Attorney General EXPLODES — Calls Democrat “Washed Up Loser”

Attorney General Pam Bondi transformed a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing into a combative spectacle, launching personal attacks on Democratic members while deflecting critical questions about the DOJ’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein files and other Trump administration controversies.

Story Snapshot

AG Bondi refused to apologize to Epstein victims and called Ranking Member Jamie Raskin a “washed up loser lawyer” during chaotic February 11 hearing
Democrats pressed Bondi on unindicted Epstein co-conspirators, immigration enforcement, and alleged First Amendment violations with zero substantive answers provided
Bondi touted unverified crime statistics claiming 21% murder rate drops while dismissing legitimate oversight as “theatrics”
Epstein victims attended the hearing seeking justice as Democrats demanded accountability for DOJ’s flawed file releases

Bondi’s Pattern of Deflection Through Personal Attacks

Attorney General Pam Bondi repeated her October 2025 Senate hearing playbook during the February 11 House Judiciary Committee testimony, launching personal attacks against Democratic members rather than addressing substantive oversight questions. When Rep. Pramila Jayapal requested Bondi apologize directly to Jeffrey Epstein victims present in the room, Bondi refused and accused Jayapal of “theatrics,” declaring she would not “get into the gutter.” The confrontational approach escalated when Bondi interrupted Rep. Jerrold Nadler’s questions about Epstein co-conspirator indictments, devolving the hearing into shouting matches that prevented meaningful accountability for the Department of Justice’s handling of the high-profile case.

Democrats Expose DOJ Failures on Epstein Investigation

House Democrats arrived prepared with specific questions about the DOJ’s troubled implementation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act and the department’s refusal to indict known co-conspirators in the Jeffrey Epstein trafficking network. Ranking Member Jamie Raskin accused Bondi of filibustering to avoid transparency, while Rep. Ted Lieu directly charged that Bondi lied under oath, noting her aggressive deflections signaled fear of a cover-up. Even Republican Rep. Thomas Massie broke ranks to focus questioning on Epstein matters, defying Trump’s pressure to remain loyal. The presence of Epstein victims in the hearing room elevated the emotional stakes, yet Bondi offered only a generic statement urging them to contact the FBI rather than explaining why the DOJ has failed to pursue justice against powerful individuals connected to the trafficking operation.

Unverified Crime Claims Mask Real Accountability Issues

Bondi opened her testimony by touting Trump administration crime statistics, claiming murder rates dropped 21% from 2024 to 2025 in Washington D.C. and Memphis, asserting “this did not happen by accident.” These figures remain unverified beyond Bondi’s testimony, yet served as her primary defense against oversight questions spanning immigration enforcement, alleged Big Tech coercion regarding ICE apps, and budget cuts to FBI and DEA programs. Democrats challenged these diversionary tactics, highlighting a February 5 letter accusing the DOJ of First Amendment violations through coercive pressure on technology companies. The hearing exposed a troubling pattern where the Attorney General prioritizes loyalty to Trump over constitutional accountability, attacking legislators who exercise their oversight duties as partisan actors rather than providing transparent answers about DOJ operations and decisions.

Implications for Constitutional Oversight and Justice

This hearing represents more than partisan theater—it signals dangerous erosion of constitutional checks and balances when the nation’s top law enforcement official treats congressional oversight as enemy combat. Bondi’s refusal to address legitimate questions about unindicted Epstein co-conspirators, her documented pattern of attacking senators and representatives who demand transparency, and her deflection tactics undermine the separation of powers that protects American liberties. While conservatives rightfully celebrate aggressive defense of Trump policies, there remains a fundamental difference between defending administration actions and obstructing legitimate oversight of potential DOJ failures. Epstein victims deserve answers, not theatrics. Taxpayers funding the Department of Justice deserve transparency about how their government pursues justice against powerful predators. When an Attorney General substitutes personal attacks for substantive responses, it raises serious questions about what the DOJ is hiding and whether justice is truly being served or merely political loyalty rewarded.