Bondi Says Todd Blanche Oversaw DOJ’s Epstein Files Release
Former Attorney General Pam Bondi told lawmakers that Todd Blanche led the process behind the Epstein files release, as Congress examines redactions, survivor privacy concerns, and DOJ transparency.
Pam Bondi told lawmakers that Todd Blanche, Donald Trump’s chosen attorney general nominee, was “in charge” of the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files release, according to testimony before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.
The statement places Blanche at the center of a growing congressional inquiry into how the Justice Department reviewed, redacted, and released records tied to Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender, and Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex-trafficking crimes.
Bondi’s testimony matters because Blanche is not only a former senior Justice Department official. He is also the person Trump has lined up to replace Bondi permanently as attorney general. If formally nominated, Blanche would need confirmation from the U.S. Senate, where the handling of the Epstein records could become part of the public record surrounding his nomination.
The question is not only what the Epstein files contain. It is who controlled their release, who oversaw redactions, who was responsible for protecting survivor information, and who will answer for the parts of the process that lawmakers and survivors say were mishandled.
Bondi appeared before the House Oversight and Reform Committee as part of its investigation into the Epstein case and the Justice Department’s compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The law mandated the release of Epstein-related records held by the department. The Justice Department has maintained that it acted in accordance with the law.
But the release has drawn criticism from lawmakers in both parties, as well as survivors of Epstein’s abuse. Some raised concerns over redactions. Others questioned whether sensitive personal information was disclosed in the records. The central issue is transparency, but also control: what the public was allowed to see, what remained hidden, and whether survivors were protected in the process.
During her testimony, Bondi defended the Justice Department’s overall handling of the records under her leadership. At the same time, she repeatedly said she did not personally lead every part of the review.
She told lawmakers that she did not “conduct that document review” herself and said she had delegated oversight of the process to Blanche.
“He was in charge of the process and the entire release of the Epstein files,” Bondi said, according to the transcript.
That answer immediately shifted attention toward Blanche.
Blanche had served as Bondi’s deputy at the Justice Department. After Bondi’s ouster, he was appointed acting attorney general. Trump has since said he plans to nominate Blanche to the role permanently.
That creates a direct line between the Epstein files release and the person now positioned to lead the Justice Department.
Bondi’s testimony also placed the department’s mistakes under renewed scrutiny. She acknowledged that “there were redaction errors” in the release, while insisting that the department had been committed to accountability and transparency from the beginning of the process.
The distinction matters. Bondi defended the department’s work, but she also described a process she said was managed by Blanche. Lawmakers are now asking whether Blanche should answer questions directly about the review, redactions, survivor protections, and release decisions.
During a break in questioning, several Democratic lawmakers told reporters that Bondi had indicated Blanche was leading the Epstein investigation and that mistakes tied to redactions and survivor protection were being pushed back onto him.
Bondi later disputed that characterization publicly, saying it was “NOT TRUE” and that she had praised Blanche’s management of what she called a “Herculean task.”
The transcript shows a more careful picture. Bondi did identify Blanche as the official overseeing the release. She also denied that she was blaming him.
“Todd Blanche is one of the most highly ethical individuals I know,” Bondi told lawmakers. She said she believed he was making “an incredible acting attorney general” and that he managed the process “with very little error.”
That is the tension in her testimony.
Bondi defended Blanche personally while placing operational responsibility for the Epstein files release under his oversight. She did not present him as someone outside the process. She presented him as the official in charge of it.
For Epstein survivors and the public, that distinction is important.
The Epstein files are not ordinary records. They involve sexual abuse, trafficking crimes, powerful people, institutional failures, survivor privacy, and years of public demands for transparency. Any release of those records carries two obligations at once: the public’s right to know and survivors’ right not to be harmed again through careless disclosure.
That is why redaction errors and sensitive information are not minor technical issues. In a case built around exploitation and institutional failure, the handling of survivor information is part of the accountability record.
Bondi’s testimony also touched on what Trump may have known before Epstein and Maxwell’s crimes became public. Asked about Trump’s knowledge, Bondi said she was “not certain of the extent” of what he knew before the crimes became public.
A White House spokesperson later claimed Trump had been “totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein” when contacted for comment on Bondi’s testimony.
That claim does not resolve the broader transparency question. The committee’s inquiry is focused on records, release decisions, redactions, compliance with the transparency law, and the Justice Department officials responsible for managing the process.
Bondi declined to discuss conversations she had with Trump, saying she would not comment on discussions with the president.
She was also questioned about Ghislaine Maxwell. Bondi said she learned of Maxwell’s controversial prison transfer through news reports after it happened and claimed she had “nothing to do with that.”
Asked whether Maxwell should receive a pardon, Bondi answered no.
Maxwell, she said, was a “monster.”
“I believe she should die in prison,” Bondi told lawmakers.
The exchange added another layer to the testimony: Bondi distanced herself from Maxwell’s transfer, rejected a pardon, defended the department’s Epstein files work, and repeatedly identified Blanche as the official who oversaw the document release.
The committee also asked whether victims or victims’ attorneys reached out to the Justice Department after Bondi took office. Bondi said yes, adding that there were multiple victims and that many were represented by attorneys.
Asked whether she personally met with them, Bondi said she spoke to one attorney but could not recall the attorney’s name. She said she believed she referred the attorney to the FBI.
“You know, when a victim is represented, you go through their attorney,” Bondi said.
That answer may become another point of scrutiny. Survivors have repeatedly argued that their voices must not be treated as secondary to the institutional process. In the Epstein case, where so much of the public demand for transparency has come from survivors, the question of how the Justice Department communicated with victims and their attorneys is not procedural background. It is part of the case.
The political pressure is now moving toward Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel. After Bondi’s testimony, Democrats urged Representative James Comer, the Republican chair of the committee, to bring both men before the panel to answer questions as part of the investigation.
That next step would matter because Bondi has now placed Blanche directly inside the chain of command.
If Blanche oversaw the release, then he is the official positioned to answer the questions Bondi did not fully resolve: how the review was conducted, how redaction decisions were made, how survivor privacy was protected, how errors occurred, and what the department did to correct them.
The Epstein files have always been about more than one criminal case. They are about a system of access, protection, secrecy, and institutional failure that allowed abuse to continue while survivors waited for accountability.
The files are the record. The release process is now part of the record too.
If powerful institutions can control what is released, mishandle sensitive information, and then diffuse responsibility across officials, the public is left with the appearance of transparency without a clear line of accountability.
That is why Bondi’s testimony matters.
It does not answer every question about the Epstein files. It points to the next person who should be asked.
Todd Blanche is now Trump’s chosen attorney general nominee. Bondi told lawmakers he oversaw the Epstein files release. Congress is still examining redactions, survivor privacy concerns, and DOJ transparency.
The question now is not only what the Epstein files contain.
It is who controlled their release, who decided what the public could see, and who will answer for the parts survivors and lawmakers say were mishandled.
This report is part of the public record on the Epstein files, survivor accountability, institutional transparency, and the officials responsible for controlling records tied to elite abuse.
Epstein Files Resistance documents how power protects itself through delay, redaction, secrecy, and procedural control — and why survivor-centered accountability cannot end when records are released.
Upgrade to a paid subscription to support the investigations that keep these records public.