Blondi is tracking Congress' searches in Epstein files

[deminks]

Why is DOJ tracking what members of Congress are searching for in the Epstein files? bsky.app/profile/atru...

— Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) 2026-02-11T22:55:06.749Z

Why is DOJ tracking what members of Congress are searching for in the Epstein files?

CNN: "Another photograph - these are notes AG Bondi brought to the hearing today. This shows a list of Rep. Jayapal's search history. Lawmakers are allowed to go to a DOJ facility to search unredacted files. We learned from this photo that the searches are apparently being tracked & read by the DOJ"

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-02-11T21:27:58.630Z

CNN: "Another photograph - these are notes AG Bondi brought to the hearing today. This shows a list of Rep. Jayapal's search history. Lawmakers are allowed to go to a DOJ facility to search unredacted files. We learned from this photo that the searches are apparently being tracked & read by the DOJ"

End snips

[Kid Berwyn]

1. Like knowing what they know.

Nice, especially if you're running a Gestapo.

[paleotn]

4. Granted, but you know they'll F it up some how.

The incompetence of that bunch never ceases to amaze.

[TommyT139]

2. I didn't watch the whole thing

...but to me that was perhaps the only useful information to come out of today's session.

If nothing else, it gives the regime an excuse to file charges if anything turns up in the public press.

[Wiz Imp]

9. File charges for what?

The law requires all of the material to be released publicly. It also required the DOJ to provide explicit detailed justification for any redactions. The DOJ has not done that. That means the entire tranche of data is free reign to inform the public about.

[TommyT139]

11. You'd think, right?

It was a tad disappointing that one of the congressmen had an email relating to Trump, yet when Bondi said it was "privileged," he refrained from reading it, both in the hearing and then later on TV.

[lame54]

3. A congressman are suing for have phone records pulled

[sakabatou]

5. They want to know who they can try and blackmail into not letting people read it

[Arazi]

6. I asked on the other thread about this, is this legal?

It feels like warrantless surveillance.

[slightlv]

7. Isn't that what the Repugs were claiming

when some emails were pulled from them regarding Jan 6? And it seems like there was another time Repugs emails came into interest a few years ago, but I can't remember the exact timing or reason. But, like they always do, they screamed like holy victims when it's THEIR emails. Not so much when it's anybody else's.

[chowder66]

8. One of two things and maybe both....

To get their talking points in order when Dems bring up information they have seen and/or to try to use their search terms against them which would be ridiculous but I wouldn't put it past them.

[Wiz Imp]

10. I would guess most are searching for specific documents that were already identified in the redacted files

The point being Democrats want to find out what was redacted and prove that 99% of the redactions were illegal and unnecessary. I would bet most searches are for simple document numbers.