Pity poor old Pam Bondi, the embattled Attorney General who’s been responsible for overseeing the publication of the Epstein files. Actually, she’s not old and I don’t feel any sympathy for her whatsoever – a less sympathetic person it’s hard to imagine.
But she finds herself in a position where the American public and Congress have been demanding one thing, but Donald Trump has wanted something different. Remember he vigorously opposed the release of the files and was – until he realised it was a lost cause – all for the pretence that there was nothing of consequence in them.
Indeed, when a female reporter from CNN, Kaitlan Collins, challenged him about the latest details of the Epstein files, Trump said it was time the American people moved on from this. She pushed back, and this was the president’s response to a perfectly polite question.
“You are the worst reporter … CNN has no ratings because of people like you … I don’t think I’ve ever seen you smile. I’ve known you for 10 years. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a smile on your face.” Fancy not having a big, beaming smile when you are talking about the sexual abuse of under-age girls.
This, of course, came after an earlier interaction with another female reporter on Air Force One. When she asked him an Epstein adjacent question, Trump just rounded on her and said “quiet, piggy.”
So back to the hapless – and some might say hopeless – Ms Bondi and her performance before a congressional committee this week. She presides over a justice department that should be more properly renamed the DVR – the Department of Vengeance and Retribution. She is there to deliver what Donald Trump wants, and he is not happy with her. Not happy at all.
So what do you do when you are giving evidence to Congress? Play nice? Listen attentively to the reasonable questions that the elected lawmakers are asking? No. You follow the Trump playbook and demean and belittle those asking the questions.
Her performance was ugly and it was awful, but she was not trying to charm the elected representatives before her, nor was she trying to assuage Epstein’s victims, some of whom were in the committee room to hear her evidence; nor was she trying to win over a deeply unimpressed American public. No. She was only trying to impress one person. And do I need to spell out who he is….?
If you haven’t listened to any of it is worth dipping into it. It was the performance of a petulant adolescent who, if was your own child, you’d be saying “maybe you should go up to your bedroom and sit and reflect on your behaviour and only come downstairs when you’re ready to behave in a more civil manner.”
The latest slew of documents to be released – astonishingly – revealed the identities of several of the victims whose names were required by law to be protected. Even nude photos identifying these young women and girls were published. Would Bondi apologise to the victims who were in the room, as she was asked to do? Would she hell. She said the congresswoman’s questioning was “theatrics” before snarling: “I’m not going to get in the gutter with this woman.”
I mean, I guess if Donald Trump isn’t going to apologise to the Obamas for posting a video on his social media platform, Truth Social, that depicted them as apes, Bondi is not going to feel much compunction to offer a mea culpa.
Another Democrat she described as a “washed up loser”. And so it went on.
But she didn’t find Republican members on the committee rushing to her assistance, as has often been the case with these hearings. That leads you to wonder whether she or the Justice Department are doing themselves any favours. They’re losing the room on this one, and despite Trump’s insistence that America move on from this, there are still far too many questions and unexplored rabbit holes to be drilled.
There are millions of files that haven’t been released. There is still a bad smell. And the protestations from the president that there is nothing to see here just isn’t washing.
Something else happened this week with Bondi’s department that hasn’t had as much coverage, but in its own way is equally significant.
I wrote a few weeks ago about the president and the Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth demanding the prosecution of 6 Democratic lawmakers who said that US servicemen and women do not have to obey orders that are unconstitutional. They became known as the ‘seditious 6’ in MAGAland. And sure enough the department of vengeance and retribution – sorry, the justice department – obliged.
The indictment to haul them before the courts was sent to a grand jury. In essence it is a jury of ordinary citizens who decide whether there is enough evidence to take the charges to trial. It is invariably a rubber-stamping operation. It was very rare that a grand jury would turn round to the prosecutors in the justice department and say you’ve got this wrong. But that’s exactly what this grand jury did. They said ‘nope’ this is flimsy in the extreme. To add insult to injury, Hegseth’s attempts to have one of the ‘seditious 6’ demoted and stripped of his rank – the former astronaut, Senator Mark Kelly – was thrown out by a district judge.
The constitution may be buckling and creaking, but there are still checks and balances, and those doing the checking are seemingly less cowed than they were.
As for the Epstein files, I suspect they will never yield all the answers that – rightly – the victims demand. They may not bring further prosecutions. But the rich and powerful men who thought they could behave with impunity are walking today a good deal more warily. And Donald Trump, though he tries, can’t will this subject away.
