...
By Newsweek Editors
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Tick follows tock underneath the West Wing. It’s Pam Bondi. And she could blow at any moment.
The Attorney General’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files has become a slow-burning political liability that neither the Justice Department nor the White House has been able to extinguish.
House Oversight Democrats say Bondi on Wednesday repeatedly refused to commit to complying with a subpoena for sworn, transcribed testimony about the department’s Epstein disclosures.
Read More on Analysis
It prompted a walkout they framed as a protest against an "outrageous fake hearing" designed to avoid accountability.
The latest closed-door blowup on Capitol Hill suggests the fuse is still lit.
Bondi Is Face of Epstein Transparency Issue
The Epstein issue is especially painful for President Donald Trump, given his past, well-documented social ties to Epstein.
It is uniquely combustible inside Trump’s own MAGA movement, which has long suspected an establishment cover-up of the truth about Epstein and his elite network of contacts.
MAGA was promised full transparency about Epstein during the 2024 campaign and beyond. But it has been frustrated by what it perceives as the slow and disorganized release of the investigation files.
And, as some perceive it, the obstructiveness of the Trump administration. Bondi, fairly or not, is now the face of that suspected obstruction on Epstein.
Following the Law, But Not the Politics
Her defenders can argue that a closed briefing was a reasonable accommodation while lawyers haggle over the mechanics of congressional demands.
The DOJ, after all, has insisted the Oversight subpoena is "completely unnecessary," saying lawmakers have been offered access to unredacted files at the department and additional briefings about compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Bondi herself leaned on the familiar formulation—"I will follow the law"—when pressed on whether she would honor the subpoena's requirement that she sit for a deposition under oath.
But politically, that's the problem. Legalistic answers read like evasions when the scandal itself is about secrecy. And in Trumpworld, ambiguity on Epstein isn't neutral. It's plain suspicious.
A Pattern Emerges
What makes this dangerous for Bondi is it's becoming a pattern.
Bondi's February appearance before the House Judiciary Committee was widely criticized by left and right, with heated exchanges, sharp personal attacks, and repeated efforts to pivot away from the specifics of redactions and disclosures.
Democrats made hay with the footage of that hearing. But it also triggered backlash from prominent conservative voices, many of them MAGA, who framed Bondi as incompetent or insufficiently transparent.
It was an especially dangerous line of critique in a movement that treats "deep state" suspicion as a central article of faith. And it raised the obvious question among MAGA and Democrats: What is Bondi trying to distract from?
The Oversight fight is the latest escalation in a long storyline.
Bondi has repeatedly been forced to explain what has (and hasn't) been released, why deadlines were missed, why victim names weren't redacted but alleged abusers were, and why the public-facing product of transparency still feels suspiciously curated.
She also famously suggested that the alleged Epstein client list was "sitting on my desk" for review only to later say it didn't actually exist, a blunder that raised the expectations of MAGA only to leave them bitterly disappointed.
Bondi’s Subpoena Dilemma
The Democrats smell blood. Oversight's subpoena was bipartisan, approved with a handful of Republicans joining Democrats. And it gives the opposition a firm lever: an April 14 deposition date that serves as a key test of compliance.
If Bondi dodges, Democrats can try to build toward contempt, and it speaks to some of MAGA's worst fears about the Epstein files.
If she shows, Democrats get sworn testimony and a transcript, which is more fodder for their fight against the Trump administration.
Either way, it's political downside for the administration, because Epstein is the kind of scandal where nothing new is rarely reassuring. The public assumes there's always more and it's being kept, deliberately, from them.
Prediction Markets Look Ominous
Prediction markets are already pricing meaningful odds that Bondi won't last through the year, and there's a sizable chance that she won't.
Markets aren't truth machines, of course, but they are useful barometers that capture one important reality: traders increasingly see the Attorney General as one of the administration officials most exposed to a sudden fall.
At the time of writing, Kalshi's market on who will leave the Trump administration in 2026 has Bondi at a 52 percent chance. Polymarket looks more favorable, with a 38 percent chance she is out by 2027.
Those aren't terrible. But they're not great either. And they're much likelier to swing sharply to the negative than the positive, particularly given Bondi’s track record on Epstein.
The Kristi Noem Lesson
But Bondi is not Kristi Noem. At least, not yet.
Noem became a political liability for Trump in a way that directly implicated him, after testifying that he approved a lavish and controversial $220 million DHS ad campaign to promote her leadership of the agency.
Trump publicly pushed back, saying he never knew anything about it, and Noem was soon moved out of her department role, despite having had the president's backing through the recent crisis over immigration enforcement in Minneapolis.
Bondi has not made that same fatal mistake.
Her posture, by contrast, has been consistent loyalty and consistent message discipline: Protect the president, narrow the dispute to process, and treat congressional Democrats as unserious actors.
That is exactly the instinct Trump values in an attorney general, and indeed all his officials. Protect the president at all costs.
The irony is that Bondi's loyalty advantage is also what makes her perilous. The more she is perceived as the administration's shield on Epstein, the more she becomes the single point of failure.
How Bondi Might Fall
Ultimately, Trump's ongoing faith in Bondi will likely be tested in a classically Trumpian way: Loyalty.
He has repeatedly expressed his annoyance at the focus on the Epstein files, seeing it as a distraction from the administration’s more important work and handing opponents a powerful political weapon.
Bondi's missteps on Epstein, while embarrassing to the administration, do not necessarily mean she will lose Trump's trust, though his patience may be stretched thin if she keeps the issue alive in a way that damages him.
It is a toxic problem for the White House.
Instead, though, Bondi may blow up underneath Trump as Noem did, by implicating him in Epstein-related decisions or some other way related to the files that undermines the president’s own position, even if only accidentally.
Until then, Bondi remains what she has increasingly become: Not just Trump’s attorney general, but the administration's human redaction.
Hey gang, Carlo Versano here. I hope you enjoyed this article. As Newsweek's Director of Politics and Culture and editor of the 1600 newsletter, I'm keen to hear what you think. Now, Newsweek is offering a new service to allow you to communicate directly with me in the form of a text message chat. You can sign up and get a direct line to me, as well as the reporters who work for me. You can shape our coverage.
As a Newsweek member, we're offering this service to you for free. You can sign up below, or read more about how it works here. Let's talk!
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines