Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 02/11/2026 10:35:37 AM PST by thegagline
Attorney General Pam Bondi ripped House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) as a “washed-up, loser lawyer” before clashing with lawmakers of both parties during a Wednesday hearing.
President Trump’s top law enforcement official testified before the panel following the release of millions of files related to the prosecution of deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein — with several victims in attendance.
Judiciary Democrats accused Bondi of ignoring those victims and having her Department of Justice harmfully release documents identifying some of them — while redacting members of Epstein’s rich and powerful circle.
In heated exchanges with Raskin, the AG accused Democrats of only caring about the issue because Trump is in the White House.
Raskin demanded in one of those back-and-forths that Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) restore time to retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), as Bondi ignored his question about possible indictments of Epstein co-conspirators.
“You can let her filibuster all day long, but not on our watch — not on our time, no way,” Raskin said. “And I told you about that, Attorney General, before you started.”
“You don’t tell me anything,” Bondi erupted, before mocking Raskin as a “washed-up, loser lawyer — not even a lawyer.”
Bondi then rounded on Nadler, telling him: “You said the president conspired, sought foreign interference in the 2016 election. Robert Mueller found no evidence, none, of foreign interference in 2016. Have you apologized to President Trump?
“You all should be apologizing. You sit here and you attack the president, and I am not going to have it. I’m not going to put up with it,” the AG continued.
“None of them asked Merrick Garland, over the last four years, one word about Jeffrey Epstein. How ironic is that? You know why? Because Donald Trump.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Seriously, Raskin, Nadler, and Garland Garfinkel deserve this and so much more. Good for Bondi
This didn’t bother those losers. They know what they are and who they are, and they’re quite comfortable with it.
Some of her comments were pretty good. But responding to a question about not having prosecuted anyone in relation to Epstein with “the stock market is hitting new highs” was pretty lame.
As far as lowlife scumbags go, raskin is right up there.
nadler is just a hygiene challenged moron.
Imagine the knuckle dragging mouthbreathers that voted for those two human vermin.
Attorney General Pam Bondi was way too nice in her otherwise accurate
description.
Twitter is having a field day with video clips of her clubbing the Rats like baby seals.
https://x.com/FoxNews/status/2021623956810444964
Why SHOULD she answer that question?
Merrick garland didn’t do sht in FOUR years.
Well, well.
She’s found a pair.
She for got to all arsehole.
This type of response is good. Its better than Republicans sitting politely while Democrats insult them. But I get the feeling that for some this type of response is what is most important in the battle with the Democrats. I see a million headlines like “X destroys the Democrats” or “X obliterates the liberal argument with one comment” or “Schumer has no response to X’s comment”. As if some gimmicky soundbite is the same as legislation and policy. The Democrats know how to legislate and stop GOP legislation. The GOP many times seems more interested in getting the headlines. Bondi calling the Dems washed up losers does not make up for her botching the Epstein files rollout or some of her other fumbles at DOJ.
Pam is looking extra cute today as she smacks the Rats
Just watching some of the clips is so painful to watch. You know these Rats are evil and trying to create red meat for their followers. I do not understand her methods of response. I wish President Trump would get a new AG that could handle these Democrats with a surgical response and not how she is going about it. She is on the defensive to the point of weakness.
Were the ‘victims’ the ones asking the questions?
She’s all talk. These guys are all talk
I would let her run a baby shower
Raskin’s Financial Disclosure Controversy: In 2022, reports emerged that Raskin failed to properly report a stock payout for his wife, which his office described as a clerical error and not an attempt to hide assets.
Response to Claims: Raskin has strongly denied allegations of personal enrichment, specifically dismissing claims linking him to USAID funds as “conspiracy theories” and “rage bait”.
Partisan Conflicts: Raskin is often accused of lying or bias by Republican colleagues, particularly regarding his role in investigations into Donald Trump and his defense of Joe Biden, which is part of typical partisan rhetorical fighting in Congress.
As of early 2026, Raskin continues to hold a high-ranking position on the House Oversight Committee, leading investigations into Republican-led initiatives, which he often labels as corrupt or illegitimate.
Based on recent legislative actions, several bills target telecommunications companies, primarily by imposing security requirements, banning foreign equipment, or reducing legal protections.
The most significant actions include:
Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (and updates): This “Rip and Replace” law prohibits the FCC from subsidizing equipment from companies deemed a national security risk (such as Huawei and ZTE) and forces U.S. providers to remove such equipment. The 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) added $3 billion to fund this process, highlighting the ongoing financial and operational burden on carriers.
Secure American Communications Act (Proposed 2024/2025): Drafted in response to major Chinese cyberespionage breaches (e.g., Salt Typhoon), this bill would require the FCC to issue binding, strict cybersecurity rules, annual vulnerability testing, and independent audits for telecom providers.
Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency (FACT) Act: Passed by the Senate in 2025, this act requires the FCC to publicly list telecom companies with ties to foreign adversarial governments (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc.), which could tarnish the reputation of affected firms.
Telecommunications Act of 1996: While older, this act is frequently cited for failing to promote competition and instead accelerating industry consolidation, which critics argue allowed a few companies to gain excessive control and tarnished the industry’s reputation for innovation.
Key Trends: Recent legislation in 2024 and 2025 focuses on forcing companies to disclose the use of foreign equipment and demanding they secure their networks against foreign hacking.
Why should Pam Bondi apologize for what Epstein did? You might as tell democrats to apologize. Of course they won’t. They’re pure as the driven snow, don’tcha know, as they steal elections and loot the treasury. Give our money away to foreign invaders, cheats, terrorists and absconders. A-holes.
Why should Pam Bondi apologize for what Epstein did? You might as tell democrats to apologize. Of course they won’t. They’re pure as the driven snow, don’tcha know, as they steal elections and loot the treasury. Give our money away to foreign invaders, cheats, terrorists and absconders. A-holes.
If you would watch her opening statement you would know what she’s been doing as AG. She has been unfairly slandered by a lot on this board as has Patel. They have done a tremendous amount of work since taking office. People forget that we never would have known about Artic Frost if Nunes and Patel had not uncovered it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.