Dem Rep Threatens Ex-AG Bondi With Contempt Over Epstein Probe

House Democrats Push for Testimony in Epstein Investigation

A leading Democrat on the House Oversight Committee is warning former Attorney General Pam Bondi that she could face contempt of Congress charges. This comes after the Justice Department indicated she would not attend a scheduled deposition. The deposition is part of the committee’s ongoing investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Representative Robert Garcia, the ranking member of the committee, stated clearly on social media that a bipartisan subpoena was issued. He emphasized that Pam Bondi was required to testify, regardless of her current or former position. If she fails to appear, Garcia warned she would face serious consequences.

Subpoena Issued Before Dismissal

The committee originally subpoenaed Bondi in March. This happened before President Trump removed her from her role as Attorney General. Less than a week after her dismissal this month, a committee spokesperson confirmed the Justice Department’s stance. They indicated that Bondi would not comply with the subpoena. Garcia, along with other Democrats on the panel and Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace, all argue that the subpoena was issued directly to Bondi. Therefore, they believe she is legally obligated to appear for her deposition.

Calls for Accountability Echo Past Cases

Last week, Representative Nancy Mace told reporters she expected Bondi’s deposition to be rescheduled soon. However, during a recent interview, Democratic Congressman Suhas Subramaniam of Virginia suggested there might be resistance from some Republicans on the committee. He believes these Republicans do not want Bondi to testify under oath. Subramaniam recalled a previous hearing where Bondi’s performance was criticized. He stated that the committee wants her to testify under oath, similar to other individuals who have appeared. He drew a parallel to Hillary Clinton, who was held in criminal contempt by the committee for not appearing, even after providing sworn statements. Bondi, on the other hand, has not even offered sworn statements.

“Bonid should be coming forward, otherwise she should face the same consequences that Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton did, which is criminal contempt.”

Precedent and Enforcement Challenges

Subramaniam pointed to the case of the Clintons as a relevant example. He noted that multiple dates were negotiated over weeks to secure their testimony. While the negotiations took time, he believes there is a clear precedent for back-and-forth discussions to bring individuals before Congress for depositions. He expressed concern that, in Bondi’s case, it sounds like even these initial negotiations are not happening. Bondi’s stated reason for not appearing is that she is no longer the Attorney General. Subramaniam interprets this as a signal that she has no intention of testifying under oath.

Questions Over Subpoena Enforcement

The core issue remains how to enforce a subpoena that is still legally valid. This is especially true when at least one Republican member, Nancy Mace, has stated her desire for the deposition to proceed. Subramaniam emphasized that the motion to subpoena Bondi was a Republican-led initiative. He believes Republicans should support efforts to enforce it. He raised a critical point about the process of holding someone in criminal contempt. Such a referral typically goes to the Department of Justice. Subramaniam suggested this could create a difficult situation, questioning who would enforce criminal sanctions for failing to comply with a subpoena. He indicated this is an issue the committee will need to examine further.

Broader Investigation and Other Figures

As the House holds the majority, Subramaniam stated his commitment to ensuring individuals like Pam Bondi testify and share what they know. He expressed concern if the Department of Justice ignores criminal sanctions for unheeded subpoenas, calling it a significant problem. He also noted a parallel between Bondi’s stonewalling and the situation with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Lutnick has volunteered to testify, possibly preempting a subpoena. Subramaniam indicated that Lutnick’s testimony might be sought to understand his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and why he is mentioned in related files. Other high-profile individuals, such as Bill Gates, are also expected to be involved in related investigations. The committee is seeking information as millions of files related to the Epstein case have yet to be released.

Ethics Investigations and Congressional Departures

The conversation also touched upon recent events in Congress, including the resignations of Representatives Eric Swalwell and George Santos. Both faced serious allegations, prompting their departures. Subramaniam, who serves on the Ethics Committee, described it as a very busy period. He stated that the rules are clear regarding affairs with staffers, which can lead to expulsion. He believes the resignations were the right course of action, as investigations often uncover further issues. He acknowledged that these public scandals undermine trust in Congress. The Ethics Committee’s role is to restore that trust. However, resignations mean that ethics investigations are no longer within their jurisdiction, although criminal investigations may continue.

Ethics Committee’s Work and Future Steps

The discussion also mentioned ongoing ethics investigations into two members from Florida: Representative Sherrill McCormick and Representative Cory Mills. Subramaniam, who is leading the investigation into Mills, could not comment on that specific case. Regarding McCormick, her sentencing is scheduled for April 21st. A public hearing has already been held, and the committee voted to charge her on almost all of the 26 counts. The next step involves determining the appropriate consequences, potentially including expulsion. Subramaniam noted that the allegations are very serious and the committee is carefully considering the outcomes.

Looking Ahead

The current Congress has been marked by significant controversy and scrutiny. As investigations continue and ethical questions arise, the focus remains on accountability and transparency. The outcome of the efforts to secure Pam Bondi’s testimony will be a key development to watch, especially in light of the historical precedents and enforcement challenges. The ongoing release of files and further testimony from high-profile individuals involved in the Epstein case will also shape public understanding and potential legal actions.

Source: Bondi should come forward or she should face same consequences as Clintons: House Dem (YouTube)