Pam Bondi on the brink over Epstein crisis
But since Trump took office and installed his top law enforcement team, Bondi has overpromised on transparency and gravely underdelivered, sources lament. They explain how there isn't some trove of new materials in the Epstein child [sexual] trafficking case hiding at the FBI as Trump and Bondi suggested. Our insider said the fallout was, unfortunately for Trump, 'completely avoidable' if Bondi had a better media strategy. The President's base, meanwhile, is growing more and more frustrated over what they see as a lack of transparency, and they now believe a nefarious 'cover-up' is underway. In the face of growing distrust, Bondi is now facing calls to testify before Congress.
She's also under mounting pressure from within the online MAGAverse to step down if she doesn't plan to release promised federal secrets. Publicly at least, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reaffirmed Trump's confidence in Bondi when reached by the Daily Mail about claims she was an 'embarrassment' to the administration. 'Attorney General Pam Bondi is working tirelessly to end the weaponization that has rotted our justice system, remove violent criminals from our streets and help President Trump in making America safe again,' Leavitt insisted. 'The President is appreciative of her efforts.'
The infighting over Epstein came to a head this week when a Wall Street Journal report alleged Bondi had told Trump in a May meeting that his name appeared in the Epstein files more times than previously thought. Bondi also allegedly recommended at that same meeting that the administration not release more files because they included child pornography and sensitive information about victims. It's widely known that the president associated with Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell in the 1980s and 1990s. Trump's name is among the 'hundreds' that appear in the Epstein-related documents, which may include flight logs for Epstein's private plane and in the convicted [child predator's] 'black book' of contacts.
Trump has not been implicated in any crimes and just because a name appears in the files does not mean any individual was involved in Epstein's child [sexual] trafficking scheme. But this observation raises the question: why isn't the administration then making the full trove of documents available to the public? Two months after Trump's May meeting with Bondi, an internal DOJ memo was released on July 7. The document said that an investigation found that Epstein died by [killing himself] in prison and that no other people named in the files would be charged. It also detailed that there was no evidence of a rumored 'Epstein client list.' Conservative media personality Laura Loomer responded by calling for Bondi's resignation. 'Please join me in calling for Blondi to RESIGN!' Loomer posted to X, using a derogatory nickname for the attorney general.
'How many more times is this woman going to get away with Fing [sic] everything up before she is FIRED?' Shortly thereafter, conservative pundit Mike Engleman posted to X: 'Pam Bondi should resign or be fired. She lied! This is NOT justice.' Podcaster Tucker Carlson theorized that Bondi is orchestrating a cover-up in order to protect members of the intelligence community who were ensnared in Epstein's conduct. 'The current DOJ under Pam Bondi is covering up crimes, very serious crimes by their own description,' Carlson said. 'Intel services are at the very center of this story, US and Israeli and they're being protected.' At least publicly, the White House has tried to quash the chorus of voices opposing Bondi's leadership at DOJ.
'President Trump has assembled a highly qualified and experienced law and order team dedicated to protecting Americans, holding criminals accountable, and delivering justice to victims,' Deputy White House Press Secretary Harrison Fields told the Daily Mail. 'This work is being carried out seamlessly and with unity.' He added: 'Any attempt to sow division within this team is baseless and distracts from the real progress being made in restoring public safety and pursuing justice for all.' Podcaster Megyn Kelly explained earlier this month that Bondi's mistake was 'running all over the media looking for attention on this, yes, click-baity story.'
'Come out and give a press conference, stand there for six hours to the point where people are dying of boredom - they've asked all their questions. That's how you put a scandal to rest,' Kelly recommended. And now, Democrats in Congress want to hear from Bondi and Patel over the botched files review. Democratic California Senator Adam Schiff demanded Wednesday that the two comes testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Republicans on Capitol Hill are facing their own pressures. A few GOP lawmakers have even signed onto a discharge petition to get the DOJ to release all materials they have related to the Epstein child [sexual] trafficking case.
The handling of the Epstein files review also appears to be fueling a civil war between the DOJ and FBI. Bondi's public affairs team calls it a healthy 'sibling rivalry,' but admitted to the Daily Mail that this has likely led to a breakdown in coordination between the department and its component agency. Though, a source close to Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino told the Daily Mail earlier this month that he was considering quitting if Bondi was able to keep her job . Insiders say they wouldn't be shocked if his threats exacerbate tension between the DOJ and FBI. 'In terms of everything that's happened over the past two weeks, you've certainly seen the Deputy Director go to war, essentially, with his boss, the Attorney General,' DOJ's co-Director of Public Affairs Chad Gilmartin told the Daily Mail.
'And I wouldn't be surprised if that manifests at a staff level over at the FBI as well, towards main justice and the people that serve the Attorney General here,' he said when asked about the conflicting accounts coming from the FBI and DOJ. Administration sources say much of their frustration and headache stems from Bondi's public discussion of ongoing investigations. But Gilmartin explained how the DOJ is operating 'differently' from previous administrations. 'In this administration, it's certainly unique that you have an attorney general with a direct line and relationship to the president, and an FBI director, and, in fact, even a deputy FBI director, all with direct lines of access and relationships with the President,' he detailed.
'That is something that is certainly unique about this administration, and I think that certainly affects the staff.' He admitted this ' creates a natural tension' and 'healthy sibling rivalry.' No matter how hard Trump tries, his Epstein headache likely isn't disappearing anytime soon. Earlier this month, Trump instructed Bondi to request secretive Epstein grand jury testimony be unsealed. But a judge in the southern district of Florida denied that request on Wednesday. Meanwhile, Bondi's Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was in Florida on Thursday to interview convicted Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell in person, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for the child [sexual] trafficking crimes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Photos reveal Chile's pursuit of Venezuelan crime syndicate branded a terror threat by Trump
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
BBC News
26 minutes ago
- BBC News
US-China talks to restart as hopes grow for trade war truce extension
The US and China are due to start a fresh round of talks on Monday as expectations grow that the world's two biggest economies could agree a 90-day extension to their trade war meetings in Sweden - led on Washington's side by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and for Beijing by Vice Premier He Lifeng - come hours after US President Donald Trump announced a framework tariffs deal with the European current 90-day truce between the US and China - which saw the two countries temporarily lowering tariffs on each other - is set to end on 12 Trump returned to the White House in January, the US and China had raised import levies on each other to more than 100%. The current 90-day tariffs pause came after top officials from the US and China met in Geneva and London earlier this week, Bessent said talks with China were in "a very good place" and suggested the new round of talks could result in a second Monday, citing sources on both sides, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported that the US and China are expected to extend the truce by another three BBC has contacted the Chinese embassy in the US and the US Treasury Department for latest US-China talks come after Washington struck deals with both the EU and Japan in the last Sunday, Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a trade agreement ended a months-long standoff between two of the world's biggest economic week, Trump said Washington had agreed a "massive" trade deal with the agreement, Japan would invest $550bn (£407bn) in the US while its goods sold to America would be taxed at 15% when they reach the country - below the 25% tariff Trump had US has also struck tariffs deals with the UK, Indonesia and 10%, Britain has negotiated the lowest US tariff rate so similar breakthrough is expected from the US-China talks this week but, with expectations of an extension to their truce, there are hopes that global trade will not be hit by fresh tariffs disruption.
The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland
The first thing to say is that if it is able to break out of the factions and abbreviations which abound in the terrain to the left of Labour – and with 300,000 claimed sign-ups and a poll rating of 10% it just might – then it marks a very big change in socialist thinking. For more than a century, socialists who wanted to change capitalism have rubbed along in the Labour Party with those who just wanted a bit more from it. Now large sections of the Labour left look set to give up the ghost. For me, that ship sailed long ago. It's more than two decades since I became convinced that using the powers that Scotland would get with political independence offered a much better prospect of changing the world than trying to reform a British state run by people still steeped in the mindset of empire. READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' Nonetheless it's an important debate. The political character of England should matter greatly to Scotland and this new party might even play a role here. In one sense the Labour left has nowhere to go. Those now in control of the party have made it perfectly clear radical views are no longer welcome within it. They have been demonised and purged. Labour is manifesting every bit as much intolerance and authoritarianism in its internal structures as it does in government. But how did it come to this? A short time ago the Labour left had more power than at any point in the party's history. Corbyn was leader and commanded the considerable resources provided to the parliamentary opposition by the state. The left controlled the conference and the NEC. And the mobilisation of the grassroots through Momentum was impressive in its day. Yet within a few short years it had all evaporated. Corbyn and others left or were expelled, policy was abandoned wholesale, and the Labour conference would sing the national anthem with no visible dissent. It has been a remarkable transition both in speed and scale. In part this is because the Corbyn project failed abjectly (Image: Getty) in its own terms. Jeremy became leader by accident. And he wasn't very good at it. I watched for years in the House of Commons the breathtaking disloyalty of the right-wing Labour parliamentarians towards the Corbyn front bench. It was embarrassing. Never have I seen such hostility and hate between political parties, never mind within one. But no-one got suspended, or expelled or deselected. They were ignored, left alone to operate as a party within a party. Despite his strength in the wider party organisation, Corbyn never moved against his enemy within. Too naïve, or too nice. Either way, a fatal mistake. Corbyn also never got out of his silo, unwilling or incapable of moving beyond his natural support. He should have developed a narrative about Brexit or constitutional reform that would have galvanised a wider alliance which the left could lead. He didn't. Once defeated, his opponents lost no time in eradicating any possible legacy. These right-wing parliamentarians had been busy making plans. There were organised by a ruthless and clever Irishman called Morgan McSweeney under the banner Labour Together. McSweeney built a strategy for power inspired by Odysseus. Seeing the popularity of left policies in the party, and among the electorate, he argued for 'Corbynism without Corbyn'. But he needed someone to front it who couldn't immediately be outed as a right-wing hack. Step forward the hapless Keir Starmer. You'll cringe to look now at the ten-point platform McSweeney drew up for Starmer's leadership bid. Common ownership, higher income tax on top earners, improving welfare, and more. It worked at the time. Those Labour members who hadn't left after their leader fell lapped it up. Once in position, McSweeney and his acolytes didn't show any hesitation that might have come from wanting to be nice or fair. At breakneck speed and with ruthless efficiency they brushed aside anyone in their way, including many on the soft left, which they saw as a gateway for extremists. They won through deceit, but at the price of the party itself. Which is why we've got a new one. So, what does this mean for us? We've just got used to Scotland being a plurality in which six parties compete. Are we now to have seven? It's hard to see. Certainly, there's plenty of discontent within Labour ranks, but not nearly as much as in places like London. Besides, there's already plenty of options where the disenchanted could escape to. And across it all lies the independence question. Not really something you can avoid. Is it plausible, or possible, for a new party to say we're really radical and want a complete overhaul of the system, but we are agnostic on whether Scotland should be an independent country or remain in the UK? Especially when they would, by definition, be living proof of the failure of the latter option.
