CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig on Wednesday debunked the “bogus” Department of Justice claim that former Attorney General Pam Bondi need not comply with a subpoena to answer questions about how the DOJ handled its release of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Honig joined “The Source” after guest host John King cited Assistant Attorney General Patrick D. Davis, who said in a letter obtained by CNN that Bondi won’t sit for questioning next week as she was subpoenaed “in her official role” and “not in a personal capacity.”

Asked if this reasoning was sound, Honig stated plainly, “No, that’s a bogus argument, John.”

He explained, “A subpoena is simply a command to a witness to provide relevant information, if they have any. As we sit here right now, former Attorney General Pam Bondi has the exact same information that she had a week ago when she was still the sitting AG.”

“Now, DOJ has come up with this distinction of, ‘Well, she’s not the AG anymore, therefore the subpoena’s invalid,’” Honig continued. “First of all, the subpoena is to Pam Bondi. It’s not to the current occupant of the office.”

The argument from Davis certainly appears to be “bogus” on its face, as any government official who is subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee could simply leave their position before questioning occurs in order to avoid complying with the mandate if it weren’t.

“Second of all, if that subpoena meant whoever the current AG is, DOJ would be offering up [acting Attorney General] Todd Blanche, which they’re not doing,” said Honig. “And third of all, John, this committee has already subpoenaed several prior AGs.”

The practicing legal attorney noted these include Eric Holder, Bill Barr and Merrick Garland.

He said that the subpoena “remains valid” despite the claim from Davis, but added that it could be tricky for ranking Oversight Committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) to legally hold Bondi in contempt if she failed to appear, which he said Wednesday he would do.

The legal analyst explained that the 21 Democrats on the committee would need three of 26 Republican members “to get a majority” vote in order to bring a contempt charge, and that Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) currently appears to be the only one who would join them.

He noted the contempt charge would only reach the House after a majority committee vote.

“But here’s the thing, John,” said Honig. “If the full House votes contempt, then it goes over to DOJ for potential prosecution, I am quite certain that Todd Blanche will not authorize a prosecution of Pam Bondi.”

Honig continued, “But it’s worth saying, for a DOJ, Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche alike — who love to congratulate themselves for being the most transparent in history — that would be a bad look to take a contempt charge from the Oversight Committee or the full House.”

Bondi is expected to appear for questioning on April 14.

By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.