Yesterday, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi embarrassed herself, her beloved leader, and the rule of law in front of the House Judiciary Committee. Refusing to answer a single question about the Epstein files or ICE’s deadly occupation directly, Bondi not only disrespected the congressional process of oversight, but completely disregarded the voices of the Epstein survivors who were sitting just a few feet behind her. She did not look at them once.
U.S. Senator Van Hollen (D-MD) joins Jen to discuss the abysmal performance by Bondi—including her dodging the question of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s connection to Epstein— and how the DOJ is monitoring the activity of lawmakers researching the Epstein files.
Chris Van Hollen is the Democratic Senator for Maryland. He is the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government and sits on various others, such as Homeland Security.
The following transcript has been edited for formatting.
Jen Rubin
Hi, this is Jen Rubin, Editor-in-Chief of The Contrarian. We are delighted to have with us Senator Chris Van Hollen from the great state of Maryland. Welcome, Senator!
Senator Van Hollen
Jen, great to be back with you and the Contrarian.
Jen Rubin
Well, we love having you. You questioned under oath, Commerce Secretary Lutnick yesterday. And he essentially admitted that, in fact, he had had social interaction with Jeffrey Epstein well after he said he had broken off, his relationship with him entirely. What did you make of the testimony, and what did you make of his attitude that this was no big deal?
Senator Van Hollen
Well, this is a big deal, and as I pointed out at the hearing, he lied to the American people, he lied to the Congress, he lied to the survivors of you know, Epstein’s disgusting acts, because we all remember when Howard Lutnick made a big deal about how, on his very first encounter with Jeff Epstein, he recognized that Epstein was a, quote, disgusting person, and Lutnik told us he would have nothing more to do with them, all to turn out that, in fact, years later, in fact, after Epstein had actually been convicted of being a sexual predator. that Lutnick takes his family and nannies to the Epstein private island.
So, number one, he lied, and of course, there’s the issue of, you know, what kind of person takes Family and nannies to the island that is controlled, run by a pedophile. So, I have asked Howard Lutnick to provide me and the committee and the Congress With his records about all of this, so that we can dig into it further.
Jen Rubin
He obviously had communication back and forth, seemed to be very chummy about setting up the relationship, about the, the meeting, rather, and about the goings-on there. Did he seem at all embarrassed, regretful about this at all?
Senator Van Hollen
He did not. He had an opportunity to, you know, indicate that he had exercised extraordinarily bad judgment, both in terms of his conduct, but also that he had lied and misrepresented his actions to the Congress and the public, and most importantly, to the survivors. So, I am doing two things in follow-up. One is demanding he provide his own records, and second, I do intend to go over to the FBI and go through the Epstein files myself.
Jen Rubin
Can you make of the fact that apparently the members of Congress who did that were being monitored by the Department of Justice? I’ve never heard of something like that.
Senator Van Hollen
No, it’s outrageous, and in fact, you know, before I go, I am going to be talking to some of those, including my colleague from Maryland, you know, Congressman Raskin, because as you know, just sitting in a chair where you’re monitored and there are 3 million documents. To go through. Having been in private practice and done document production and discovery, you need a strategy to do that. They allow you, as I understand, to search by word, but you need to, number one, know what you’re looking for and how you’re going to do it, and number two, to your point, outrageous that they’re monitoring and surveilling what members of Congress are doing, and they’re trying to monitor and surveil everyone in America these days, it seems.
Jen Rubin
It does. Of course, not all the documents have still been produced. There are a few million, but there are millions more, and even though they were not supposed to redact the names of the men who were involved, they did. I seem to remember Congress passed a law, and the President signed it into law. How can you obtain enforcement of that? How can you bring these people to heel to actually follow the law the President signed?
Senator Van Hollen
Well, you’re absolutely right. They did the reverse of what they were supposed to do, right? They revealed the names of, you know, victims and survivors, and continued to hide the names of perpetrators and others who had these relationships, with Jeffrey Epstein. So, what we need to do, Jen, is twofold. Number one, continue to look at legal options through the courts, and we tried, I will say, the other day in the Senate, I was co-sponsor of a resolution to empower the Senate, to take legal action to require 100% compliance.
The other option is to get more of our Republican colleagues on board, and Again, the only reason that the Department of Justice is releasing these files is because we had about 4 House Republicans join all the Democrats to reveal the files. I mean, I listened to Pam Bondi, Attorney General Bondi, the other day, as if they had been so forthcoming. What a lie. I mean, the only reason they produced what they have so far is because Congress passed a law, which, by the way, Trump tried to block, went after Republicans who voted to require the you know, disclosure of Epstein files. So, Trump, let’s be really clear, he wanted to keep this buried, and we will keep fighting until we get full transparency and accountability.
Jen Rubin
You’ve been a lawyer, you’ve served in various public positions. Have you ever seen a performance like Pam Bondi’s yesterday?
Senator Van Hollen
Oh my god, I’ve never seen such a, you know, the way she conducted herself had to make everybody in the country, including everybody in the Trump administration, cringe. And as you know, it’s hard to get anyone in the Trump administration cringe, but I have to believe that they were sort of silently screaming at the TV, because, you know, to watch that spectacle of her lashing out, not answering questions, completely unprofessional conduct really made a mockery of her position. And, you know, I think somebody summed it up right when they mistakenly called her secretary, she said, no, I’m Attorney General Bondi, and the response was, well, you had me fooled.
Jen Rubin
Yeah, no kidding. And unfortunately, your colleagues don’t hold her in contempt, don’t proceed with any kind of other sanctions against her, so she goes merrily on the way. Where do you think the American people are? They obviously saw her refusing even to look at the victims. Do you think the American people are gonna put up with this? Do you think this is gonna come back to haunt all those enablers, on your committee, on other committees?
Senator Van Hollen
I don’t think the American people will stand for this. You know, one thing we’ve seen is, across the political spectrum, you know, the American people understand how despicable Jeffrey Epstein’s conduct was. and how outrageous it is that, you know, Pam Bondi has worked to shield the perpetrators of this, and Literally, that photo you mentioned of her with her back. To the survivors, refusing to even turn around and look them in the eye, refusing to acknowledge their pain, and refusing to say that they’re sorry for how this has taken so long to come out. I mean, you and I remember when Pam Bondi said she got the files on her desk.
And now we witnessed yesterday where she refuses to even turn around and acknowledge the survivors. So, no, I don’t think the American people will stand for this, and I think this is contributing to the fact that, you know, Donald Trump and this presidency are going down very fast when it comes to American public opinion.
Jen Rubin
Turning to another but related topic of lawlessness, the extension on funding for the Department of Homeland Security is going to run out, as people are taking off. For Munich and elsewhere, today. There’s also an announcement from Tom Homan, we don’t know if it’s accurate or not, that they’re winding down their surge in Minneapolis. Where are we on ice, and what’s gonna happen come tomorrow, when essentially, they’re gonna be a funding stop, not for them, because they’ve got billions of dollars, but for the rest of the Department of Homeland Security.
Senator Van Hollen
So, a couple things. One, and I was always skeptical, but now we know that the White House is just not serious about any meaningful reform or reining in of ICE, right? They’ve taken more off the table than they left on the table. They’ve not agreed to having an independent you know, investigation of the killings of two American citizens. I mean, how can we trust an administration that called the victims of these shootings domestic terrorists. How can we possibly trust them to conduct a fair investigation and hold people accountable? They’ve also said they don’t want any additional restraints on the use of force. We were asking that we apply the same kind of rules that apply to local law enforcement, that engage every day in our communities.
And then, we also wanted them to have to sort of individually identify the people that they’re picking up, as opposed to this indiscriminate sweeps, where they’re just locking people up. We all know that they lied when they said they’re focused on the worst of the worst. People there sweeping up overwhelmingly pose no, you know, public threat whatsoever. And so, they’re just—they’re lying when they lead people to believe they want change. I will say, with respect to, you know, Tom Homan’s announcement, I don’t know if they’re going to follow through in Minneapolis, but think about this, Jen. Where are they going to go next?
Right, in my state of Maryland, they just purchased a facility in Washington County that can take up to 1,500 people. We were successful at blocking them from purchasing another property in Howard County. When I say we, the county executive and the county council, within a week, passed a law blocking them from purchasing that particular property. But… They were not blocked in Washington County, they’re not blocked in other places. We’re hearing about other places they may, you know, open up. So, these people want to fill these detention centers, these concentration camps.
And, so, you know, the fact that Tom Homan may try to dress this up with some of his language is not reassuring to me whatsoever, given their conduct. And so, very quickly, when it comes to the money. My view is that Republicans should not hold these other elements of the Homeland Security Department hostage, right? They should not hold up TSA, should not hold up the Coast Guard, should not hold up, FEMA. You’re absolutely right that they’ve got a boatload of money already for ICE. They have $70 billion in the bank, they’re drawing that down, but we shouldn’t give them another $10 billion when they’re engaged in this activity, so that is the one recourse we have at this point, is to say, not one more penny as we continue to work with the American people in pushing back.
Jen Rubin
And this shutdown, if it does affect TSA, if it does affect FEMA, Coast Guard, this would be on the Republicans. As I understand it, Democrats are more than willing to fund those other functions and continue to work on the ICE and Border Patrol, situation, is that right?
Senator Van Hollen
That’s exactly right. In fact, we may have an opportunity later today to make that point legislatively. We’ll see how all this plays out, but the answer to your question is yes. We would like to continue to fund TSA, continue to fund FEMA, continue to fund the Coast Guard. and other part of the operations. I don’t think we should be funding the Secretary’s office at the Department of Homeland Security, and we shouldn’t be funding ICE, and under these circumstances, Customs and Border Patrol. As you pointed out. because of their so-called big, beautiful bill, that big, ugly bill where they give billionaires permanent tax cuts, they cut Medicaid, but one thing they funded was these lawless ICE operations. But they don’t need a penny more, and $10 billion… It’s a lot more money.
Jen Rubin
Exactly. There was a really stunning opinion from the Fifth Circuit recently that essentially said—took a very minority position. Lots of courts have ruled the other way, but saying that they could permanently detain with no bail. people who had not committed a violent crime, not a flight risk, not a danger to others. Obviously, that could be appealed to the Supreme Court, goodness knows what they would do. Is that something that Congress should address as well through the funding bill to make sure money isn’t spent to detain people who are not a flight risk, are not serious criminals, are not, a danger to others?
Senator Van Hollen
So the short answer, Jen, is yes. I mean, we should be putting—we should make it clear that you cannot use funds for what I think are these lawless purposes. You’re right, the Trump administration, you know, engaged in forum shopping, went to their favorite circuit, but that opinion is so out of line, with the Constitution, with jurisprudence generally. That’s why, as all these other courts have found in the opposite way, it may be headed to the Supreme Court, but my view is that we should use every lever we have to prevent them from using monies, taxpayer monies, to conduct those kind of abusive actions. Now, look, at the end of the day, as you pointed out, Republicans are in the majority in the House and in the Senate, at least for now.
I hope that changes in 2026, I think it will. But for now, you know, we ultimately, in order to pass something affirmatively, are going to need at least some Republicans to come on board. We had some, you know, on the Epstein file release. I mean, we only had 4 originally. Right now, unfortunately, we have… we don’t have that many Republicans willing to rein in ICE, even though I think the American people across party lines are calling for that. The American people don’t like what they see. They don’t like to see this unconstitutional, outrageous sort of activity that they’re seeing from federal agents.
Jen Rubin
Last subject I want to talk to you about, and we’ve talked about it some in regard to them snooping around on Congress, is this attack on the First Amendment of members of Congress. They tried to actually get a grand jury to indict those 6 members of Congress who made a video saying nothing more than members of our armed services should follow the Constitution. They couldn’t get a single grand juror to indict. I’ve never heard of anything like that. And there was just minutes ago, apparently, a ruling on the lawsuit brought by Senator Mark Kelly saying that this disciplinary kangaroo court thing they’re cooking up, violates his First Amendment rights. What are they doing here, and do you think, at some point, your Republican members of Congress get a little concerned that First Amendment rights, not only for the American people, but for them, are at stake?
Senator Van Hollen
Yeah, you’re right. You would think that the assault on the First Amendment of the American people would be enough to wake up Republicans, but now that it’s getting even closer to home, like, you know, members of the Senate that they’re talking to every day, you would hope that that will wake them up. We will see. I mean. This is exactly the authoritarian playbook that we’ve witnessed in other countries rolling out here, and the crackdowns on the First Amendment, you know, arresting Don Lemon, arresting other journalists, you know, for doing their job, and now You know, arresting students, by the way, early in this administration for expressing their views.
And now, literally trying to get an indictment of six members of Congress whose message was. Follow the Constitution, right? You don’t have to disobey… you can disobey an unlawful order. You’re only obligated to follow lawful orders. I mean, this is classic… Constitutional, you know. jurisprudence, but it’s also classical, really First Amendment protected. So, another very dangerous moment. Whether our Republican colleagues will wake up, we don’t know, but I will say, and I think you agree, we cannot… normalize this behavior. We’ve been pushing back, but I do believe we need to identify even more ways to just say, we cannot normalize. this shredding of the Constitution, the First Amendment, the right to due process. I mean, one after another, the provisions in the Bill of Rights are being shredded. And so, this is a moment that nobody can allow this sort of to become normal, and just say. Boy, the public furor over this died down over the last 48 hours, so we’ll just move on. We just can’t move on.
Jen Rubin
Well, I think, all the contrarians certainly agree with that, and there is a solution, and that is elections in 2026. I think it’s fair to say that the… both the House and the Senate, are up for grabs, and there’s one sure way to stop this, and that is have a first branch of government that actually does their job. So thank you.
Senator Van Hollen
And I would just say, Jen, on this point, I mean, it’s the… it is the we the people in Minneapolis who really are the heroes of the moment, right? They’re the ones who organize, they’re pushing back, and to your point on their efforts to, you know, get a grand jury indictment of my six congressional colleagues, again. It was… it was the public, it was the members of the jury. who obviously looked at that case and said no, and as you know, you know the saying that, you know, a grand jury… if you get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
Well, this administration now has a record in the Comey case, as well as other cases, and now this. Where, even when the defense doesn’t get to show up, even when the prosecution Has the, you know, grand jury in front of them, and can present the exact case they want with no other information. People are listening to this and going, this is crazy! It is crazy.
Jen Rubin
Exactly. Well, thank you so much for everything you’re doing, Senator. You are a strong voice for democracy, and we really do appreciate it. We’ll look forward to having you back soon, and hopefully, your Republican colleagues will grow a spine sometime soon. So thanks so much. We’ll talk to you soon.
Senator Van Hollen
Right back at you.
