The Department of Justice said Wednesday that Pam Bondi will not appear for her upcoming deposition in the House Oversight Committee’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation given that she is no longer serving as the US attorney general.

The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general and not in a personal capacity. As such, she won’t appear on Capitol Hill on April 14 to discuss her role overseeing the release of the Epstein Files, Assistant Attorney General Patrick D. Davis wrote in a letter to House Oversight Chairman James Comer.

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Hahahah, then she can be arrested as a private citizen for contempt of Congress.

    Holy fuck these people are stupid.

  • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    31 minutes ago

    The actual letter sent yesterday by Ro Khanna and Nancy Mace to Chairman Comer explains that the DoJ refusal to have Bondi appear has no legal substance at all. It’s an easy read, so I included the text along with the source. See it for yourself.

    Note especially the assertion made in paragraph 5, “As you know, Congress’s oversight authority does not end when an official leaves office. In fact, just last year the Committee issued subpoenas to six former Attorneys General, spanning multiple administrations of both political parties.”

    Source

    Congress of the United States Washington, DC 20515

    April 7, 2026

    The Honorable James Comer
    Chairman
    Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    U.S. House of Representatives
    Washington, DC 20515

    Dear Chairman Comer,

    We urge you to make clear former Attorney General Pam Bondi remains obligated to comply with the Oversight Committee’s subpoena and appear for her scheduled deposition on April 14, 2026.

    We moved to subpoena Pam Bondi, and the Committee voted to approve this motion on a bipartisan basis, because the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) still has not complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act (Public Law No: 119-38), and because serious questions remain regarding the DOJ’s non-compliance and their handling of the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his associates while she was Attorney General.

    The removal of Pam Bondi as Attorney General does not diminish the Committee’s legitimate oversight interests in seeking her sworn testimony or the need for accountability and information about files withheld from the public by the DOJ. On the contrary, it makes her sworn testimony even more important, especially with respect to actions she took as Attorney General, matters already under investigation, and decisions made under her leadership.

    When Pam Bondi appeared last month for a briefing, you reiterated you would continue to pursue her sworn testimony and would discuss holding her in contempt of Congress if she failed to comply. She also stated that she would follow the law with respect to her subpoena, which clearly requires her to appear before the Oversight Committee.

    As you know, Congress’s oversight authority does not end when an official leaves office. In fact, just last year the Committee issued subpoenas to six former Attorneys General, spanning multiple administrations of both political parties. The American people deserve answers about whether Congress was misled and whether information is being withheld by the DOJ.

    We ask you to publicly reaffirm that Pam Bondi must appear on April 14 for a sworn deposition as ordered or face appropriate enforcement if she refuses to comply.

    Sincerely,

    Ro Khanna
    Member of Congress
    U.S. House of Representatives

    Nancy Mace
    Member of Congress
    U.S. House of Representatives

  • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Oh yeah everyone knows if you get fired from your job you can’t be held responsible for anything you did at that job

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Nah, even in that second case they should have her dragged out there in an orange jumpsuit.

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    172
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general

    That’s just a blatant fucking lie. The subpoena was for Pam Bondi by name.

  • orclev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Man, someone called this play on the day they fired Bondi. It will be interesting to see if Congress lets them get away with it or if they charge her with contempt.

  • zd9@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Burn down every single Republican (legally and politically) and start from scratch. The whole lot of them are evil and corrupt. A decent chunk of Democrats too.

    I hope she faces justice in other ways from the actual QAnon crazies who really care about the fact that Trump raped children for decades.

      • zd9@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Don’t write anything online you wouldn’t want read back to you in a court of law. The reader can infer whatever they want from any comment I write.

  • TwilitSky@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    7 hours ago

    “The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general”

    Who wrote this slop? Lindsey Halligan?

    There’s only one witness who can answer what happened and why under her tenure at DOJ.

    • chetradley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The department argued that Bondi was subpoenaed in her official role as attorney general and not in a personal capacity. As such, she won’t appear on Capitol Hill on April 14 to discuss her role overseeing the release of the Epstein Files, Assistant Attorney General Patrick D. Davis wrote in a letter to House Oversight Chairman James Comer.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Yeah I… this is amazing.

      If she is a private citizen, well now she can be arrested for contempt of Congress.

  • tidderuuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Anyone want to take a bet that the SC will vote that subpoenas have no power when this inevitably reaches them?

    They already ruled that being in contempt has no consequences.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Just to be clear, because I’ve seen it in a lot of these threads.

    She can’t hide behind the executive from contempt of congress. She may be able to dodge a criminal charge, but congress has the power of inherent contempt.

    Under inherent contempt, either chamber can direct its Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest and detain a person without relying on the courts or executive branch. The individual is brought before the chamber for proceedings and can be held until they comply or the congressional session ends.

    Congress can literally physically force a person to be held in custody until they comply. It hasn’t been used since the 1930s but it is very much a thing that can be done.

    Just like the Judicial branch doesn’t require the executive branch in order to enforce a court order or contempt. It can deputize people to see that its will is done.

    The executive doesn’t have exclusive rights to use force to compel obedience, all branches can but have rarely needed to.

    • CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Right. So we just need Congress to do something it doesn’t want to do.

      The purpose of a system is what it does.

      I swear, this midterm is going to end up with another 45-50% voter turn out and people will continue to complain that nothing changes or has gotten worse.

      People: IF YOUR VOTE DIDN’T MATTER, THEY WOULDN’T BE SPENDING SO MUCH MONEY AND EFFORT TO KEEP YOU FROM VOTING!

      I don’t care if you live in a +60 (your political leaning) district. Vote in spite of that and make it +61.

      Vote in every god damn election you fucking can, down to School District Board elections and even HOA’s. My city councilman just lost reelection by 1 fucking vote to some douchbag who will probably get bought out by some data center asshole within a week, and even though turn out was historically high, it was still only 18-20%. And when i asked my very liberal neighbor if she and her husband voted, she said “No, we just didn’t have time”. 🤦🏻

      At least in my area, you are allowed to take time away from work to vote, it doesn’t matter what the election is for.

      KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AND FUCKING USE THEM!

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Exactly, if you want the world the way you want it, you have to stay engaged in the political process at every level.

        It’s not a spectator sport.

        Vote.