayton? A Mr. Clayton. And we very publicly asked him to look into any other crimes committed as a result of the Epstein files. I don't know the status of that. Q During your tenure as Attorney General, did DOJ ever contact any Epstein survivors to follow up on any investigative leads contained in the Epstein files? A That would be a question for Director Patel and deputy director -- excuse me, Deputy Attorney General at the time, now Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. Q To your knowledge, did the Department of Justice ever investigate Steve Tisch for any potential crimes related to Jeffrey Epstein? A To my knowledge -- I don't know. Q To your knowledge, did DOJ ever investigate Jes Staley for any alleged crimes related to Jeffrey Epstein? A I don't know. Q To your knowledge, has DOJ questioned Secretary Howard Lutnick, Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., former Navy Secretary John Phelan, or any other administration official about their ties to Jeffrey Epstein? A I don't recall. That would be a question for Deputy Attorney General, now acting U.S. attorney -- excuse me, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. Q I'm just going to call him Mr. Blanche today. It's no disrespect; I just don't want to get tangled up with all the different titles. To your understanding, or I should say, do you have any understanding of DOJ's decision to"
9151,10,41,Page 42,,,"investigate or not investigate Les Wexner as a coconspirator of Jeffrey Epstein? A Not to my knowledge. That would be a question for the FBI. Q Is Director Patel a reasonable starting place for that type of question? A Yes. Q In the 2019 Epstein SDNY case, FBI officials identified ten alleged coconspirators to interview in connection with Mr. Epstein's crimes. . There's an email reflecting that fact, which I will introduce now as minority exhibit B. [Bondi Minority Exhibit B was marked for identification.] : Q And I'll give you a moment to look it over. A What was the date of that? Q I'll give you a copy, but the date is July 7th of 2019. Ms. Dhillon. Look at the document, but I'll make an objection. . To your knowledge, who are these ten individuals? Ms. Dhillon. And I'm going to object to this question. It's beyond the scope of the witness' voluntary interview here today, which is concerning the things that she did or was responsible for during her tenure as Attorney General. . Well, this goes directly to the Epstein investigation, and I think the 2019 investigation was also discussed in the previous round. So I'd be hard pressed to understand the nature of that objection. Ms. Dhillon. I don't know what to do to help you understand it, but it is my objection. . If you could just use the microphone so folks can hear, and I think the button there."
9152,10,42,Page 43,,,"Ms. Dhillon. Yeah. I understand your question, and it's beyond the scope. . Would it be your view that the 2019 Epstein investigation in its totality is beyond the scope of today's conversation? Ms. Dhillon. The scope of today's transcribed interview is what the former Attorney General sitting next to me did regarding the Epstein transparency files and related matters during her tenure, and that's the scope of it. . So, just sort of in a yes-or-no way, would it be your understanding that, for example, the 2019 Epstein investigation in its totality would be outside the scope of today's conversation? Ms. Dhillon. Yes. . Okay. Would it be your understanding that any Epstein-related fact or question that does not live inside the witness' date range as Attorney General would be outside the scope of today's conversation? Ms. Dhillon. Generally, yes, unless she has personal knowledge that comes from that time, i.e., postdates that time period. . Could you -- because we've had some confusion about this -- just articulate for us and for the record, the link between that objection and the agency's interest? Because our understanding is obviously you're not here as personal counsel. So I would expect to hear something like that from the witness, but why is it coming from you? Ms. Dhillon. Because we want clear testimony coming from the Department of Justice concerning what -- any witness from the Department of Justice, and that is the basis on which this witness is here, concerning her tenure as Attorney General, and so that's the scope that we've agreed to today. . The witness is perfectly capable, it sounds like, of saying she's not sure if she's not sure. So I'm not following why that would be some kind of insurmountable problem."
9153,10,43,Page 44,,,"Ms. Dhillon. Yeah, I can't help you follow it, but that is our objection and limitation today. . Okay. It's not even necessarily clear to me that that would be your place to draw that line. So we'll phrase it this way: I'll re-ask the question and, if the witness does not want to answer, we'll have the witness say that she does not want the answer and state the basis for that. Ms. Dhillon. You're not going to dictate the objections that I make, but you can ask your questions, and I will instruct the witness to answer or not accordingly, because she is here on behalf of the United States Department of Justice because her testimony is concerning that time. Yeah. It's kind of a non sequitur, but, yes, I agree. But I'm going to set up the way that this is reflected on the record just so we get that clarified. So, Ms. Bondi, with respect to exhibit B that I just provided -- and if you don't mind, it sounds like, if you could get a little closer to the microphone, there's been some problems. So with respect to exhibit B, who are the 10 individuals, coconspirators of Mr. Epstein reflected in this email? Ms. Dhillon. She's not going to answer that. . Ms. Bondi, are you refusing to answer the question? Ms. Bondi. May I have a moment to confer? . Of course. . We can go off the record if you need a minute to confer. Please go off the record. [Discussion off the record.] . We can go back on the record. Ms. Bondi. I don't recall ever reviewing this document, so I don't know who's in it, and that came from the FBI New York. : Q That's helpful. Thank you. Would Director Patel be a logical starting point for those"
9154,10,44,Page 45,,,"of us who might be interested in this question? A Or someone at the FBI New York, because that's who's on the bottom of this document. Q And so is it correct that not having knowledge of who the individuals are, you would not have knowledge of which of these folks was interviewed or not interviewed; is that right? A Correct. Q Okay. A Also, to clarify, that was 2019 and I was not the Attorney General at the time. Q Yeah. And, when that's the case, just feel free to clarify that for me. Thank you. I'd like to ask some questions about President Trump. What is your understanding of the extent to which President Trump was aware of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell's crimes prior to those crimes becoming public? Ms. Dhillon. You can certainly answer if you have any knowledge of that. Ms. Bondi. Can you ask that again? : Q Of course. What is your understanding of the extent to which President Trump was aware of Mr. Epstein or Ms. Maxwell's crimes prior to the crimes being public knowledge? A I don't know. Q During your tenure -- [Discussion off the record.] Ms. Bondi. Wait, can you repeat that again? : Q Yeah. I can phrase it again, absolutely. A Yeah. Q I just want to make sure it's clear for both of us. A Because you're talking about Ghislaine Maxwell too."
9155,10,45,Page 46,,,"Q Yeah. And I can split them up and do them one at a time if you want. A No. Go ahead. Q What is your understanding of the extent to which President Trump was aware of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell's crimes prior to the crimes becoming public? So when nobody else -- A I'm not certain of the extent of his knowledge. Q Okay. During your tenure, did President Trump direct you or any of your subordinates to take any official action related to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell? A I'm not going to discuss any conversations that I've had with the President of the United States. Q It would be helpful for us just to understand whether that's just a refusal to discuss it full stop or whether that's an invocation of some version of executive privilege. A Privilege. Q And can you or counsel elaborate a little bit on the nature of the privilege for the record? Ms. Dhillon. We're not going to get into any conversations that the former Attorney General had with other senior members of the -- executive members of the White House and the immediate staff of the President. That's covered by privilege. Mr. Guynn. I'll also add, we don't even need to formally assert the privilege in this context given the voluntary nature of these proceedings. So we're just going to refuse to provide answers about conversations with the President or his advisers. . Thank you. And, as I think you just said, those are two different concepts. So, just for clarity one more time, is this just a voluntary refusal to answer or a formal assertion of executive privilege? Ms. Dhillon. This is a voluntary interview and assertion of privilege is not legally required,"
9156,10,46,Page 47,,,"and so just telling you what's out of bounds. You're not going to get answers on those issues. It's just a choice not to answer that question, correct? Ms. Dhillon. I'm not testifying here, so I'd say, , I think you can go ahead and ask your next question. . Well, we'll just clarify with the witness. Thank you. That's a great point. : Q That's just a choice on the witness' part to simply not answer questions in the category you describe, which is conversations with the President or his close advisers. Is that correct? A And I've said that in the past on a multiple range of topics. Q But that is the case here today? A Yes. Q Yes? Sorry, I just need that last yes. A Yes. Q Thank you. To your knowledge, has DOJ released all Jeffrey Epstein-related files and documents that relate to President Trump? A To my knowledge, yes. Q It was reported by The Wall Street Journal that, in September of last year, President Trump told Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene that, if she tried to expose the names of Epstein abusers that, quote, ""My friends will get hurt."" Were you present for that conversation? A Not to my knowledge. Q Were you aware of that comment being made at the time? A Not to my knowledge. Q Do you have any knowledge of which friends President Trump was referring to? A Not to my knowledge."
9157,10,47,Page 48,,,"Q Did President Trump ever tell you that he had friends who could be exposed as abusers by the Epstein files release? A I'm not going to discuss any conversations that I've had with the President on any matter. Q There may be time -- I'll try to minimize it, but there may be times where it's appropriate for you to say that again for the record, and I appreciate your patience. I'd like to discuss some chronological events, starting with President Trump's 2024 campaign. During that campaign, then-candidate Trump promised to release the Epstein files. Did you speak with then-candidate Trump or any of his advisers about Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell during the 2024 presidential campaign? A Not to my knowledge. But, again, he wasn't the President. Ms. Dhillon. It's beyond the scope of this interview. Ms. Bondi. And, yeah, it's beyond the scope and -- but I -- : Q So it's helpful for us, does that boundary extend beyond President Trump's time in office? A Right. Q Yes? Ms. Dhillon. I don't understand your question. . I'll redo the question. It's whether, during the 2024 presidential campaign, whether you, Ms. Bondi, had any conversations with then-candidate Trump or his advisers about Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell? Ms. Dhillon. And, to repeat, this witness is here voluntarily to talk about her time as Attorney General, and that is an overarching limitation so that we can not be here all day, and those are the ground rules that we agreed to when we came here. So that is our limitation. Your"
9158,10,48,Page 49,,,"question goes beyond that. I'm just noting that for the witness. . Just to clear it for the record, we never agreed to that or were informed of that. Ms. Dhillon. Fine. . And, separately, it would be helpful for me to understand, with the question relating to candidate Trump, is that still part of the previously described concern of not discussing conversations with Donald Trump or President Trump? In other words, is it no conversations with him at any time whether or not he was in office? Ms. Dhillon. This is a separate limitation regarding the -- a temporal limitation, which has previously been articulated to you. Her testimony here today is limited to what she said or did during her time as the Attorney General. . Well, we -- Ms. Dhillon. That's the basis on which she's here today. . We blew through that one on the 2019 email, but it sounds like maybe it's a separate limitation on conversations with -- I mean, you tell me. It's just helpful for us and for the record to understand where the limitation is. Ms. Dhillon. Yeah. This is a voluntary interview. The fact that she answered a question is not relevant to the overall limitation. And we're going to be here all day if there are no limits. So that's a limit. . Definitely. This will go so much quicker if there's clarity in describing what the limits are. So let me just do the question again and -- Ms. Dhillon. , you seem determined to eat up all of your time on repeating yourself. That's your choice. But she's going to stick to the limits that have been articulated. . That's great, but we can't walk out of here confused about what the limits are. So let me just repeat this one question, and if the limit is no conversation with"
9159,10,49,Page 50,,,"President Trump in or out of office, then that's the limit. As you said, it's a voluntary conversation. We just need it on the record. So, when President Trump was a candidate during the 2024 presidential campaign, did you have any discussions with him or his close advisers about Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell? Ms. Dhillon. It's beyond the scope, so -- Ms. Bondi. It's beyond the scope of the -- I was subpoenaed as Attorney General -- or asked to come in as Attorney General. : Q Sorry, just a little closer to the microphone. A Beyond the scope. Q Okay. In what sense? I don't want to lose all day on it, but in what sense do you view it, as a witness, as beyond the scope? A I was not Attorney General at the time. Q Okay. You were sworn in as Attorney General on February 5th of last year. When was your first conversation with President Trump about the Epstein investigations? A I don't discuss any conversations, whether I've had them or not had them, with the President of the United States. Q With respect to the February 21st comment about the DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients -- sitting on my desk -- we heard the discussion in the previous round and we've heard a discussion of this previously. Just for the very last piece of clarity, to your knowledge, is the Department of Justice currently withholding a document that lists Jeffrey Epstein's clients? A To my knowledge, no. Q With respect to the February 27th meeting that was discussed in the previous round, that grouping of files, to the best of our understanding, was mostly already public at the time. Do you recall whether at the time you knew whether these files were already public or not already"