Why the Epstein scandal still haunts Trump’s Justice Department

Trump attorney general deflects scrutiny

US Attorney General Pam Bondi endured more than four hours of sharp questioning before the US Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, a session that underscored the polarized state of American politics and the fragile credibility of the Justice Department under President Donald Trump. From the start, Democrats sought to portray Bondi as a political enabler who had eroded prosecutorial independence, while Republicans rallied to her defence by shifting attention toward old grievances with former special counsel Jack Smith. The hearing offered more fireworks than new facts, but it highlighted the intense partisan divides that shape every aspect of Trump-era justice, the New York Times reported.

Bondi’s combative defence

Bondi opened the session by insisting that the Department of Justice was carrying out its mission “fairly and without fear or favour.” Yet her testimony quickly became a verbal brawl. Senator Richard Durbin, the committee’s ranking Democrat, accused her of leaving “an enormous stain in American history” by bowing to White House demands on sensitive prosecutions. Bondi fired back, suggesting Democrats were motivated by animosity toward Trump rather than genuine oversight. When pressed about the administration’s decision to drop an FBI probe into White House border czar Tom Homan—who was recorded accepting a bag containing $50,000 in cash from undercover agents—Bondi deflected. Asked directly whether Homan kept the money, she refused to answer. Instead, she lashed out at Representative Adam Schiff, calling him “a failed lawyer” and demanding to know if he would apologize to Trump.

Clash over National Guard deployments

The session also spilled into Trump’s controversial use of the National Guard in Democratic-led cities, including Los Angeles and Chicago. When Durbin criticized the president’s decision to deploy troops despite falling crime rates, Bondi snapped back: “I wish you loved Chicago as much as you hate President Trump.” Her retort reflected the broader strategy of tying Democratic criticism of policy decisions to what she cast as deep-seated hostility toward the president.

The Epstein shadow

Perhaps the most difficult exchange for Bondi came not from Democrats, but from Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana. Kennedy asked about the still-smouldering case of Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex trafficking. Bondi had previously suggested the FBI held damaging material that could be released, only to reverse herself and declare that there was nothing left to investigate. Her reversal has frustrated conservatives who want the administration to expose alleged high-profile figures tied to Epstein. Kennedy pressed Bondi on whether US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, a former Epstein neighbour, had been interviewed after publicly declaring Epstein “the greatest blackmailer ever.” Bondi admitted that he had not, but said she would “absolutely” support such an interview if FBI Director Kash Patel approved it.

Confusion over the administration’s stance

The Epstein exchange revealed the awkwardness of the administration’s position. While Bondi insists there is no further evidence to pursue, senior figures in Trump’s cabinet have hinted otherwise, fuelling suspicion and conspiracy theories. Her unwillingness to clarify the inconsistencies suggested either a lack of internal coordination or a deliberate effort to keep the issue at arm’s length. For an administration long shadowed by Epstein-related speculation, the hearing offered no closure and only renewed questions.

Republicans pivot to Jack Smith

If Democrats focused on Bondi’s decisions, Republicans seized the opportunity to hammer former special counsel Jack Smith. Senator Chuck Grassley revealed that in 2023, the FBI had examined the toll records of nine Republican lawmakers, including Senator Josh Hawley, around the time of the January 6 Capitol attack. Toll records provide call times, durations, and locations but not the content of conversations. Still, Republicans branded the move “spying.” Hawley accused the FBI of wiretapping him, a claim contradicted by the evidence, but effective in rallying conservative outrage. Senator Josh Hawley thundered that the investigation represented “the most egregious abuse of power since Watergate.”

The politics of surveillance claims

The reality, according to people familiar with the investigation, was that prosecutors were trying to map communications between Trump’s inner circle and members of US Congress during the lead-up to the violence. But Republicans framed the data request as a political vendetta, not a legitimate probe. Several called for a new special counsel to investigate Smith himself. Kash Patel, now serving as FBI director, suggested further disciplinary action could be taken against agents involved. That posture aligned with Trump’s broader efforts to recast institutions of accountability as partisan conspiracies.