Bondi pledges to expose shielded men in Epstein files amid Massie clash
WASHINGTON, DC: Pam Bondi faced a combative House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, February 11, pledging that the Justice Department would unmask powerful individuals whose names were improperly shielded in the "Epstein Files." Responding to questions from Representative Lou Correa (D-Calif.), Bondi stated the department would work to correct redaction errors that withheld names of potential associates while exposing the survivor's identity.
Bondi: "If any man's name was redacted that should have not have been, we will of course unredact it" pic.twitter.com/522s1VdtyS
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 11, 2026
"If any man's name was redacted that should not have been, we will of course unredact it," Bondi testified. The Attorney General defended the department's "very low" error rate but conceded that mistakes were inevitable given the 30-day window provided to review millions of sensitive records.
Massie slams ‘worst thing’ for survivors
Thomas Massie criticizes Pam Bondi on the Epstein Files:
— The American Conservative (@amconmag) February 11, 2026
"This email was sent by the victims' lawyers to the DOJ. It was a list of names not to release. What did the DOJ do with this email? They released it. Literally the worst thing you could do the survivors you did." pic.twitter.com/s28KHILTSw
Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a co-sponsor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, launched a scathing attack on Bondi’s leadership, specifically regarding the exposure of survivors' private data. Massie revealed that the DOJ published a list of victim names directly provided by their attorney with an explicit request for secrecy, calling the failure "literally the worst thing you could do to the survivors."
The Kentucky Republican said the department’s "mixture of staggering incompetence and jaded cruelty" led to the public release of victims' home addresses, bank details, and unredacted nude photographs of abuse victims. Bondi acknowledged the harm caused and urged any survivor whose name was improperly disclosed to contact the department so it could correct the error immediately.
Hidden co-conspirators caught ‘red-handed’
BREAKING:
— 𝐀𝐋𝐏𝐇𝐀 ® (@Alpha7021) February 11, 2026
Thomas Massie: “Are you able to track who it was that obscured Les Wexner’s name as a co-conspirator in an FBI document?
AG Pam Bondi: “We corrected it within 40 minutes”
Thomas Massie: “Within 40 minutes of me catching you red-handed.”
AG Pam Bondi: “This guy has… https://t.co/m0jgligh8i pic.twitter.com/fO8uUBlUB7
The hearing turned even more heated when Massie pivoted to the redactions of powerful men, specifically referencing former Victoria's Secret CEO Les Wexner. Massie questioned why Wexner’s name was obscured in an FBI document that appeared to label him as a "potential co-conspirator" of Epstein.
Bondi responded that Wexner’s name appeared more than 4,000 times in the records and said it was unredacted within 40 minutes of the issue being raised. Massie countered that the correction came only after he had caught the department "red-handed" in what he called an ongoing effort to shield wealthy enablers.
Decades of cover-up claims fly
Bondi to Massie: You have Trump Derangement Syndrome. You’re a failed politician. pic.twitter.com/mHne27Kn1w
— Acyn (@Acyn) February 11, 2026
As the exchange devolved into personal insults, Bondi labeled Massie a "failed politician" and a "hypocrite" suffering from "Trump derangement syndrome." She accused the Republicans of failing to press the previous administration on the same issues, a claim Massie rejected by stating the "cover-up" has spanned multiple presidencies.
"This cover-up spans decades, and you are responsible for this portion of it," Massie told the Attorney General. Despite the fireworks, Bondi maintained that her department has been as transparent as the law allows, while survivors sitting behind her in the hearing room remained unacknowledged throughout most of her testimony.
Disclaimer: This article contains remarks made by individuals and organizations on the internet. MEAWW cannot independently confirm them and does not support the claims or opinions being expressed online.