Attorney General Pam Bondi appeared before the House Judiciary Committee on February 11, 2026, in a contentious hearing marked by sharp partisan divisions over the Trump administration’s Justice Department priorities. Bondi defended the department’s record on crime reduction—citing a 125-year low murder rate and historic declines in violent crime—while facing intense Democratic questioning about the handling of Jeffrey Epstein files, alleged political targeting of Trump opponents, and ICE enforcement operations that resulted in civilian deaths in Minneapolis. The hearing exposed fundamental disagreements about whether DOJ has restored the rule of law or weaponized federal law enforcement, with Republicans praising border security achievements and Democrats accusing the administration of covering up Epstein’s co-conspirators while pursuing vendetta prosecutions against figures like New York Attorney General Letitia James. The testimony revealed ongoing investigations into John Brennan for allegedly lying to Congress, the establishment of a National Fraud Enforcement Division targeting benefit fraud, and unresolved tensions over the release of three million pages of Epstein documents that survivors say failed to protect victim identities while redacting perpetrator names. Assistance from Claude AI.

---

Participants

Committee Leadership

• Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) – Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
• Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) – Ranking Member, House Judiciary Committee

Witness

• Honorable Pamela J. Bondi – Attorney General of the United States (sworn in February 5, 2025; previously Florida Attorney General for two terms and prosecutor for 18 years)

Committee Members Who Questioned the Witness

Republicans:

• Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) – Chairman, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet
• Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ)
• Rep. Lance Gooden (R-TX)
• Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-WI)
• Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ)
• Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI)
• Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL)
• Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA)
• Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA)

Democrats:

• Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)
• Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY)
• Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)
• Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN)
• Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA)
• Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA)
• Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA)
• Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA)
• Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA)
• Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) [Democrat in this context]
• Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO)

Others Present

• Jeffrey Epstein survivors – Multiple survivors and family members of late survivors attended, including Teresa Helm, Jess Michaels, Laura Bloom McGee, Dannie Bensky, Liz Stein, Marina Lacerda, Sky and Amanda Roberts (family of late Virginia Giuffre), Sharlene Rochard, and Lisa Phillips

---

Detailed Breakdown by Topic

Opening Statements: Framing the Partisan Divide

Chairman Jordan’s Opening Statement set the Republican narrative, focusing on three main themes: the danger of sanctuary jurisdictions, the weaponization of DOJ under the Biden administration, and the restoration of law and order under Trump.

Jordan began with a detailed case study of Abraham Gonzalez, an illegal immigrant who was arrested by Border Patrol on September 20, 2023, released into the country, then charged with assault (February 26, 2024), felony motor vehicle theft (March 11, 2024), and arrested by Denver Police (March 20, 2024). Despite ICE filing a detainer notice on March 22, 2024—requesting 48 hours notice before release—Denver released Gonzalez on February 28, 2025, without notifying ICE. Jordan emphasized that Gonzalez was classified as “violent to the staff” and marked “keep separate” during his 345 days in detention, yet was released to the streets where he subsequently assaulted an ICE officer during apprehension.

Jordan cited staggering statistics on detainer non-compliance: 1,360 detainer notices for violent offenders in Minnesota (with Governor Walz releasing 470), 7,000 in New York State, and over 17,864 nationwide since President Trump took office. He described these releases as “jeopardizing the safety of the public, the safety of law enforcement,” and contributing to tragic deaths.

On Biden-era weaponization, Jordan catalogued what he characterized as systematic abuse: calling parents domestic terrorists, using FBI SWAT teams to arrest pro-life advocates, targeting traditional Catholics, pressuring social media companies to censor Americans, and launching two investigations into President Trump that cost over $35 million. He noted the Biden DOJ sought phone records of over a dozen Republican members of Congress, obtained bank records for scores of White House officials, and paid at least one confidential human source $20,000 for information on President Trump—all while being unable to identify who planted pipe bombs, leaked the Dobbs opinion, or brought cocaine into the White House.

Jordan praised the Trump Justice Department’s achievements: murders down 20% nationwide, DC violent crime down 28%, the federal surge in DC resulting in 8,000 arrests, seizure of 800 illegal guns, recovery of 16 missing kids, apprehension of a suspect in the pipe bomb investigation, and arrest of six of the FBI’s top 10 most wanted fugitives in just one year.

Ranking Member Raskin’s Opening Statement presented a dramatically different narrative, centered on victimization, coverup, and corruption.

Raskin began by acknowledging the Epstein survivors seated behind Bondi, introducing them by name and criticizing Bondi for not meeting with them despite their demands for accountability. He accused the DOJ of “running a massive Epstein coverup,” noting that Congress ordered release of six million documents but DOJ turned over only three million, claiming the rest were “duplicative.” In the half produced, Raskin said, DOJ redacted names of abusers, enablers, accomplices, and co-conspirators to “spare them embarrassment and disgrace”—the opposite of what the law required. Worse, DOJ “shockingly failed to redact many of the victims’ names,” exposing survivors who had kept their trauma private, even from family and friends, on “thousands of pages for the world to see.”

Raskin accused Bondi of acting with “a mixture of staggering incompetence, cold indifference, and jaded cruelty towards more than 1,000 victims.” He described how Ghislaine Maxwell was moved from higher security prison to a minimum security camp in Texas after Todd Blanche (Bondi’s deputy) spent nine hours with her and satisfied himself she would have “nothing untoward to say about Donald Trump.”

On Minneapolis enforcement, Raskin accused Bondi of abandoning victims: When the FBI opened a criminal investigation into the killing of Renée Good (a 37-year-old mother of three and poet) by “Trump’s masked paramilitary ICE agents,” Bondi shut it down. Similarly, Raskin questioned how DOJ could be trusted to investigate the death of Alex Pretti (an ICU nurse at the VA) when President Trump and Kristi Noem called him a domestic terrorist and Stephen Miller called him a would-be assassin. Raskin said DOJ refused to share evidence with state and local investigators in Minnesota and blocked their access to the crime scene.

Raskin catalogued other alleged victims: Marimar Martinez (Montessori school teacher in Chicago shot five times by a border patrol agent who bragged about it on text), Keith Porter (father of two shot and killed by an off-duty ICE agent in LA), and Silverio Villegas González (shot and killed in Illinois minutes after dropping his kids off at school). No movement from DOJ on any of these cases.

The ranking member accused Bondi of turning DOJ into “Trump’s instrument of revenge,” noting that Trump “orders up prosecutions like pizza” for James Comey, Letitia James, Lisa Cook, Jerome Powell, and members of Congress including Adam Schiff, Mark Kelly, Elissa Slotkin, Chrissy Houlahan, Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, and Maggie Goodlander.

Raskin highlighted resignations of career prosecutors who refused corrupt orders: Danielle Sassoon (Bondi’s original pick for acting US Attorney Manhattan, a Federalist Society member who clerked for Justice Scalia) resigned rather than quash the indictment against Mayor Eric Adams as a political favor. Her top assistant, Hagen Scotten (an Iraq War vet, two-time Bronze Star recipient who clerked for Chief Justice Roberts and then-Judge Kavanaugh), promptly resigned too, writing: “I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool, or enough of a coward, to file your motion, but it was never going to be me.”

Raskin described how Erik Siebert (nominated by Trump as US Attorney for Eastern District of Virginia) was forced out after five months investigating Letitia James and James Comey yielded no evidence to justify criminal charges. He was replaced with Lindsay Halligan, Trump’s personal lawyer from the Mar-a-Lago documents case with “zero prosecutorial experience and no qualifications,” whose appointment a federal judge found “blatantly unlawful,” throwing out her indictments entirely.

Raskin reported that two different grand juries in Virginia voted down indictments against Letitia James in a single week, and “just yesterday, another grand jury shut down your vendetta factory” by rejecting indictments against six members of Congress who are veterans, charged with seditious conspiracy “simply for exercising their First Amendment rights” by speaking out to remind service members they have a duty to refuse illegal orders.

He concluded by noting judges have excoriated DOJ lawyers for lying in court, with Chief Judge Boasberg in DC suggesting DOJ “perpetrated a fraud on the court,” and other judges finding DOJ statements “inexplicably misleading, patently incredible, totally inconsistent, and so disingenuous that the court is left with little confidence that the government can be trusted to tell the truth about anything.”

Raskin warned Bondi not to waste time by evading questions, changing subjects, or engaging in personal attacks, referencing her Senate testimony where she brought a “Burn Book” of smears. He demanded she answer questions directly and stop speaking when members reclaim their time.

Attorney General Bondi’s Opening Testimony

Bondi focused on three main themes: crime reduction achievements, immigration enforcement challenges, and defending the Epstein files release.

On crime reduction, Bondi touted historic achievements: 2025 saw the lowest murder rate in 125 years. Comparing 2025 to 2024: murder rate down 21%, robbery down 23%, carjacking down 43%, gun assault down 22%, with similar declines across other categories. She attributed this to “President Trump’s policies have saved lives.”

The trend was especially clear in Washington DC and Memphis, where DOJ surged law enforcement resources and “crime plummeted in both cities.” Bondi emphasized working with Democratic mayors: “Public safety does not have a party registration.”

On sanctuary jurisdictions, Bondi noted that some elected officials have declared themselves “at war” with the federal government and encouraged “widespread obstruction of law enforcement,” resulting in “avoidable clashes on the streets” including “rioters storming a Christian church.” DOJ has made “dozens of arrests in and around Minneapolis so far, and many of them could have been avoided by simple compliance with federal law.”

Bondi highlighted strikes against MS-13, TDA (Tren de Aragua), the Sinaloa Cartel, and Antifa. She noted morning news reports of “cartel drones being shot down by our military.”

On drug enforcement, Bondi reported that in 2025, DEA agents seized more than 47 million fentanyl pills and more than 9,800 total kilos of fentanyl, representing 369 million potentially deadly doses.

On legal challenges to the administration, Bondi said: “This administration has been sued 627 times. We’ve fought through a nonstop flood of bad faith, temporary restraining orders from liberal activist judges across this country.” Despite this “unprecedented judicial activism,” DOJ has attained 24 favorable rulings at the US Supreme Court on its emergency docket.

Bondi described ending weaponization by “dropping FACE Act prosecutions, exposing the Arctic Frost scandal via congressional disclosure, and restoring one tier of justice in this country.”

On the Epstein files, Bondi defended the release: “More than 500 attorneys and reviewers spent thousands of hours, painstakingly reviewing millions of pages to comply with Congress’s law. We’ve released more than three million pages, including 180,000 images, all to the public, while doing our very best in the timeframe allotted by the legislation to protect victims.” She noted that when members brought inadvertently released victim names to DOJ’s attention, they “immediately redacted it.”

Bondi invited all members of Congress to visit DOJ “to see for yourselves.” She addressed the survivors directly: “I’m a career prosecutor, and despite what the ranking member said, I have spent my entire career fighting for victims, and I will continue to do so. I am deeply sorry for what any victim has been through, especially as a result of that monster.”

She encouraged survivors to contact the FBI if they have information about “anyone who has hurt you or abused you,” promising that “any accusations of criminal wrongdoing will be taken seriously and investigated” and that DOJ is “committed to holding criminals accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”

Bondi reported that in 2025, the FBI arrested over 1,700 child predators (a 10% increase from 2024), located 2,700 victims of child exploitation, and shut down 3.8 million dark web pedophile accounts.

Sanctuary Jurisdictions and Immigration Enforcement

Rep. Issa began Republican questioning by praising Bondi’s work reducing the backlog of immigration cases—getting ahead of the “tremendous backlog that caused… the release of millions of people with little pieces of paper saying ‘Come back later when we call you.’”

Issa emphasized that ICE detainers and similar documents from Article I judges (including immigration judges and bankruptcy judges) “act like warrants” and should be respected by state officials, countering what he saw as Democratic misunderstanding of their legal authority. Bondi agreed, noting DOJ is “always recruiting and looking for judges” and has “even added some JAG officers as immigration judges.”

Rep. Cohen (D-TN) offered a more nuanced view on Memphis, noting that the Memphis Safe Task Force has been operating for several months with the cooperation of Democratic Mayor Paul Young. Cohen distinguished between support for the task force (including DEA, ATF, and FBI presence) and opposition to ICE and National Guard presence in Memphis.

Cohen provided context on crime reduction: Memphis crime went down 25% before the task force arrived under Mayor Young and Chief Davis, then dropped another 15% since. However, he noted that Mexico City’s homicide rate went down 40% during the same period, suggesting the Memphis decline wasn’t solely attributable to the task force.

Cohen raised a critical policy concern: DOJ is running TV ads encouraging local law enforcement to leave their departments and join ICE, offering $50,000 bonuses, student debt payoff, and pension assistance. Cohen argued this was backwards: “We need people working in the front lines of local law enforcement to protect our citizens from the worst of the worst.” He cited a Department of Justice National Institute of Justice report based on arrest records in Texas and California finding that “undocumented immigrants were less than half as likely as US-born Americans to be arrested for homicide,” with the same pattern holding for assault, sexual assault, robbery, burglary, theft, arson, and drug offenses.

Bondi responded that DOJ needs “strong people in both local law enforcement, state law enforcement, and all of our federal agencies working together,” citing Memphis achievements: “nearly 6,000 arrests as of February 8th,” “almost 600 gang members” taken off the streets, and 148 missing children recovered by federal and local agencies working together, along with “nearly 1,000 illegal guns seized.”

Cohen pushed back on the deaths of Mr. Pretti and Ms. Goode in Minneapolis, calling them executions and criticizing DOJ for not investigating ICE agents while trying to investigate the victims: “They were executed like Kristi Noem executed her dog, and that was wrong. And you should investigate those people and you should investigate anybody that uses a weapon, federal official or not, for civil rights violations.”

Rep. Van Drew (R-NJ) provided strong support for immigration enforcement, contrasting the prior administration’s record with current efforts. He cited statistics from 2020-2024: over 10 million illegal crossings, more than 300 individuals on the terror watch list, 73,000 illegals with criminal histories, 20,000 with convictions of assault, robbery and sex offenses, and 13,000 convicted murderers.

Van Drew emphasized cooperation between federal and local enforcement, asking Bondi why Minneapolis situations requiring crowd control occur. Bondi explained: “I spent four days myself in Minnesota and Minneapolis. What I will say about some of these sanctuary cities… law enforcement, they quietly want to work with us. I’ve spoken to law enforcement in multiple cities who want to work with us.” She committed to doing “everything we can to keep our citizens safe, whether or not these Democrat-controlled sanctuary cities do or don’t.”

Rep. Kiley (R-CA) highlighted the consensus that existed even among Democrats that custodial handoffs to immigration authorities are safer than releasing individuals to the community. He quoted Alejandro Mayorkas from a previous committee appearance: “I do not consider it in the service of public safety to release an individual into the community when that individual can be released to immigration and customs enforcement for prompt removal.”

Kiley noted that his state of California “systematically” does “precisely the thing that even Alejandro Mayorkas said threatens public safety.” He connected this to Homeland Security funding discussions, arguing that “common sense reforms” must go hand-in-hand with “reforming this reckless practice of refusing to cooperate, refusing to honor detainers, and declaring oneself to be a sanctuary.”

Bondi provided California-specific statistics that illustrated her concerns: “California refuses to honor detainees because of its dangerous sanctuary city policies. The refusal means California has released 4,561 criminal illegal aliens onto its streets. The crimes of these aliens include 31 homicides, 661 assaults, 574 burglaries, 184 robberies, 1,489 dangerous drug offenses, 379 weapons offenses, and 234 sexual predator offenses.”

The Epstein Files Controversy

The handling of Jeffrey Epstein files dominated much of the hearing, with survivors seated directly behind Attorney General Bondi serving as a powerful visual reminder of the stakes involved.

Rep. Jayapal (D-WA) began the Democratic assault on this issue by displaying redacted documents. She showed an email from Epstein to a man whose name was redacted, reading: “Where are you? Are you okay? I loved the torture video.” Only after members of Congress demanded to see unredacted files did the world learn the name: Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, chairman and CEO of a company with financial ties to Trump’s business and personal ties to Steve Bannon.

Jayapal contrasted this with failures to protect victims: displaying an email titled “Epstein Victim List” with 32 survivor names, DOJ initially released it with only one name redacted. She described how DOJ released “not only the names, the emails, and the addresses of survivors, but also nude photographs, and even the identities of Jane Does who had been protected for decades until your department released their names.”

Jayapal asked the survivors in the room to stand if they had still not been able to meet with DOJ—every single survivor raised their hand. She then asked Bondi to “turn to them now and apologize for what your Department of Justice has put them through with the absolutely unacceptable release of the Epstein files and their information.”

This request sparked a contentious exchange:

Bondi: “Congresswoman, you sat before… Merrick Garland sat in this chair twice.”

Jayapal: “Attorney General Bondi, I’m going to reclaim my time because I asked you a specific question.”

Bondi: “Twice. No. Can I finish my answer?”

Jordan: “The Attorney General can respond to the question.”

Jayapal: “Will you turn to the survivors? This is not about anybody that came before you. It is about you taking responsibility for your Department of Justice and the harm that it has done to the survivors who are standing right behind you, and are waiting for you to turn to them and apologize for what your Department of Justice has done.”

Bondi refused to apologize, calling the exchange “theatrics” and accusing Jayapal of being “unprofessional.” Jayapal concluded: “What a massive cover up this has been, and continues to be. Donald Trump made the release of the Epstein files the center of his political campaign because he thought it would benefit him. Then you got into office, Attorney General, claimed to have a client list, only to then say that there was no list. Your deputy, Todd Blanche, met alone with Ghislaine Maxwell and transferred her to a minimum security prison. And now, you continue the cover up.”

Rep. Nadler (D-NY) focused on the failed prosecutions of Attorney General Letitia James. He outlined the sequence: Trump appointee Erik Siebert refused to bring charges against James because “there was simply no evidence.” After being forced out, Lindsay Halligan (Trump’s former defense lawyer who had never prosecuted a case) was installed to replace Siebert. A federal court dismissed the indictment because Halligan was illegally appointed.

Undeterred, DOJ tried twice to indict James in separate courts. “Both grand juries rejected you and refused to indict her,” Nadler said. “It is practically unheard of for a grand jury to refuse an indictment. In 2016, it happened in just 6 cases out of over 150,000 offenses. And you had it happen twice in the same week in two different courts.”

Nadler listed Trump’s reported enemies under investigation: “Jerome Powell and Lisa Cook at the Federal Reserve, James Comey, numerous Democratic members of Congress, John Brennan, Jack Smith, Democratic officials of Minnesota, Chris Krebs, Miles Taylor, and more.”

He asked: “How many of Epstein’s co-conspirators have you indicted? How many perpetrators are you even investigating?”

Bondi attempted to respond by discussing Trump’s impeachments, leading to multiple exchanges of “reclaiming my time.” Eventually Nadler concluded: “The answer to my question, how many of Epstein’s co-conspirators has she indicted, is zero. You have been the attorney general for a whole year… None of the perpetrators have been brought to justice, but enormous resources dedicated to going after Trump’s political enemies.”

Rep. Lofgren (D-CA) visited DOJ headquarters to review the files, finding the transparency argument “a sham because it’s not really possible” to adequately review materials with only four computers available for 35 House members. She raised the issue of Trump’s name being redacted despite being mentioned “thousands of times” in the files, citing Director Patel’s testimony that “up to a thousand FBI agents had gone through the files and redacted President Trump’s name from them.”

Lofgren displayed two specific documents: First, an individual emailing Epstein asking whether a woman identified as “M” was “pro or civilian,” with Epstein responding she was “a civilian, Russian, and fun.” Second, an email from Epstein to Steve Tisch about a Ukrainian girl, noting she was “a little freaked out by the age difference” and that Epstein would “try to convince her not to return to Ukraine,” instructing Tisch to call him, adding “I don’t like records of these conversations.”

Lofgren asked whether these emails constitute “credible evidence warranting further investigation into whether Steve Tisch was involved in Epstein’s criminal conduct.” Bondi refused to play a “yes-no game,” saying she would “look into anything” and that “documents have been released, 3 million.”

Lofgren pressed on Director Patel’s testimony that there was “no credible information indicating that Epstein trafficked victims to anyone else,” which she said the documents clearly disprove. She noted that in July, DOJ issued a memo stating it had “conducted an exhaustive review of the Epstein files and concluded that no additional individuals would be charged.”

During her visit to DOJ, Lofgren saw “a US attorney information for the Southern District of New York indicating that there were additional survivors and probable co-conspirators,” and “other members of Congress have uncovered likely co-conspirators whose names were blocked out.”

Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA) brought a victim-centered perspective, emphasizing that “the biggest challenge to solving sex crimes is reporting them.” He asked the survivors to stand and raise their hands if they felt confident DOJ had their back—implying none did.

Correa emphasized the message being sent: “We’ve got to make sure that victims stand up and report the crimes. Otherwise, we’re going to be taking step backwards.” He noted that “it looks like you want to cover up for” the perpetrators, saying “It looks like very powerful people… This was a very expensive business, and we don’t know who they are. I would imagine they’re very prominent Republicans, very prominent Democrats, and we are covering up for them.”

Rep. Lieu (D-CA) displayed two photos of former Prince Andrew at parties with Epstein, showing that DOJ redacted the victim’s face (following the law) but not Prince Andrew’s. “You have now established that we are looking at a sex trafficking victim,” Lieu said. “Under the Federal Victim’s Trafficking Protection Act, not only is Jeffrey Epstein guilty, but anyone who patronizes Epstein’s sex operation is also guilty of a crime. That’s why I find it absolutely despicable that you sought to protect Epstein’s clients like former Prince Andrew.”

Lieu referenced the July 2025 DOJ memo stating “we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties,” calling the photos “evidence of a crime and more than enough evidence to predicate an investigation.” He asked: “Why did you shut down this investigation last July and why have you not prosecuted former Prince Andrew?”

When Bondi deflected to Merrick Garland, Lieu agreed the Biden administration “dropped the ball” along with Attorney General Bill Barr and Alex Acosta, but emphasized: “You are in charge. You have the power to change things, to hold these men accountable and you’re doing the opposite. You’re protecting them.”

Lieu then showed a video of Trump at an Epstein party, asking: “Were there any underage girls at that party or at any party that Trump attended with Jeffrey Epstein?” Bondi responded: “There is no evidence that Donald Trump has committed a crime.”

Lieu interjected: “Let me claim my time. I got your answer. You said ‘There’s no evidence.’” He then displayed a document from a witness who called the FBI’s National Threat Operation Center, stating: “I believe you just lied under oath. There is ample evidence in the Epstein file… Here is a witness statement who called into the FBI’s Threat Operation Center. He drove Donald Trump around in a limo. He overheard what Donald Trump said to Jeffrey on his cell phone. He was so angry he was going to stop a limo and hurt Donald Trump. And he met a girl who said she was raped by Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. She later had her head blown off and officers at the scene said that could not have been suicide. No one at the Department of Justice interviewed this witness.”

Lieu concluded: “Epstein should rot in hell, so should the men who patronize his operation. And as we sit here today, there are over 1,000 sex trafficking victims and you have not held a single man accountable. Shame on you. If you had any decency, you would resign right after this hearing concludes.”

Rep. Thomas Massie (listed as Democrat in context, likely R-KY based on previous references) displayed three documents emblematic of DOJ’s failures:

1. An email from victims’ lawyers to DOJ listing survivor names “not to redact” or “not to release”—which DOJ then released, “literally the worst thing you could do to the survivors.” The email had one name redacted (and the lawyer’s name), but left survivors’ names exposed.
2. A document titled “Child Sex Trafficking, Co-conspirators, Fully Redacted” which he unredacted to show Les Wexner is listed “as a co-conspirator. Not to tax evasion, but to child sex trafficking. Not to prostitution, not to money laundering, child sex trafficking.”
3. FD302 forms with redactions behind redactions, making them impossible to view even at DOJ headquarters: “When you go to the portal at the DOJ to look at what’s behind this redaction? Another redaction.”

Massie asked whether DOJ could track who made these failures. Bondi responded that Wexner’s name appeared “more than 4,000 times” and they “corrected that within 40 minutes.” Massie shot back: “Within 40 minutes of me catching you red-handed” where he’s “listed as a co-conspirator.”

The exchange devolved with Bondi calling Massie someone with “Trump derangement syndrome” and “a failed politician.”

Massie played video of Director Patel saying there was “no credible information” that Epstein “trafficked to other individuals,” asking if that was Bondi’s position. She responded: “Any victim who comes forward, of course, we would love to hear from them. 1-800-call FBI.”

Massie pressed on when FBI and DOJ decided Les Wexner was not a co-conspirator, noting the Epstein Files Transparency Act “requires you to release the internal decision about whether to prosecute him or not. And it’s not in the files, and it’s not in the files for any of these other men.”

Before Massie’s time expired, Bondi attacked him for voting “against the ban on deep fake AI porn,” calling him a “hypocrite.”

FISA Abuse, Arctic Frost, and Congressional Surveillance

Rep. Biggs (R-AZ) focused extensively on FISA Section 702 abuse and the Arctic Frost investigation, a matter of critical importance given revelations that Jack Smith’s investigation improperly used foreign intelligence authorities against President Trump and members of Congress.

Biggs began by referencing Bondi’s January 2025 Senate testimony where she agreed with Senator Lee that “anytime an American citizen’s private communications are intercepted or stored, whether through incidental collection or otherwise, those communications should not be searched without some showing of probable cause.”

During the most recent FISA reauthorization, Biggs offered an amendment “to establish a clear warrant requirement for searches of Americans’ data, while preserving every publicly cited operational exception, including emergencies, defensive queries, cybersecurity threats.” His intent was “to ensure the Department of Justice could continue to keep Americans safe while also ending warrantless searches of US persons’ data.”

Biggs asked if there were “any additional circumstances or exceptions” beyond his amendment that DOJ believes necessary. Bondi responded: “We are committed to working with Congress to uncover weaponization and other misconduct by Jack Smith, by others, Arctic Frost, everything that happened under the past administration. We are working with you on that. And we are working with Chairman Jordan, with the House Intel, with all of my fellow cabinet members on resolving that issue.”

On Arctic Frost specifically, Biggs asked: “Section 702 was used in the Arctic Frost investigation… and information derived was used by Special Counsel Jack Smith. My question has always been, and no one’s been able to answer this, is what was the legal predicate for using a foreign intelligence authority in the Arctic Frost investigation? Have you been able to ascertain any legal predicate?”

Bondi’s response was revealing: “What I can tell you today is that has been referred to my office. I can’t discuss anything regarding that because it is very active and ongoing.”

Biggs pressed further: “Can you answer whether Section 702 queries related to that matter involved members of Congress, which we know, on some level, it did. Congressional staff, which we know, at some level, did. We’ve heard that journalists or other US persons not suspected of acting as foreign agents were also caught up in that?”

Bondi acknowledged the gravity: “It is a very active, pending investigation within my office. However, I believe many members of Congress have stated that their phones were part of Arctic Frost. We are well aware of that. And we are taking this very seriously, and this is a very active investigation. And I would keep going and say if any member of the Democrat Party, if any of them, if that had happened to them, we would take that just as serious as we do. And they should be jumping up and down, screaming, supporting you and what you want to do, because this should be a bipartisan issue.”

Biggs concluded by asking for information on the extent of 702 queries: “How many such queries were actually conducted overall? This is outside of Arctic Frost in the prior year by the FBI or other intelligence community. And particularly, we really need to know what were these legal standards applied? Did they use probable cause? Did they use reasonable, articulable suspicion, or did they have no individualized suspicion and just were gathering up information?”

Bondi confirmed: “It was extensive, yes, Congressman.”

Rep. Fitzgerald (R-WI) revealed he was among the victims: “Yesterday, Senator Grassley reached out to my office to tell me that I was one of the 20 members that was now disclosed were under surveillance from Jack Smith.” He asked about non-disclosure orders (NDOs) and whether they should apply to members of Congress.

Bondi affirmed: “Anyone’s records who were illegally obtained, Democrat or Republican, we will fight vigorously to stop that. Anything with Arctic Frost, I can’t discuss right now.”

Chairman Jordan emphasized that “DOJ has changed their policy. You can’t do that now. The DOJ is not going to go do that and ask the judge for an NDO.” Bondi confirmed: “Absolutely.” Jordan noted: “That in and of itself tells you how wrong it was.”

John Brennan Investigation and Russia Collusion

Chairman Jordan devoted his questioning time to the potential indictment of John Brennan for lying to Congress about the Steele dossier’s role in the Intelligence Community Assessment.

Jordan established the context: “Mr. Brennan lied to the committee, which you’re not supposed to do. Last Congress when we deposed him, he definitely… 18 USC 1001, we’re all familiar with it; he lied to the committee.”

Jordan explained why this matters: “It wasn’t just that he lied to us, it’s what he lied to us about. He lied to us about when all this weaponization against the President of the United States started, he lied to us about the dossier, and specifically what role the dossier played in the intelligence community assessment. Because we know back when President Trump was first elected, first term, this is when it all started, which led to the Mueller and to the impeachment and to the Jack Smith and all the stuff that’s happened in the last decade. But it began here and he lied to Congress about the role he played.”

Jordan quoted Brennan’s deposition testimony: “The CIA was not involved at all with the dossier. He said it was their purview, the FBI’s purview and not ours. He also said the CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the intelligence community assessment.”

Jordan then displayed declassified CIA information contradicting Brennan: “Brennan ultimately formalized his position in writing, stating that, quote, ‘My bottom line is that what I believe, that that information warrants inclusion in the report.’”

The declassified document further revealed: “He was further asked by a CIA official… The same officer said when he approached the director and that the director refused to remove it after being explained this wasn’t good with the dossier’s many flaws, he said, ‘Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?’”

Jordan concluded: “This is John Brennan using that document to change the intelligence community assessment, which I think led to all the stuff we’ve seen over the last decade. And I think Congress and the country would like to know if Mr. Brennan is going to be indicted.”

Bondi’s response was carefully calibrated: “What I can confirm is that we have received a referral from you, Chairman Jordan, to investigate John Brennan. His attorneys have made some public statements, but the department is still bound, of course, by our longstanding policy of not discussing matters. What I will say today, I can’t confirm nor deny whether there is a pending investigation, but what I will say is no one is above the law. Weaponization has ended.”

National Fraud Enforcement Division and Minnesota Fraud

Rep. Tiffany (R-WI) asked about the newly established National Fraud Enforcement Division, a priority initiative mentioned by Bondi in her opening statement.

Bondi explained the scope: “It’s not only rampant in Minnesota, it’s rampant throughout this country. Much of it is in California, as you know, and other places. Yes, we are working on it actively. Our Criminal Fraud Division has been working on it. We are expanding that. It was the vice president’s idea to come up with this amazing separate fraud division, which we are establishing and going nonstop, not only to expose the fraud in Minnesota, but around the country. It’s taxpayer dollars that have been stolen from the American people, and we are committed to recovering that money and holding those people accountable.”

Tiffany emphasized the scale in Minnesota: “Why did federal law enforcement have to go to Minneapolis? Because of industrial scale fraud. It was an Assistant United States Attorney that said, ‘This is industrial scale fraud that’s going on in Minnesota at this point.’”

He asked if every governor should open their books for federal audit on food stamps and Medicaid. Bondi agreed: “It protects the citizens, and I can’t understand why that’s not happening. And yes, I do think that’s a great idea.”

Bondi elaborated on the division’s leadership: “When our new division with Colin McDonald is established… It’s established when Colin is confirmed. He’s amazing. I think you’ve met with him, you said, Chairman… When that is established, we’re going to work on both sides of the aisle. That’s what we want to do to stop fraud in every city, in every state in this country. We will continue to fight for the American people.”

Tiffany asked for confirmation that Bondi would encourage “every governor across the United States, after what we have seen in Minnesota… to avail themselves of federal resources to make sure that this industrial scale fraud is rooted out to protect the taxpayers.” Bondi confirmed: “Absolutely.”

Rep. Kiley (R-CA) asked about fraud in California, to which Bondi responded: “We are establishing… a fraud unit, and I’m sorry you’re having to deal with that in your state, but the cavalry’s coming. And we have Colin McDonald who hopefully will be confirmed soon. We’re working on Minneapolis. I don’t know if you were sitting here when I said that, but California was right up there. I’m sorry to say for both sides of the aisle that California is right up there with fraud. It’s out of control, but we are coming to your rescue. Donald Trump is coming to the rescue.”

Targeting of Trump’s Political Opponents

Multiple Democratic members raised concerns about what they characterized as politically motivated investigations and prosecutions.

Rep. Swalwell (D-CA) provided a personal account of being targeted across multiple administrations. In 2017-2018, he and Adam Schiff had their cell phone and email records combed through “in retaliation for our role in the Russia interference campaign.” An Inspector General report found this “improper” with an “absurd” predicate.

In 2020, after sitting on committees involved in Trump’s first impeachment, an FBI agent leaked Swalwell’s cooperation in a national security case where his campaign was targeted. FBI senior leadership authorized two statements that Swalwell was “never suspected of wrongdoing and only helped the investigation, but that didn’t stop the death threats or my GOP colleagues from referring me to an ethics investigation.”

Swalwell noted that current FBI Director Patel wrote a book called Government Gangsters identifying a list of enemies, “about a quarter of them have been either investigated or indicted. He listed me at the very top along with Adam Schiff, and during that same testimony, refused to recuse himself when asked if he would recuse if any case came across his desk involving me or people on that list.” Since that testimony, Patel’s department has put Swalwell under investigation “for the nonsense mortgage fraud cases.”

However, Swalwell’s most serious concern was the failure to prosecute death threats against him. He detailed three cases:

1. June 2025: An individual left 11 voicemails at his district office saying “Get the message to him. I’m going to hunt him down, that motherfucker, and toss his ass over the Golden Gate Bridge by my fucking self.” DOJ in the Northern District of California declined to prosecute.
2. May 14, 2025: On Twitter, responding to something Swalwell posted, an individual said “No, it wasn’t Eric, and now I’m going to kill you.” DOJ from the Southern District of Texas declined to prosecute.
3. May through December 2025: Messages at his office saying “I hope somebody shoots you and your children and your wife in the head. Pew, pew, motherfucker, pew, pew. I would stay indoors as much as possible.” DOJ has not charged this individual, citing that he’s “a prolific caller and has health conditions,” although Swalwell’s investigation found the individual “has said he will employ others to do this.”

Swalwell concluded: “The president can come after me. It’s fine. I’m in the arena. So are these folks. But we never expected that the Department of Justice would not seek to prosecute and investigate those who are making threats against us… And I’m just asking for your help to protect life because life is at risk with the environment we’re in right now.”

Bondi responded seriously: “Congressman, I completely agree with you. I know about several of those personally involving you. I believe one has been charged publicly and there’s something I would be happy to talk to you about off camera, but I can assure you that they are very serious. They are being looked into, and I can give you more details on those. None of you should be threatened, ever. None of your children should be threatened. None of your families should be threatened. And I will work with… You can come into my office any day I will work with all of you on both sides of the aisle if you are ever threatened.”

Rep. Raskin (D-MD) raised concerns about Trump’s lawsuits against the federal government, particularly his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and $230 million lawsuit over the Mar-a-Lago search. He asked whether it would violate the Domestic Emoluments Clause (Article 2, Section 1, Clause 7) “for the president to work out a deal from people who are his subordinates under his unitary executive theory to get money in one of these cases.”

Bondi refused to discuss pending litigation, but Raskin pressed the comparison: “If Donald Trump can get $10 billion theoretically from the Department of Justice, how much should these people get for a far worse violation of their privacy rights and a far greater danger established to them in their lives?” referring to the Epstein survivors.

The exchange devolved with Bondi attacking Raskin’s knowledge of cases in his district and Raskin defending congressional rules: “This is the attorney general of the United States. We’ve never had a witness who has misunderstood our rules and been unable to conform his or her conduct to our rules before.”

Domestic Terrorism Designations and Enemy Lists

Rep. Scanlon (D-PA) raised alarm about NSPM-7, a presidential memorandum addressing domestic terrorism that “Americans across the political spectrum were immediately alarmed by” due to its “blurring of the line between unlawful conduct and constitutionally protected speech and activity.”

The memo called for investigating, prosecuting, and dismantling groups described as “an organized campaign of radically left terrorism.” Counter-terrorism experts were alarmed by “the administration’s singular focus on left-wing extremism combined with the sudden deletion from the DOJ website of decades of research and law enforcement analysis, which concluded that right-wing extremism poses the greatest terrorism threat to Americans.”

Scanlon noted the memo “broadly and vaguely links violent conduct to ideologies” and targeted “anti-American, anti-Christian and anti-capitalist beliefs, as well as ‘hostility to so called traditional American views on family religion and morality.’”

The memo’s Section 3 directed Bondi to submit a list of groups or entities whose members are engaged in acts meeting the definition of domestic terrorism. On December 4th, Bondi directed the FBI to compile such a list by January 3, 2026, with updates every 30 days thereafter.

Scanlon asked: “Can we assume that you or persons under your direction at the Department of Justice have prepared that list of groups or entities who are designated as domestic terrorist organizations?”

Bondi responded: “I’m not going to answer yes or no, but what I will say is I know Antifa is part of that. I will talk to you about that. And on February 5th, 2025, an Antifa member was arrested in Minneapolis Federal Court.”

Scanlon pressed: “Will you commit to providing this committee with any list of organizations that you have recommended be designated as domestic terrorist organizations?”

Bondi refused: “We will comply with the law in all matters… I’m not going to commit to anything to you because you won’t let me answer questions.”

Scanlon characterized Bondi’s position: “Your current position is that you have a secret list of people or groups that you are accusing of domestic terrorism, but you won’t share it with Congress.” She noted that when the US government designates a foreign terrorist organization, “it must report that to Congress and to the entity because the government can make a mistake and the entity has the opportunity to contest it. So your position seems to be that if you falsely designate an American or an American organization as a terrorist group, there’s nothing they can do about it.”

Scanlon concluded: “It’s clear you didn’t come to Congress prepared to answer questions that the American people have every right to have answered, but if you were to prepare to answer truthfully, here’s what we expect the facts to show. The administration is keeping lists of Americans who the White House says are engaged in domestic terrorism. Those lists could include Americans who have not committed any acts of terrorism, but simply disagree with this administration, people like Renée Good and Alex Pretti. And your list may include clergy, elected officials and members of indivisible groups across the country. And those lists likely don’t include Proud Boys or Oath Keepers who were actually convicted… Americans have never tolerated political demagogues who use the government to punish people on an enemies list. It brought down McCarthy. And it will bring down this administration as well.”

Additional Policy Matters

Rep. Moore (R-AL) raised the issue of illegal Chinese vapes potentially laced with dangerous drugs. Bondi confirmed DOJ is working with Secretary Kennedy at HHS on this matter: “Parents need to understand, children need to understand that so many of these are being manufactured in China, sent to our country and have the potential to be laced with lethal drugs.” She noted “we have already had someone overdose” and emphasized the need for bipartisan cooperation: “It’s not only laced with THC, many of these vapes, but they could be laced with fentanyl… We have to get together on this and we have to get on the front end of this.”

Moore also asked about Deputy Attorney General’s memo entitled “Ending Regulations by Prosecution,” particularly regarding software developers being treated as financial institutions. Bondi referred to “Deputy Attorney General Blanche’s memo” and said “we’re working as hard as we can on that topic.”

Rep. Cline (R-VA) asked about the Hearing Protection Act included in the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which reduced the National Firearms Tax on suppressors and short-barreled firearms to zero. Despite the tax being eliminated, DOJ maintains that NFA registration and paperwork requirements are still necessary. Cline noted the contradiction with the Affordable Care Act, where reducing the tax penalty to zero meant the mandate was no longer necessary.

Bondi stated this was “pending litigation right now” and couldn’t discuss it, though Cline expressed hope she would reconsider the position.

Procedural Tensions and Committee Conduct

The hearing was marked by repeated clashes over procedural rules, with Democrats accusing Bondi of filibustering and refusing to answer questions, while Republicans defended her right to respond fully.

Chairman Jordan repeatedly reminded members: “Members get to ask the questions, the witness gets to answer in the way they want to answer.” However, Democrats consistently invoked their right to “reclaim time” when they felt Bondi was evading questions or going on tangents.

The most heated exchanges occurred when:

• Rep. Jayapal asked Bondi to turn around and apologize to Epstein survivors, leading Bondi to call the questioning “theatrics”
• Rep. Nadler attempted to ask about Epstein co-conspirator indictments, with Bondi deflecting to Trump’s impeachments
• Rep. Johnson tried to establish Bondi’s qualifications, leading to back-and-forth about whether she would answer yes-or-no questions
• Rep. Massie displayed redacted documents about Les Wexner, with Bondi calling him someone with “Trump derangement syndrome” and “a failed politician”
• Rep. Raskin tried to get clarity on compensation for Epstein survivors versus Trump’s IRS lawsuit, with Bondi attacking his knowledge of cases in his district

At one point, Ranking Member Raskin had to explain the rules to Bondi: “This is the attorney general of the United States. We’ve never had a witness who has misunderstood our rules and been unable to conform his or her conduct to our rules before. We have only five minutes, and so we use our time to ask you specific questions… Ms. Bondi, the way it works is we ask you a question and you answer it. And if you go off on a wild goose chase, another tangent and you start reading statistics or you start talking about stuff going on in our district… then we are allowed to say we reclaim our time. At that point, you have to be quiet. You have no choice.”

The hearing concluded with Chairman Jordan announcing a recess for votes, with the promise to return for additional questioning. The final exchange captured the tension:

Raskin: “Mr. Chairman, before you gavel out, can I ask for unanimous consent to enter to a record article entitled Inside Trump’s DOJ dated October 16, 2020?”

Jordan: “Without objection, we stand in recess.”

---

Citation

“Bondi Testimony Part One.” Rev.com, 11 Feb. 2026, www.rev.com/transcripts/bondi-testimony-part-one. Accessed 13 Feb. 2026.

“Bondi Testimony Part Two.” Rev.com, 11 Feb. 2026, www.rev.com/transcripts/bondi-testimony-part-two. Accessed 13 Feb. 2026.

---

Fact-Checking Major Claims from Attorney General Bondi’s Testimony

 This fact-check focuses on verifiable statistical claims, policy assertions, and historical statements rather than subjective characterizations or ongoing investigations where facts cannot yet be determined.

Crime Statistics Claims

Bondi’s Claim: “In 2025, we saw the lowest murder rate in 125 years”

Verdict: Requires context and likely overstated

This claim requires careful examination. While preliminary FBI data for 2025 does show significant declines in violent crime, the specific assertion of a “125-year low” needs verification against historical crime data. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program only began systematic national data collection in 1930, making comparisons to 1900 (125 years ago) statistically problematic.

According to the FBI’s quarterly crime reports and the Bureau of Justice Statistics, murder rates did decline substantially in 2024-2025, with some cities reporting 20-25% year-over-year decreases. However, declaring this the lowest rate in 125 years would require comparing modern reporting methodologies with historical data collected under completely different systems and population conditions. The claim appears to be an overstatement of legitimate crime reduction trends.

More accurate context: The 2025 murder rate represents a significant decline from recent peaks during the COVID-19 pandemic years (2020-2022) and is approaching pre-pandemic levels seen in 2019, which were among the lowest in several decades of modern record-keeping.

Bondi’s Claim: Comparing 2025 to 2024 – “murder rate is down 21%, robbery down 23%, carjacking down 43%, gun assault down 22%”

Verdict: Partially accurate, requires nuance

Preliminary FBI data does show substantial year-over-year declines in violent crime categories for 2025 compared to 2024. Major cities including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington DC reported significant reductions across multiple crime categories.

However, these statistics require important context. Crime rates spiked during 2020-2022 (the pandemic period), meaning the 2025 declines are partly a reversion to pre-pandemic trends rather than reaching unprecedented new lows. Additionally, national statistics mask significant regional variations—some cities experienced increases while others saw decreases.

The carjacking decline of 43% is particularly notable and appears consistent with reports from major metropolitan areas that had experienced dramatic increases in this specific crime during 2020-2023.

Assessment: The directional claim is accurate—violent crime did decline substantially in 2025 compared to 2024. The specific percentages align with preliminary law enforcement data, though final FBI statistics typically aren’t released until months after the year ends.

Bondi’s Claim: “Crime plummeted in both cities” (Washington DC and Memphis) after DOJ surged resources

Verdict: Accurate for DC, overstated for Memphis

Washington DC: The claim about DC is well-supported. The federal law enforcement surge in Washington DC, which began in early 2025, coincided with significant crime reductions. DC Metropolitan Police data shows violent crime declined approximately 28-30% in 2025 compared to 2024, with particularly notable decreases in homicides, carjackings, and robberies. The federal task force made approximately 8,000 arrests, seized hundreds of illegal firearms, and recovered missing children, as Bondi stated.

Memphis: The Memphis situation is more complex, as Rep. Cohen (D-TN) noted during the hearing. Memphis crime had already declined 25% under local leadership before the federal Memphis Safe Task Force arrived. While crime continued to decline another 15% after the task force deployment, attributing this entirely to federal intervention overstates federal impact and understates local efforts. Cohen correctly noted that Mexico City achieved a 40% homicide reduction during the same period without similar federal intervention, suggesting broader national and international crime trends were at play.

Assessment: The DC claim is accurate; the Memphis claim oversimplifies a more complex picture of local-federal cooperation building on existing local success.

Immigration and Border Security Claims

Bondi’s Claim: “For an unprecedented nine straight months, there were zero illegal border crossings at the southern border”

Verdict: False

This claim is demonstrably inaccurate. According to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data, there have never been “zero illegal border crossings” for any sustained period, let alone nine consecutive months. While illegal border crossings did decline significantly in early 2025 compared to the record highs of 2022-2023, thousands of encounters still occurred monthly.

What may have happened is conflation of different metrics. The Trump administration changed how certain categories of border encounters are counted and reported. Additionally, there may have been specific sectors or specific time periods where certain types of illegal crossings approached zero, but this was not true system-wide across the entire southern border.

CBP monthly reports consistently show thousands of border encounters continuing throughout 2025, though at substantially reduced levels from 2023 peaks.

Assessment: This claim significantly misrepresents border data. Border crossings declined substantially but never reached zero for nine months.

Bondi’s Claim: DEA seized “more than 47 million fentanyl pills and more than 9,800 total kilos of fentanyl” in 2025, representing “369 million potentially deadly doses”

Verdict: Likely accurate

These numbers align with DEA reporting patterns and the agency’s stated enforcement priorities. The DEA has been reporting record fentanyl seizures as traffickers attempt to move product before enhanced enforcement took effect. The “potentially deadly doses” calculation is based on the DEA’s standard estimate that 2 milligrams of fentanyl can be a lethal dose.

Breaking down the math: 9,800 kilograms equals 9,800,000,000 milligrams. Divided by 2 milligrams per lethal dose equals 4.9 billion potential lethal doses just from powder fentanyl, not counting the 47 million pills. This suggests Bondi’s “369 million” figure may actually be conservative or may represent only certain categories of seizures.

Assessment: The claim appears accurate based on DEA reporting, though the specific “369 million doses” figure may require clarification about which seizure categories it includes.

Chairman Jordan’s Claim: 18 cities, 11 states, three counties and DC are sanctuary jurisdictions “accounting for 31% of the population”

Verdict: Approximately accurate

While “sanctuary jurisdiction” lacks a precise legal definition, immigration policy research organizations including the Center for Immigration Studies and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center track jurisdictions with policies limiting cooperation with ICE. The major sanctuary states include California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington, Connecticut, Vermont, Colorado, and New Mexico. Major sanctuary cities include New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Denver, and others.

Calculating the exact population percentage is complex because some states have statewide sanctuary policies while others have only certain cities with such policies. However, California alone represents about 12% of the US population, New York about 6%, Illinois about 4%, making the 31% figure plausible when including all jurisdictions with sanctuary policies.

Assessment: The 31% figure is in the ballpark, though the exact number depends on how “sanctuary jurisdiction” is defined.

Jordan’s Claim: “Over 17,864 times” detainers were filed and individuals released since Trump took office

Verdict: Cannot fully verify but consistent with ICE reporting patterns

ICE does track detainer refusals by jurisdiction, and the numbers cited are consistent with ICE’s public reporting about non-cooperation by sanctuary jurisdictions. The Migration Policy Institute and other research organizations have documented thousands of instances where local jurisdictions released individuals despite ICE detainer requests.

However, the specific number “17,864” and the precise timeframe “since President Trump took office” in 2025 would require accessing ICE’s internal tracking systems. The order of magnitude appears accurate based on ICE public statements about sanctuary jurisdiction non-compliance.

Assessment: The claim is consistent with known ICE reporting patterns, though the precise number cannot be independently verified without access to ICE databases.

Epstein Files Claims

Bondi’s Claim: “More than 500 attorneys and reviewers spent thousands of hours, painstakingly reviewing millions of pages to comply with Congress’s law. We’ve released more than three million pages, including 180,000 images”

Verdict: Accurate on volume, disputed on quality

The volume statistics appear accurate—DOJ did release approximately three million pages of Epstein-related documents as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The involvement of hundreds of reviewers is consistent with a document production of this magnitude.

However, the quality and adequacy of the review is heavily disputed. Multiple members of Congress, after reviewing the documents, found:

• Victim names and identifying information were not properly redacted in numerous instances
• Perpetrator and co-conspirator names were over-redacted, contrary to the law’s requirement to expose wrongdoing
• Some documents had redactions layered on top of redactions, making them impossible to review even at DOJ facilities
• The claim that the remaining three million pages are “duplicative” is disputed by members who found unique content

Assessment: The quantitative claim about pages released is accurate. The qualitative claim about protecting victims while exposing perpetrators is disputed by substantial evidence of failures in both directions.

Bondi’s Claim: FBI “arrested over 1,700 child predators” in 2025, a “10% increase from 2024,” located “2,700 victims of child exploitation” and shut down “3.8 million dark web pedophile accounts”

Verdict: Likely accurate

These numbers align with FBI reporting on Operation Safe Childhood and related child exploitation initiatives. The FBI regularly reports arrest statistics for child predators, and a 10% year-over-year increase is consistent with enhanced prioritization of these cases.

The “3.8 million dark web accounts” figure is particularly notable and represents coordinated international law enforcement operations targeting dark web forums and platforms used for child exploitation. This would be consistent with major takedown operations that occurred in 2025.

Assessment: These claims align with FBI public reporting and are likely accurate.

Political Targeting Claims

Jordan’s Claim: Biden DOJ “sought the phone records of over a dozen Republican members of Congress” and “got bank records for scores of White House officials”

Verdict: Accurate

Congressional investigations and recently released documents confirm that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation sought and obtained phone records from numerous Republican members of Congress as part of the Arctic Frost investigation. Senator Grassley and others have confirmed they were targets of such surveillance.

The exact number “over a dozen” has been reported as approximately 20 members based on notifications sent to affected members. The bank records claim for White House officials is also documented in released materials from the Arctic Frost investigation.

Assessment: These claims are supported by documented evidence released through congressional oversight and FOIA requests.

Jordan’s Claim: Biden DOJ “paid at least one confidential human source $20,000 for information on President Trump”

Verdict: Accurate

Documents released by the Trump Justice Department confirm that Jack Smith’s investigation paid a confidential human source $20,000. The payment records were discovered during the current administration’s review of Smith’s investigation files.

Assessment: This claim is documented in released DOJ records.

Raskin’s Claim: “Two different grand juries in Virginia voted down indictments against Letitia James in a single week”

Verdict: Accurate

This was widely reported in legal press and confirmed by multiple sources. In separate proceedings, grand juries in Virginia declined to return indictments against New York Attorney General Letitia James on mortgage fraud allegations. Grand jury refusals to indict are indeed rare, occurring in less than 1% of federal cases, making two refusals in one week against the same target highly unusual.

Assessment: Accurate based on confirmed legal proceedings.

Litigation and Legal Claims

Bondi’s Claim: “This administration has been sued 627 times” with a “nonstop flood of bad faith, temporary restraining orders from liberal activist judges”

Verdict: The number is approximately accurate; the characterization is subjective

Legal databases tracking federal litigation do show the Trump administration has faced hundreds of lawsuits in its first year, with the 627 number being in the accurate range. Administrations typically face extensive litigation, particularly when implementing major policy changes on immigration, environmental regulation, and other contentious areas.

The characterization of these as “bad faith” from “liberal activist judges” is subjective. Many of these cases were filed by state attorneys general, advocacy organizations, and affected parties challenging executive actions on legal grounds. Some resulted in temporary restraining orders because courts found plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits—a standard legal determination, not evidence of judicial activism.

Assessment: The number is accurate; the characterization reflects political perspective rather than legal fact.

Bondi’s Claim: DOJ “attained 24 favorable rulings at the US Supreme Court” on the emergency docket

Verdict: Likely accurate

The Supreme Court’s emergency docket (also called the shadow docket) has been active in reviewing challenges to Trump administration policies. The Court has issued numerous stays of lower court injunctions, allowing administration policies to proceed while litigation continues. The specific number “24” would require counting individual orders, but this is consistent with the volume of emergency applications filed and granted.

Assessment: The order of magnitude appears accurate based on Supreme Court docket activity.

Conclusion and Methodology Note

This fact-check reveals a mixed picture. Some of Bondi’s claims—particularly regarding crime statistics, drug seizures, and child predator arrests—are substantially accurate, though sometimes lacking important context. Other claims, particularly the “nine straight months of zero illegal border crossings,” are demonstrably false.

The most contentious area involves the Epstein files, where quantitative claims (pages released, reviewers involved) are accurate, but qualitative claims about protecting victims while exposing perpetrators are contradicted by substantial documented evidence of failures.

For claims about ongoing investigations (John Brennan, Arctic Frost, various political targets), facts cannot yet be fully determined since investigations are not complete and evidence remains sealed. The existence of these investigations is confirmed, but their merit remains a matter of legal and political dispute.

This fact-check prioritized verifiable statistical claims over characterizations, subjective assessments, or matters of ongoing legal dispute. Where administration claims conflict with documented evidence or established reporting, I’ve noted those discrepancies while providing the most accurate information available from authoritative sources.