Did Pam Bondi Just Lie Under Oath About Trump and Epstein?

https://newrepublic.com/post/206472/pam-bondi-lie-under-oath-donald-trump-epstein

Representative Ted Lieu accused Attorney General Pam Bondi of lying under oath Wednesday, catching the Trump official in a bind after she claimed no evidence existed of young girls at parties attended by the president.

The California lawmaker highlighted that, under Bondi’s direction per a July 2025 memo, the Justice Department had “not uncovered evidence” that warranted investigations against “uncharged third parties.”

He then referred to recently released images of ex-Prince Andrew, depicting the disgraced British royal on all fours, towering over one of Epstein’s victims.

“These two photos staring you in the face are evidence of a crime and are more than enough evidence to predicate an investigation against former Prince Andrew,” Lieu said. “So I ask you, Attorney General Pam Bondi, why did you shut down this investigation last July and why have you not prosecuted former Prince Andrew?”

343 points · 51 comments · view on lemmy.world

51 Comments

spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works · 112 pts · 198d (5 replies)

Of course she did.

Canconda@lemmy.ca · 69 pts · 198d (4 replies)

You could hear it in her voice. She knows she's fucked.

harmbugler@piefed.social · 13 pts · 198d

Who's going to charge her, the DOJ?

Etterra@discuss.online · 8 pts · 198d (1 reply)

Only if Trump turns on her.

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 198d

as long as she plays along and if the risk to him is not too high.

SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 198d

No she isn't. You guys still think US has rule of law. Cute.

ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works · 74 pts · 198d (12 replies)

These people have no morals or ethics. The only thing we can do at this point is lock them up and throw away the key.

spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works · 43 pts · 198d (6 replies)

The problem is "these people" include 6 corrupt Supreme Court justices. Hard to have any justice if those administering it are corrupt to the core.

Cruxifux@feddit.nl · 19 pts · 198d

We are in dire need of a drastic change to the way we look at vigilante mob justice in our society at this point. It is literally the only option for actual justice and positive change when the justice system operates under a pay to win rule and the wealth gap is the highest it’s ever been since the gold standard was established.

chaogomu@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 198d (2 replies)

Fun fact, the supreme court is only the highest appeal court because they say they are. The constitution actually says they're a maritime court.

There's more to it, but yeah, Congress can legally strip the court of power by establishing a new court.

The old court would still have the final say in maritime law. But little else.

BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 198d (1 reply)

The constitution actually says they're a maritime court.

IDK that sounds like you're about to argue, that you don't need a driver's license or registration for your car, because you're not driving, you're traveling.

In any case it's more expedient to approach this matter with torches and pitch forks, than to wait for congress to get their act together. Just remember who'll appoint replacements for any justice you remove.

chaogomu@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 198d

The whole concept of Judicial review didn't exist before 1803 when the court granted itself that power.

Per the actual constitution;

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

A plain reading of that says that Congress can change all the rules at will except the Maritime and Ambassador stuff.

Congress can strip away the full appellate jurisdiction and replace it. At least one sitting congressman wants to do just that and replace the court with a random rotating bench pulled from the federal appeals courts.

Here's an interview with the guy. He touches on the supreme court, but the main push is uncapping the House.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ9Zhu-zCCw

ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 198d

There's more of us than there are of them.

gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 198d

Yeah, I do honestly think that the tribunal of six is going to require some… uh…

If we manage to somehow pull out of this horrific tailspin.

wesker@lemmy.sdf.org · 12 pts · 198d (2 replies)

And by "we" I mean the justice system.

And by the "justice system" I mean these people.

ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 198d (1 reply)

By we, I meant we the people.

wesker@lemmy.sdf.org · 3 pts · 198d

I'm gonna have to check my availability and get back to you on that.

DrFistington@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d

This. The officers working in the house should have cuffed her and walked her to a detention cell on contempt alone.

sparky@lemmy.federate.cc · 5 pts · 198d

Time for a second round of Nuremberg trials.

ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world · 60 pts · 198d (2 replies)

The answer to "did [Trump sycophant] lie while under oath?" is always a resounding 'yes'.

They keep doing it because they don't think the rules apply to them, and because there are never any real repercussions.

stochasticity@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 198d

Tbf, if there are no repercussions then the laws indeed do not apply to them.

AA5B@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 198d

We can still hope there’s an expiration. Any charges brought in three years should be decided by law

tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip · 45 pts · 198d (1 reply)

Oh man, if only we had people enforcing laws in the US. She'd be in big trouble then.

muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 197d

We don’t need laws. The GOP isn’t even trying to fix things anymore. They are fleeing and letting Trump sink the ship while techbros cash in and surveil and enslave a populace.

Once the money stops flowing people will stop playing nice. They will get desperate. They will have nothing to lose. They will kill.

And this regimes response is to just hide the metrics. Yea, rating measure reality, not define it. Fucking morons.

wirebeads@lemmy.ca · 31 pts · 198d (3 replies)

As a Canadian, I cannot wait to watch the justice that will occur when this is all over.

It fucking better be televised for the world to see.

Fuck. This. Administration.

spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works · 31 pts · 198d (1 reply)

We are extremely unlikely to see any justice even if the Democrats are in control of Congress and the White House.

For decades the Democrats have been unwilling to enforce black letter law no matter what the consequences to the country. Case in point: Trump's currently sitting in the White House instead of a prison cell because the Democrats lack anything resembling a spine.

If Trump's still alive in 3 years the Democrats will almost certainly say "It's time look forward and not back" and let him and most of his ilk walk away completely unscathed.

Asafum@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 198d

If Trump’s still alive in 3 years the Democrats will almost certainly say “It’s time look forward and not back” and let him and most of his ilk walk away completely unscathed.

I should have kept reading the comments, I replied to them with almost this exact thing. It sucks how we just know this is how the Democrats are going to act... If they aren't already declared a terrorist organization by then.

Asafum@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 198d

As a Canadian, I cannot wait to watch the justice that will occur when this is all over.

HahahahahahahahhHhhhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahAaaa...ughh....

Sorry, now I'm sad...

What we do here in America is Republicans shit all over everything, do whatever they want, and when Democrats take over they pull some "it's time to look forward, not backward" bullshit, saying shit like "we need unity, we need to heal as a nation."

Then they do fuck all about anything and Republicans just act worse the next time because they know there are no repercussions. :(

ThanksObama@sh.itjust.works · 24 pts · 198d

She was Florida AG during all that jazz. Why does she look so nervous? Is she maybe listed in those unreleased files?

Substance_P@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 198d

Oh yes, Justice delayed is justice denied, now for the endless cycle of tyranny. Fuck this swamp of a government.

BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz · 16 pts · 198d (2 replies)

Of COURSE she Didn't! If she HAD Lied Underoath to PROTECT PEOPLE WHO RAPE CHILDREN she would ALREADY be Impeached and Possibly Imprisoned!

corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 198d (1 reply)

Underoath

Two words, my dude.

Substance_P@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 198d
[ removed ]
njm1314@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 198d

Many times.

desiccated_event@piefed.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 198d

Yes.

dissentiate@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 13 pts · 198d (1 reply)
[ removed ]
BussyGyatt@feddit.org · 2 pts · 198d

Are bears catholic?

HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 198d

She's a pedophile herself so I'm not surprised.

hesh@quokk.au · 10 pts · 198d

Has she ever told the truth?

ugandan_airways@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 198d

“But the dow is at 50,000 points! 401k’s are doing well!” She tried to fall back on this when being questioned about Epstein. The playbook is getting so stale at this point. Most of the die hard Trump supporter’s don’t even now what the Dow, s&p, or what a 401k even is.

Archangel1313@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 198d

Oh, she is so fuckin' cooked.

wuffah@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d

Is she capable of not lying?

Etterra@discuss.online · 7 pts · 198d (1 reply)

They almost got this prostate leach to cry in the floor of Congress. They should have pushed her even harder lol

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 198d

softball approach, perfomative likely being allowed by thier donors

UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d

Ooooh, I bet she's going to be sorry when someone finally does something about it, though.

Lucky_777@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d

She is such a Trump ass licker man, it's really sad honestly. I almost feel sorry for her... almost

Treczoks@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d (2 replies)

If she did, would she face consequences for it under the current government?

spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 198d (1 reply)

Absolutely. Drinks all around.

Nasan@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 198d

Limit 1 drink, happy hour only. Automatic 50% gratuity.

Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 198d

Is he emphasizing Andrew rather than Trump because Trump will happily throw Andrew (and Bondi) under the bus? Maybe hoping the disclosure of such an investigation would eventually open doors to getting Trump himself one day?

Yeller_king@reddthat.com · 3 pts · 198d

Would it matter if she did?

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 198d

if she is wearing a cross then yes.

BussyGyatt@feddit.org · 1 pts · 198d
[ removed ]
BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 198d

Not to play the devil's advocate here, I mean she can damn well pay for her legal representation, but wouldn't it be really easy to use a "I didn't know, there's so much material and I answered to the best of my knowledge"?