Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to get right
Speaker 1: back to that Pam Bondi interview with the House Oversight
Speaker 1: Committee question. Before you left your position as Attorney General,
Speaker 1: were there attorneys or other DOJ employees still working torectify
Speaker 1: redaction errors in the files? Answer? I believe so, especially
Speaker 1: if anyone reached out to us saying that there was
Speaker 1: an error, including members of Congress who have the ability
Speaker 1: to look at the unredacted versions. I believe they still
Speaker 1: have that ability. Mister Emmer, we're at the end of
Speaker 1: the majority's hour, so we're going to go off the
Speaker 1: record redacted. We can go back on record before we
Speaker 1: get started. I understand that the witness has a clarification
Speaker 1: that she'd like to make. Bondie, Yeah, I believe one
Speaker 1: of the questions that was posed to me, pretending to
Speaker 1: Glenn Maxwell being transferred from a prison, was phrased. The
Speaker 1: question was phrased that she was transferred from a maximum
Speaker 1: security prison to a low security prison. And I don't
Speaker 1: believe that she was ever in a maximum security prison.
Speaker 1: I believe it was a lower facility prison that she
Speaker 1: was initially in and when she was transferred it was
Speaker 1: to a comparable prison. But as my answer was, that
Speaker 1: would have to be for the Bureau of Prisons to
Speaker 1: answer that. What she doesn't say, though, is that the
Speaker 1: Attorney General is in charge of all of that. The
Speaker 1: Attorney General is in charge of the BP as well.
Speaker 1: And to help her out a little bit, because you know,
Speaker 1: she doesn't know, Maxwell was not at the same kind
Speaker 1: of facility as Camp Ryan. Maxwell was at a low
Speaker 1: level facility in Tallahassee where she should have stayed, by
Speaker 1: the way, and then she was moved to a federal camp,
Speaker 1: which is a whole last different story question. Good morning,
Speaker 1: miss Bondi. I'll be doing most of the questioning for
Speaker 1: the minority today. Before we get started, I want to
Speaker 1: say that we're aware of your recent health diagnosis. We
Speaker 1: wish you a full and speedy recovery. Bondie, thank you question.
Speaker 1: If you need a break at any point today, please
Speaker 1: let us know. I also want to thank you for
Speaker 1: your long career in public service. Bondi, thank you question.
Speaker 1: As you know, our conversation today is going to focus
Speaker 1: on the DOJ's investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and Glenn Maxwell,
Speaker 1: and on the DOJ's compliance with the Committee subpoena and
Speaker 1: the Epstein File Transparency Act. Just a few things before
Speaker 1: we get started. First, I'll note for the record that
Speaker 1: today's interview is not being videotaped. Committee Democrats strongly disagree
Speaker 1: with that decision. We believe that Jeffrey Epstein's survivors and
Speaker 1: the American people deserve to watch today's interview and to
Speaker 1: reach their own conclusions, and the lack of video here
Speaker 1: today is another failure in transparency and accountability for the
Speaker 1: survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. Redacted. To that end, I'll
Speaker 1: introduce as minority Exhibit A. This is a letter from
Speaker 1: a group of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors to Chairman Comer, dated
Speaker 1: May twentieth, requesting that this interview be videotaped. Bondi. Minority
Speaker 1: Exhibit A was marked for identification in question. Miss Bondie,
Speaker 1: I know you may have discussed today's questions and other forums.
Speaker 1: Our goal here is to create one single record that
Speaker 1: addresses as many of the issues as possible. We appreciate
Speaker 1: your patients, and we'll try to have you repeat yourself
Speaker 1: as little as possible. To the extent that any of
Speaker 1: my questions or your answers involves survivor names or other
Speaker 1: survivor identifying information, we would ask that the majority redacts
Speaker 1: that information prior to releasing the transcript publicly, and with
Speaker 1: that we can get started. And I just had sort
Speaker 1: of a preliminary global question. We will ask everything today
Speaker 1: to the best of your recollection. But the impression I
Speaker 1: got from the last round was that, in a general sense,
Speaker 1: on a day to day basis, then Deputy Attorney General
Speaker 1: Blanche now Acting Attorney General Blanche had a more direct
Speaker 1: day to day supervisory role over the Epstein files and
Speaker 1: related matters. Would you tend to agree with that answer? Yes,
Speaker 1: he supervised the Epstein file release. Question, and with respect
Speaker 1: to Epstein files related matters that link directly to the FBI,
Speaker 1: is it correct that Director Patel would have a more intimate,
Speaker 1: detailed understanding of that, then you probably would answer yes question.
Speaker 1: And I think if I heard correctly, it sounds like
Speaker 1: with respect to this committee subpoena, a DOJ official named
Speaker 1: Stanley Woodward was the person to whom that topic was
Speaker 1: generally delegated. Is that right answer? On a portion of
Speaker 1: the documents being released. Stanley Woodward supervise that release. Question okay,
Speaker 1: I can ask later when we get to it. But
Speaker 1: is there a different official who has sort of been
Speaker 1: the person in charge of the committee subpoena since then
Speaker 1: other than mister Woodward. Answer no, Todd Blanche I believe
Speaker 1: question okay, to the extent that this case for other
Speaker 1: topics we discussed today where you yourself are not sure,
Speaker 1: but there's somebody else what that was, either managing it
Speaker 1: or in charge of it. If you could just let
Speaker 1: us know when that's the case, that's very helpful for us,
Speaker 1: and we'd appreciate, Miss Bondie. Have you ever met Jeffrey Epstein? Bondye,
Speaker 1: not to my knowledge. Question is there any uncertainty on
Speaker 1: your part about whether you may have without knowing? Answer?
Speaker 1: I was Attorney General for the State of Florida for
Speaker 1: eight years and probably met thousands and thousands of individuals
Speaker 1: at events, but to my knowledge, I have never met him.
Speaker 1: Question Have you ever met Glaim Maxwell Bondy to my
Speaker 1: knowledge no, same answer. Question. I'd like to ask you
Speaker 1: about some potential investigative leads linked to the Epstein files
Speaker 1: that the dj released during your tenure at DOJ, were
Speaker 1: you aware of any open investigation into any individual or
Speaker 1: entity related to participation in mister Epstein's crimes. Answer? At
Speaker 1: one point, we asked Jay Clayton in the Southern District
Speaker 1: of New York to open an investigation, and I don't
Speaker 1: know whether that's still open or not. Question what was
Speaker 1: the extent of your knowledge of the status of that
Speaker 1: investigation as your last day as Attorney General? Bondie, I
Speaker 1: don't recall my last day. What was the status of it? Question?
Speaker 1: Was it open as far as you know? Answer? I
Speaker 1: don't recall. Question who would be most likely to know that?
Speaker 1: Would that be mister Clayton? Answer mister Clayton, and we
Speaker 1: very publicly asked him to look into any other crimes
Speaker 1: committed as a result of the Epstein files. I don't
Speaker 1: know the status of that. Question during your tenure as
Speaker 1: Attorney General, did DOJ ever contact any Epstein's survivors to
Speaker 1: follow up on any investigative leads contained in the Epstein files?
Speaker 1: Answer by Bondie. That would be a question for Director
Speaker 1: of Patel and deputy Director excuse me, Deputy Attorney General
Speaker 1: at the time now Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche question,
Speaker 1: to your knowledge, did the Department of Justice ever investigate
Speaker 1: Steve Tish for any potential crimes related to Jeffrey Epstein? BONDI,
Speaker 1: to my knowledge, I don't know. Question, to your knowledge,
Speaker 1: did the DOJ ever investigate Jess Staley for any alleged
Speaker 1: crime related to Jeffrey Epstein? Answer? I don't know. Question,
Speaker 1: to your knowledge has DOJ question Secretary Howard Lutnik, Secretary
Speaker 1: Robert F. Kennedy, former Navy Secretary John Feelin, or any
Speaker 1: other administration official about their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Answer?
Speaker 1: I don't recall. That would be a question for Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General now acting US attorney excuse me, Acting Attorney
Speaker 1: General Todd Blanche. Question, I'm just going to call him
Speaker 1: mister Blanche today. It's no disrespect. I just don't want
Speaker 1: to get tangled up with all the different titles. To
Speaker 1: your understanding or should I say, do you have any
Speaker 1: understanding of DJ's decision to investigate or not investigate Les
Speaker 1: Wexner as a co conspirator of Jeffrey Epstein? Answer not,
Speaker 1: to my knowledge, that would be a question for the FBI.
Speaker 1: Question is Director Patel a reasonable place to start? With
Speaker 1: that type of question, answer yes question. In the twenty
Speaker 1: nineteen SDNY case, FBI officials identified ten alleged co conspirators
Speaker 1: to interview in connection with mister Epstein's crimes. There's an
Speaker 1: email reflecting the fact, which I will introduce now as
Speaker 1: minority Exhibit B, and I'll give you a moment to
Speaker 1: look it over. Bondy, what was the date of that question?
Speaker 1: I'll give you a copy, but the date is July seventh,
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. Miss Dylan, look at the document. But I'll
Speaker 1: make an objection redacted to your knowledge. Who are these
Speaker 1: ten individuals? Dylan, I'm going to object to this question.
Speaker 1: It's beyond the scope of the witness voluntary interview here today,
Speaker 1: which is concerning the things that she did or is
Speaker 1: responsible for during her tenure as Attorney General. Redacted. Well,
Speaker 1: this goes directly to the Epstein investigation, and I think
Speaker 1: the twenty nineteen investigation was also discussed in the previous round.
Speaker 1: So I'd be hard pressed to understand the nature of
Speaker 1: that objection. Dylan. I don't know what to do to
Speaker 1: help you understand, but it's my objection. Redacted. If you
Speaker 1: could just use the microphone so the folks can hear,
Speaker 1: and I think the button there. Dylan, Yeah, I understand
Speaker 1: your question, and it's beyond the scope question. Would it
Speaker 1: be your view that the twenty nineteen Epstein investigation in
Speaker 1: its totality is beyond the scope of today's conversation? Dylan,
Speaker 1: The scope of today's transcribed interview is what the former
Speaker 1: Attorney General sitting next to me did regarding the Epstein
Speaker 1: transparency files and related matters during her tenure, and that's
Speaker 1: the scope of it. Question, So just sort of yes
Speaker 1: or no. Would it be your understanding that, for example,
Speaker 1: the twenty nineteen Epstein investigation in its totality would be
Speaker 1: outside the scope of today's conversation? Dylan, Yes, question okay.
Speaker 1: Would it be your understanding that any Epstein related fact
Speaker 1: or question that does not live inside the witnesses date
Speaker 1: range as Attorney general would be outside the scope of
Speaker 1: today's conversation? Dylan generally yes, unless she has personal knowledge
Speaker 1: that comes from that time i e. Post dates that
Speaker 1: time period redacted. Could you I believe we have some
Speaker 1: confus usion about this, Just articulate for us and for
Speaker 1: the record, the link between the objection and the agency's interest,
Speaker 1: because our understanding is obviously you're not here as a
Speaker 1: personal counsel, so I would expect to hear something like
Speaker 1: that from the witness. But why is it coming from you,
Speaker 1: ding bat Dylan, because we want clear testimony coming from
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice concerning what any witness from the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice, and that's the basis on which this
Speaker 1: witness is here, concerning her tenure as Attorney General, and
Speaker 1: so that's the scope that we've agreed to redacted. The
Speaker 1: witness is perfectly capable. It sounds like of saying she's
Speaker 1: not sure. If she's not sure, so I'm not following
Speaker 1: why that would be some kind of insurmountable problem. Dylan. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I can't help you follow it. But that's our objection
Speaker 1: and limitation today. Redacted. Okay, it's not even necessarily clear
Speaker 1: to me that would be your place to draw the line.
Speaker 1: So we'll phrase it this way. I'll re ask the question,
Speaker 1: and if the witness does not want to answer, we'll
Speaker 1: have the witness say that she doesn't want to answer
Speaker 1: and state the base for that. Dylan, You're not going
Speaker 1: to dictate the objections that I make, but you can
Speaker 1: ask your questions and I'll instruct the witness to answer
Speaker 1: or not accordingly because she is here on behalf of
Speaker 1: the United States Department of Justice, because her testimony is
Speaker 1: concerning that time redacted. Yeah, it's kind of a non sequitur,
Speaker 1: but yes, I agree, but I'm going to set it
Speaker 1: up that way that it's reflected on the record, just
Speaker 1: so we get that clarified. So, Miss Bondi, with respect
Speaker 1: to Exhibit B that I provided, and if you don't mind,
Speaker 1: it sounds like if you could get a little closer
Speaker 1: to the microphone, there's been some problems with respect to
Speaker 1: Exhibit B. Who are the ten individuals co conspirators of
Speaker 1: mister Epstein reflected in this email Dylan, she's not going
Speaker 1: to answer that redacted? Miss Bondie. Are you refusing to
Speaker 1: answer that question? BONDI may have a moment to confer answer.
Speaker 1: Of course, we can go off the record if you
Speaker 1: need a minute to confer. They come back on the record, BONDI.
Speaker 1: I don't recall ever reviewing this document, so I don't
Speaker 1: know who's in it, and that came from the FBI
Speaker 1: to New York. Question. That's helpful, thank you. Would Director
Speaker 1: Patel be a logical starting point for those of us
Speaker 1: who might be interested in this question, Bondi or someone
Speaker 1: at the FBI New York, because that's who's on the
Speaker 1: bottom of the document. Question, And so it's correct that
Speaker 1: not having knowledge of who the individuals are, you would
Speaker 1: not have knowledge of which of these folks was interviewed
Speaker 1: or not interviewed. Is that right? Answer? Correct? All right, folks,
Speaker 1: We're gonna wrap up right here, and then the next
Speaker 1: episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where
Speaker 1: we left off. All the information that goes with this
Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
Speaker 1: and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
Speaker 1: this episode, we're gonna pick up where we left off
Speaker 1: with the Pam Bondi congressional interview. Bondi, And to clarify,
Speaker 1: that was twenty nineteen and I was not the Attorney
Speaker 1: General at the time. Question. Yeah, and when that's the case,
Speaker 1: just feel free to clarify for me. Thank you. I'd
Speaker 1: like to ask some questions about President Trump. What's your
Speaker 1: understanding of the extent to which President Trump was aware
Speaker 1: of mister Epstein and miss Maxwell's crimes prior to those
Speaker 1: crimes becoming public. Dylan, you can certainly answer if you
Speaker 1: have any knowledge of that. Bondie, can you ask that again? Question?
Speaker 1: Of course, what's your understanding of the extent to which
Speaker 1: President Trump was aware of mister Epstein or miss Maxwell's
Speaker 1: crimes prior to the crimes being public knowledge? Answer? I
Speaker 1: don't know. Question during your tenure? BONDI wait, can you
Speaker 1: repeat that again? Question? Yeah, I can phrase it again, absolutely.
Speaker 1: I just want to make sure it's clear for both
Speaker 1: of us. Answer, because you're talking about Glenn Maxwell too.
Speaker 1: Answer yeah, and I can split them up and do
Speaker 1: the one out of a time if you want. Answer no,
Speaker 1: go ahead. Question what's your understanding of the extent to
Speaker 1: which President Trump was aware of Jeffrey Epstein or Glenn
Speaker 1: Maxwell's crimes prior to the crimes becoming public? Answer I'm
Speaker 1: not certain of the extent to his knowledge. Question Okay,
Speaker 1: during your tenure, did President Trump direct you or any
Speaker 1: of your subordinates to take official action related to Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein or Glenn Maxwell. Answer I'm not going to discuss
Speaker 1: any conversations that I've had with the President of the
Speaker 1: United States. Question it would be helpful for us to
Speaker 1: just understand whether that's just a refusal to discuss full stop,
Speaker 1: or whether that's an invocation of some version of executive privilege.
Speaker 1: Answer privilege question, and can you or your counsel elaborate
Speaker 1: a little bit on the nature and the privilege of
Speaker 1: the record, Dylan, We're not going to get into any
Speaker 1: conversation that the former Attorney general had with other senior
Speaker 1: members of the executive members of the White House and
Speaker 1: the immediate staff of the President that's covered by privilege,
Speaker 1: mister Ginn. I'll also add, we don't even need to
Speaker 1: formally assert the privilege in this context, given the voluntary
Speaker 1: nature of these proceedings. So we're just going to refuse
Speaker 1: to prove answers about conversations with the president or his advisors.
Speaker 1: Oh I bet you are. Are you guys catching on yet? Redacted?
Speaker 1: Thank you? And as I think you just said, those
Speaker 1: are two different concepts. So just for clarity one more time,
Speaker 1: is this just a voluntary refusal to answer or a
Speaker 1: formal assertion of executive privilege? Dylan, This is a voluntary interview.
Speaker 1: An assertion of privilege is not legally required, and so
Speaker 1: just telling you what's out of bounds, you're not going
Speaker 1: to get answers on those issues. Why is BONDI even
Speaker 1: here enough with a bullshit and all the people out
Speaker 1: here that are still beating the drum for Trump, Wake
Speaker 1: the fuck up, wake up already redacted. It's just a
Speaker 1: choice not to answer that question, correct, Dylan. I'm not
Speaker 1: testifying here, so I'd say redacted. I think you can
Speaker 1: go ahead and ask your next question. Question. Well, just
Speaker 1: to clarify with the witness, thank you. That's a great point,
Speaker 1: redacted question. That's just the choice, the witness part, not
Speaker 1: simply to answer the question in the category you described,
Speaker 1: which is conversations with the president or as close advisors.
Speaker 1: Is that correct answer? And as I've said in the
Speaker 1: past on multiple range of topics, question, but is that
Speaker 1: the case here today? Answer? Yes question, Yes, Sorry, I
Speaker 1: just need that last yes answer, yes question, thank you.
Speaker 1: To your knowledge, has the DJ released all Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 1: related files and documents that relate to President Trump? Answer
Speaker 1: to my knowledge, yes question. It was reported by The
Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal that in September of last year, President
Speaker 1: Trump told Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green that if she tried
Speaker 1: to expose the names of Epstein's abusers. That quote my
Speaker 1: friends will get hurt. Were you present for that conversation?
Speaker 1: Answer not to my knowledge? Question were you aware of
Speaker 1: that comment being made? Answer not to my knowledge. Question
Speaker 1: do you have any knowledge of which friends President Trump
Speaker 1: was referring to? Answer not to my knowledge. Question did
Speaker 1: President Trump ever tell you that he had friends who
Speaker 1: could be exposed as abusers by the Epstein files? Answer,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to discuss any conversation that I've had
Speaker 1: with the President on this matter. Question. There may be
Speaker 1: a time I'll try to minimize it, but there may
Speaker 1: be times where it's appropriate for you to say that. Again,
Speaker 1: for the record, and I appreciate your patience, I'd like
Speaker 1: to discuss some chronological events, starting with President Trump's twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four campaign. During that campaign, then candidate Trump promised
Speaker 1: to release the Epstein files. Did you speak with then
Speaker 1: candidate Trump or any of his advisers about Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 1: or Glenn Maxwell during the twenty twenty four presidential campaign?
Speaker 1: Answer not to my knowledge, but again, he wasn't the president.
Speaker 1: Dylan jumps in, it's beyond the scope of the interview,
Speaker 1: BONDI And yeah, it's beyond the scope questions. So it's
Speaker 1: helpful for us. Does that boundary extend beyond President Trump's
Speaker 1: time in office? Answer right question, Yes, Dylan, I don't
Speaker 1: understand your question, redacted. I already do. My question. Then
Speaker 1: it's whether during the twenty twenty four presidential campaign, whether
Speaker 1: you miss Bondy had any conversations with then candidate Trump
Speaker 1: or as advisors about Jeffrey Epstein, orgle Ann Maxwell, Dylan.
Speaker 1: And to repeat this, witness is here voluntarily to talk
Speaker 1: about our time as attorney general. And that's an overarching limitation,
Speaker 1: so that we cannot be here all day. And those
Speaker 1: are the ground rules that we agreed on when we
Speaker 1: came here, So that's our limitation. Your question goes beyond that.
Speaker 1: I'm just noting that for the witness, this is why
Speaker 1: they shouldn't be voluntary. This is all a big ass
Speaker 1: joke and the whole entire circus is being led by
Speaker 1: James Comer at the direction of Donnie Diddles redacted. Just
Speaker 1: to be clear for the record, we never agreed to
Speaker 1: that or were informed of that. Dylan. Fine, Separately, it
Speaker 1: would be helpful for me to understand with the question
Speaker 1: relating to candidate Trump, is that still part of the
Speaker 1: previously described concern of not discussing conversations with Donald Trump
Speaker 1: or President Trump. In other words, is it no conversations
Speaker 1: with him at any time, whether or not he was
Speaker 1: in office. Dylan. This is a separate limitation regarding the
Speaker 1: temporal limitation redacted, which has previously been articulated to you.
Speaker 1: Her testimony here today is limited to what she said
Speaker 1: or did during her time as the attorney general. Dylan.
Speaker 1: And that's the basis on which we're here today. Question.
Speaker 1: We blew through that one on the twenty nineteen email,
Speaker 1: But it sounds like maybe it's a separate limitation on
Speaker 1: conversations with I mean, you tell me. It's just helpful
Speaker 1: for us and for the record to understand where that
Speaker 1: limitation is. Dylan. Yeah, this is a voluntary interview. The
Speaker 1: fact that she answered a question is not relevant to
Speaker 1: the overall limitation. And we're going to be here all
Speaker 1: day if there are no limits, So that's a limit, redacted. Definitely,
Speaker 1: this will go so much quicker if there's clarity in
Speaker 1: describing what the limits are. So let me just do
Speaker 1: the question again, Dylan cuts her off. Redacted. You seem
Speaker 1: determined to eat up all your time on repeating yourself.
Speaker 1: That's your choice, but she's going to stick to the
Speaker 1: limits that have been articulated. I really dislike to meet Dylan,
Speaker 1: you know, the lady that wasn't qualified for the office
Speaker 1: that she was given. Yeah, her redacted. That's great, But
Speaker 1: we can't walk out of here confused about what the
Speaker 1: limits are. So let me just repeat this one question.
Speaker 1: And if the limit is no conversation with President Trump
Speaker 1: in or out of office, then that's the limit. And
Speaker 1: as you said, it's a voluntary conversation. We just need
Speaker 1: it on the record. So, when President Trump was a
Speaker 1: candidate during the twenty twenty four presidential campaign, did you
Speaker 1: have any discussion with him or as close advisors about
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein or Glenn Maxwell. Dylan, it's beyond the scope,
Speaker 1: BONDI jumps in. It's beyond the scope. I was subpoened
Speaker 1: as attorney general or asked to come in as attorney general. Question. Sorry,
Speaker 1: just a little closer to the microphone answer. Beyond the
Speaker 1: scope question? Okay, in what sense? I don't want to
Speaker 1: lose all day on it, But in what sense do
Speaker 1: you view it as a witness as beyond the scope question?
Speaker 1: I was not attorney general at the time. Question, Okay,
Speaker 1: you were sworn in as Attorney General on February fifth
Speaker 1: of last year. When was your first conversation with President
Speaker 1: Trump about the Epstein investigation. Answer, I don't discuss any
Speaker 1: conversations whether I've had them or not had them with
Speaker 1: the President of the United States. Question with respect to
Speaker 1: the February twenty first comment about the DOJ maybe releasing
Speaker 1: the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients. Sitting on my desk,
Speaker 1: we heard the discussion in the previous round, and we've
Speaker 1: heard a discussion of this previously. And just for the
Speaker 1: very last piece of clarity, to your knowledge, is the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice currently withholding a document that lists Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein's clients Bondy answer, to my knowledge, No question with
Speaker 1: respect to the February twenty seventh meeting, what was discussed
Speaker 1: in the previous round that grouping of files, to the
Speaker 1: best of our understanding, was most already public at the time.
Speaker 1: Do you recall whether at that time you knew whether
Speaker 1: these files were already public or not public? Answer? No question, No,
Speaker 1: you don't recall. Answer, don't recall. Don't believe I knew
Speaker 1: they were public at the time. Question, Our understanding is
Speaker 1: that none of the files were classified in the legal
Speaker 1: sense of the word. Do you recall why the word
Speaker 1: the classified was stamped on top. I don't recall if
Speaker 1: they were or weren't. Question. You may have said this already,
Speaker 1: But were these materials of the same files that you
Speaker 1: had said that we're sitting on your desk a few
Speaker 1: days earlier. Are those the same packet of files? Answer? Yes. Question.
Speaker 1: The Wall Street Journal has reported that you told President
Speaker 1: Trump last May that he was in the Epstein files
Speaker 1: and that the Department did not plan to release any
Speaker 1: more Epstein files. Deputy Attorney General Blanche was also reportedly
Speaker 1: in that meeting. What did President Trump say when you
Speaker 1: told him he was in the files? Answer? I won't
Speaker 1: discuss any conversation that I did or didn't have with
Speaker 1: the President of the United States. Question. I'll note, just
Speaker 1: for the transcript purpose, that I think the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice publicly confirmed the nature and the scope of that meeting,
Speaker 1: So that would seem to us like something that's reasonable
Speaker 1: to discuss in this forum. But I understand your position,
Speaker 1: and I'll move forward with respect to the July twenty
Speaker 1: twenty five memo that I think the majority handed out
Speaker 1: in the previous round. I think I heard, but I
Speaker 1: just want to confirm that mister Blanche was managing the
Speaker 1: process for putting together the memo. Is that correct? Answer?
Speaker 1: Which memo? Question? The July twenty fifth FBI DOJ no
Speaker 1: further disclosures are warranted? Answer? I don't recall who was
Speaker 1: managing that, because I don't think it's signed. It was
Speaker 1: just looking at that. I don't recall who managed that,
Speaker 1: but ag Blanche was managing the entire investigation. Question. Okay,
Speaker 1: the memo stated, quote, we did not uncover evidence that
Speaker 1: could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties. I think
Speaker 1: a lot of folks, now having seen the files, are
Speaker 1: having trouble accepting that claim. Would you tend to I
Speaker 1: can just read it, it's just the one sentence. I
Speaker 1: can read it back. If that's helpful answer, go ahead. Question.
Speaker 1: It was just the quote, we did not uncover evidence
Speaker 1: that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties. So
Speaker 1: I think a lot of folks now haven't seen the
Speaker 1: releases struggle with that logic of that claim. Do you
Speaker 1: tend to agree with that statement? As you sit here today? Answer,
Speaker 1: what was the date of the memo? Question? I think
Speaker 1: it was July seventh when it was released, although I
Speaker 1: don't think it has a date on it. Answer. I
Speaker 1: would refer any of that to ag Blanche. Mister Quinn redacted.
Speaker 1: Can I just clarify to your question, are you referring
Speaker 1: to the public's perception of that sentence at that very
Speaker 1: limited number of files the Department was aware of at
Speaker 1: this time this letter was drafted or later after many
Speaker 1: more documents were reviewed. Question the latter, which I think
Speaker 1: and hope it was clear in the question Quinn Okay,
Speaker 1: I don't think it was clear, So in that case,
Speaker 1: it's helpful question I can do a lead in. I
Speaker 1: think folks who have now seen the release of the
Speaker 1: Epstein files struggle with that claim looking back on it
Speaker 1: last July. Do you have a view on that statement
Speaker 1: sitting here today? Answer? As ag Blanche has said multiple times,
Speaker 1: I believe Director Patel has multiple times, and I would agree,
Speaker 1: if there is any evidence of a crime, they would
Speaker 1: ask now that people contact the FBI so anything can
Speaker 1: be fully investigated. Also, as I've stated earlier, I believe
Speaker 1: US Attorney Jay Clayton had an investigation in the Southern
Speaker 1: District of New York and I don't know the current
Speaker 1: status of that as well. Question. Thank you. All right,
Speaker 1: We're going to wrap up right here, and in the
Speaker 1: next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up
Speaker 1: where we left off. All the information that goes with
Speaker 1: this episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
Speaker 1: and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to get right back to the
Speaker 1: Pam Bondi interview with Congress. Question with respect to that
Speaker 1: memos assertion that no further disclosure of files would be
Speaker 1: appropriate or warranted, do you recall who made that decision
Speaker 1: at the time that no further Epstein file should be released? Answer?
Speaker 1: Can you point out where you're reading that question? Sure?
Speaker 1: Down at the bottom of the first page, there's just
Speaker 1: one sentence and it says the determination of the DOJ
Speaker 1: and the FBI that no further disclosure would be appropriate
Speaker 1: or warranted. Answer. I can't answer that other than that
Speaker 1: was in July, and we had sought meaning the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice to unseal in July documents from courts in
Speaker 1: the Southern District of Florida and Southern District of New York,
Speaker 1: and that was denied, I believe by both judges the
Speaker 1: release of those documents. Question if you know, would the
Speaker 1: Department have been aware of the content of the three
Speaker 1: million or so pages that we now have seen at
Speaker 1: the time that the memo was written in July. Answer
Speaker 1: I don't believe so. Question Okay, so that judgment about
Speaker 1: no further disclosure of files would be warranted was made
Speaker 1: on a lesser understanding of what the files were then
Speaker 1: as we sit here today. Answer, well, clearly they did
Speaker 1: not know that there were three million plus approximately three
Speaker 1: million pages the documents at the time. Question as far
Speaker 1: as you know, was that July memo written informed exclusively
Speaker 1: within DJ and the FBI or did the White House
Speaker 1: have any role in crafting that memo? Answer? I don't recall. Question.
Speaker 1: The month prior, in June, Elon Musk had tweeted that
Speaker 1: time to drop the really big bomb at real Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is in the Epstein files, and that's the real
Speaker 1: reason they have not been made public. Did you have
Speaker 1: any conversation with any agency or administration staff about the tweet?
Speaker 1: Answer I'm not going to discuss any conversations that I
Speaker 1: did or didn't have with the department or administration question
Speaker 1: I think or conversations inside the department I think have
Speaker 1: been discussed to a pretty good extent here today. So
Speaker 1: is there some more nuance to that idea? Answer? No question? Okay?
Speaker 1: Is it that you will not answer that particular question
Speaker 1: for the record? Answer? Will you repeat the question? Answer? Yeah.
Speaker 1: The Elon Musk tweet which was last June, mister Musk
Speaker 1: said quote, it's time to drop the really big bomb
Speaker 1: at real Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. The
Speaker 1: question was just whether you had any conversation with subordinates
Speaker 1: colleagues about that tweet? Dylan, that question calls for communication
Speaker 1: that she already said she's not going to testify about,
Speaker 1: and she already answered that, So question, I definitely don't
Speaker 1: think it does. But can you help me understand in
Speaker 1: what sense? In other words, it's not a conversation with
Speaker 1: the president, it's during her time as attorney general. Dylan,
Speaker 1: she stated that she's not going to testify about executive
Speaker 1: branch communication, and your question elicited that it was broader
Speaker 1: than the president question. Definitely, I'm not asking about presidential communication.
Speaker 1: So is the category not just president or close aids
Speaker 1: to president. But inside of DJ conversation, Dylan that question redacted.
Speaker 1: You're kind of changing the scope of your question. Actually, question,
Speaker 1: I don't think I am Dylan. I think you are.
Speaker 1: Question I'm definitely not. The question is just whether miss BONDI,
Speaker 1: and I'll direct it to Miss BONDI had any discussions
Speaker 1: that you can recall with colleagues at DOJ about the
Speaker 1: tweet that I just described, Dylan, So that's a different
Speaker 1: question than the one you had originally asked. You can
Speaker 1: answer the question if you can without revealing privileged communication.
Speaker 1: BONDI sure. I'm sure we did, because that was quite
Speaker 1: a post. Yes, but I can't recall the extent of
Speaker 1: the conversation other than did you see this question? To
Speaker 1: your knowledge, did that tweet have any impact on the
Speaker 1: department's decision to release the July memo we previously discussed answer?
Speaker 1: To my knowledge, no question, all right. I would like
Speaker 1: to ask a few questions about Glen Maxwell and the
Speaker 1: conditions of her incarceration. This topic was discussed to some extent.
Speaker 1: Bondy jumps in. Can I have a minute to confer question? Sure?
Speaker 1: Of course, answer there's something I might want. We can
Speaker 1: go off the record for a moment. Do you have
Speaker 1: a clarification, Bondy, no question. Okay, We're actually going to
Speaker 1: do a few questions from members that are here, so
Speaker 1: I'll turn that over in that direction. Now we have
Speaker 1: mister Garcia asking the questions. Mister Garcia, Miss Bondie, thank
Speaker 1: you again for being here, and again just want to
Speaker 1: reiterate we wish you a full and speedy recovery, so
Speaker 1: thanks for being here, Miss BONDI a couple questions I
Speaker 1: want to start first. There's been a reporting that indicates
Speaker 1: that you had informed President Trump on May twenty fifth
Speaker 1: that his name appeared multiple times in the Epstein files
Speaker 1: that were reviewed by the DOJ. A couple of months later,
Speaker 1: on July seventh of twenty twenty five, which was discussed earlier,
Speaker 1: the DOJ and the FBI released a memo saying that
Speaker 1: no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted. We just
Speaker 1: discussed that. Now, looking at the conversation that was reported
Speaker 1: back in May, why did you tell President Trump he
Speaker 1: was in the files? Bondi. I'm not going to discuss
Speaker 1: the conversations I did or did not have with the
Speaker 1: President of the United States, and I've said that multiple
Speaker 1: times on multiple topics throughout my tenure. Garcia, what was
Speaker 1: President Trump's reaction when you had that conversation with him?
Speaker 1: No response. Dylan asked and answered Garcia. Did President Trump
Speaker 1: at any time tell you not to disclose what was
Speaker 1: in the files? Dylan asked and answered, Garcia, let me
Speaker 1: get to Glenn Maxwell. It's clear not answering my questions
Speaker 1: about President Trump about any conversation with President Trump, what
Speaker 1: he may have directed you to do. Is that correct, Bondi.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to answer any question any conversations that
Speaker 1: I've had with the President of the United States, whether
Speaker 1: we had them or didn't have them, or the substance, Garcia.
Speaker 1: So let's look at the handling of Clen Maxwell. Obviously
Speaker 1: a convicted sex trafficker. She sentenced to twenty years in
Speaker 1: federal prison. You earlier today called her evil. We can
Speaker 1: agree on that. I wonder, just to re clarify, miss Bondi,
Speaker 1: do you think that Maxwell deserves a pardon for her crimes?
Speaker 1: Bondy No, Garcia, Okay, thank you, we agree on that
Speaker 1: as well. Now I also want to talk to you
Speaker 1: about the prison. She was moved to a less secure
Speaker 1: prison you mentioned earlier that it was comparable. In fact,
Speaker 1: that's not correct. There are four levels of prison within
Speaker 1: the GOP. She was moved to the minimum level from
Speaker 1: another level, so she was actually moved to a lower
Speaker 1: level less secure facility per BOP. We have an exhibit
Speaker 1: on it. If we need to also share that, our
Speaker 1: council can pass it around. Do you think that she
Speaker 1: should have been moved to a less secure prison, Bondy.
Speaker 1: I think any inmate should be moved somewhere where they
Speaker 1: can be safe, regardless of what crime they committed. That
Speaker 1: would be a question directed at the Bureau of Prisons,
Speaker 1: and I have full faith in Billy Marshall, who is
Speaker 1: the director of the Bureau of Prisons. Garcia, but will
Speaker 1: you acknowledge that she was moved to a less secure facility? Bondy, No,
Speaker 1: because I have no knowledge of that, Garcia. Okay, I
Speaker 1: do want to make sure that we get that exhibit out,
Speaker 1: But that is the case, she was moved to a
Speaker 1: less secure facility. Do you know if acting ag Todd
Speaker 1: Blanche ordered the move to a less secure facility? Bondy,
Speaker 1: I have no knowledge of that, Garcia. Did you ever
Speaker 1: ask anyone to move Glenn Maxwell to a different prison, Bondy.
Speaker 1: As I stated earlier, I knew she was moved when
Speaker 1: I read it. I guess Onlinor saw it. Garcia, Okay,
Speaker 1: did you talk to the acting ag mister Blanche after
Speaker 1: you read it online? Dylan on any topic? Garcia on
Speaker 1: the actual move Glen Maxwell to the less secure facility, BONDI,
Speaker 1: I don't recall. I would direct that though, to the
Speaker 1: Bureau of Prisons. I don't recall, Garcia, Okay. I just think, obviously,
Speaker 1: the move Glenn Maxwell to a less cure facility was everywhere,
Speaker 1: was being discussed in the news, a massive, obviously move
Speaker 1: that the Bureau of Prisons ended up making under whose
Speaker 1: direction we still have yet no answer on. And so
Speaker 1: it's interesting, of course that you don't recall if there
Speaker 1: was ever a conversation. Did you have a conversation with
Speaker 1: the Bureau of Prisons about the move after what happened, Bondie,
Speaker 1: I believe. I ran into them and at an event
Speaker 1: and I asked it was moved to a similar level,
Speaker 1: and they said, yes, I believe. But this is why
Speaker 1: it's not unusual. As a career prosecutor, she was on
Speaker 1: top of the news and if she was getting threats,
Speaker 1: I don't know even where she was moved where she's
Speaker 1: housed now, but if any defendant at any level is
Speaker 1: getting threats, it's common to move people within the prison system.
Speaker 1: That's why it wasn't that unusual to me. That's an
Speaker 1: absolute lie, by the way, and also nobody threatening her
Speaker 1: in the honor dorm in Tallahassee. Now you see why
Speaker 1: Pam Bondi didn't want to be under oath. Garcia, thank you?
Speaker 1: And would you agree that perhaps the question should have
Speaker 1: been directed at the Bureau of Prisons and to the
Speaker 1: Acting ag Todd Blanche. Bondy, yes, question, okay, And so
Speaker 1: mister Blanche, Bureau of Prisons, that's where the information is at.
Speaker 1: Knowing what you Dylan jumps in, I would just know
Speaker 1: a Congressman that mister Blanche actually made those remarks and
Speaker 1: said that during a briefing that you walked out of,
Speaker 1: mister Garcia. So, knowing what you know today, do you
Speaker 1: think that miss Maxwell should have been moved to that facility? Bondy? Anytime?
Speaker 1: I don't have details, and if she received death threats,
Speaker 1: what kind of threats, but anytime an inmate at any
Speaker 1: level is threatened, they will be moved. Well, that's going
Speaker 1: to be great to hear for a lot of people
Speaker 1: that are being threatened in prison right now all over
Speaker 1: the country. Pam Bondy, former AG says, you're going to
Speaker 1: be moved. Start hitting those petitions up and if you
Speaker 1: have family members in prison, time to start sending letters
Speaker 1: in saying that they're being threatened. So everybody gets moved
Speaker 1: to a camp. That's what Bondi is saying, right. It's
Speaker 1: very common among prisons, state and federal to move inmates,
Speaker 1: and she had just recently given a very public interview. Garcia,
Speaker 1: thank you. Last question. You are aware that, of course,
Speaker 1: there was the Epstein File Transparency Act that passed in Congress,
Speaker 1: but there was also an active subpoena that the dj
Speaker 1: did actually not fully respond to. Are you aware of that, Bondy,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. Could you slow down and repeat that again please, Garcia.
Speaker 1: So you're aware that besides the Epstein File Transparency Act
Speaker 1: that passed in Congress signed by the President, prior to that,
Speaker 1: there was an active subpoena passed by an oversight committee
Speaker 1: for the full release of the files, and that those
Speaker 1: two are separate Bondi. Yeah, and that's when we released
Speaker 1: I believe approximately thirty three thousand or over thirty thousand.
Speaker 1: She gets cut off by Garcia. Thank you, and we'll
Speaker 1: continue with some additional questions on that. I'm going to
Speaker 1: turn this over to Representative Frost. Mister Frost, thank you
Speaker 1: very much. One quick question for clarification for the record.
Speaker 1: The Council kept referring to your participation here as a
Speaker 1: voluntary interview. Are you aware that this committee issued a
Speaker 1: subpoena to you, Bondi, yes. Question. Do you not consider
Speaker 1: this sit down to be complying with that subpoena? Bondi,
Speaker 1: I am no longer attorney general. The subpoena was regarding
Speaker 1: when I was Attorney general. I'm here voluntarily today. She
Speaker 1: gets caught off by Frost. So is it your opinion
Speaker 1: is that you sit she cuts them off to comply
Speaker 1: with you. Frost again, So just to make sure for
Speaker 1: the record, in your opinion, the sit down is not
Speaker 1: to comply with the subpoena, but it's a voluntary interview.
Speaker 1: Have nothing to do with the subpoena issued by the committee, Bondi.
Speaker 1: I'm here to answer any questions that you have that
Speaker 1: I can answer. Regarding Jeffrey Epstein, I also came in
Speaker 1: while I was Attorney General to this committee voluntarily with
Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General at the time, Blanche, who answered many
Speaker 1: of the questions that you're asking now. However, during that hearing,
Speaker 1: I believe many of you, if not all of you left,
Speaker 1: Frost cuts her off. Yes, ma'am, Yes, ma'am, thank you.
Speaker 1: And just for a clarification of the record, now she
Speaker 1: cuts him off. So many of those Excuse me, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: I didn't mean to interrupt you. Many of those have
Speaker 1: been asked and answered by at the time the Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General Frost. Yeah, thank you, ma'am. And just for
Speaker 1: clarification for the record, you do not see this sit down,
Speaker 1: this voluntary interview, as you call it, as complying with
Speaker 1: the subpoena that the committee issued. You see this as
Speaker 1: a separate thing. Mister Ginn. I'm sure, I'm confident that
Speaker 1: you're aware that the answer to that is actually that
Speaker 1: there was a robust discussion between the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: and this committee about how the Department of Justice would
Speaker 1: fulfill its obligation in responding to the subpoena and this
Speaker 1: sit down interview right now, is the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: compliance with the committee's request to have time to speak
Speaker 1: with the Attorney General? Yeah, because comer hooked her up.
Speaker 1: Stop of the bullshit, mister Frost, so many Just for
Speaker 1: clarification for the record, is the answer, Yes, you do
Speaker 1: see this sit down as complying with the subpoena. Mister Ginn. Again,
Speaker 1: the contents of former Attorney General Bondie's testimony do not
Speaker 1: overlap with the content of Counsel's negotiation with you all.
Speaker 1: So I mean, I think the answer to that information
Speaker 1: is really directed to Miss Dillon and myself and the
Speaker 1: Attorney General. Mister Frost. Okay, So, Miss Bondie, you don't
Speaker 1: have an answer for that on whether or not you
Speaker 1: see this as complying with the subpoena. Miss Dylon, she's
Speaker 1: not going to answer that, mister Frost. Okay, So you
Speaker 1: won't answer the question. Okay, back to the Blain Maxwell transfer.
Speaker 1: Are you aware if President Trump was informed about the
Speaker 1: transfer before it happened? Bondie, I'm not going to discuss
Speaker 1: any conversation that I had or did not have with
Speaker 1: the President of the United States on this topic or others.
Speaker 1: Mister Frost. Yeah, I understand that, but it's not about
Speaker 1: the conversation you might have had with him. My question
Speaker 1: is are you aware if he knew about it before
Speaker 1: it happened, Bondie. I'm not going to discuss any conversation
Speaker 1: that I might have had or not had with the
Speaker 1: President of the United States, mister Frost. So just for clarification,
Speaker 1: it seems like you won't answer my question relating to
Speaker 1: conversations you've had with the president, but also any conversations
Speaker 1: you've had about the president. Is that true, Bondy, no question, okay,
Speaker 1: So my question has to do with if you're aware
Speaker 1: that he knew about it, not if he told you
Speaker 1: he knew about it. Gin jumps in once again, I'm
Speaker 1: just going to object to this entire line of questioning.
Speaker 1: It's just argumentative and completely unproductive. Redacted, Council. This is
Speaker 1: a transcribed interview. There are no objections. Frost. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: just asking questions and I'm just trying to understand the
Speaker 1: scope of things. Dylan. If members are chewing up their
Speaker 1: time repeating themselves, that is not our problem, Bondi. I
Speaker 1: am not aware of the President having any knowledge of it,
Speaker 1: whether it be from reading in the paper or people
Speaker 1: reporting that he did, or talking to anyone about it.
Speaker 1: I have no knowledge of that, mister. Okay, thank you, ma'am.
Speaker 1: Did anyone in the administration ever express concern about the
Speaker 1: transfer or urge Bopeter, reverse it, Bondie. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to discuss any conversations that I had or did not
Speaker 1: have with the administration, mister Frost. Okay, thank you, redacted.
Speaker 1: Just a really quick clarification, and it's not so much
Speaker 1: for you all, but more just for the record. The
Speaker 1: reference to the relationship between the subpoena, a deposition, a
Speaker 1: transcribed interview related discussions, we have not been part of
Speaker 1: those discussions and we haven't been read into those discussions,
Speaker 1: so we don't actually have any knowledge of that. So
Speaker 1: that's just for the transcript. Please continue, all right, folks,
Speaker 1: We're going to wrap up right here, and in the
Speaker 1: next episode we're going to pick up where we left off.
Speaker 1: All the information that goes with this episode can be
Speaker 1: found in the description box.