Has any law enforcement agency opened an investigation into Pam Bondi over missing documents?

1. What Bondi publicly accused — FBI withholding of Epstein files

In late February 2025 Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly accused FBI personnel of not delivering “the full and complete Epstein files” to the Justice Department and demanded the bureau turn over additional documents and investigate why her earlier request was not followed; Bondi ordered FBI Director Kash Patel to deliver remaining materials and produce a report and proposed personnel actions within 14 days ^{[2] [1] [4]}. News outlets reported Bondi’s letter and Patel’s social‑media pledge that there would be “no missing documents,” framing this as Bondi directing the FBI to investigate its own compliance rather than law enforcement opening a probe into Bondi ^{[1] [4]}.

2. What courts and prosecutors said about “missing” grand jury materials

Separately, in litigation connected to the Comey prosecution, a judge observed that prosecutors did not possess a complete grand jury transcript when Bondi initially ratified an action on Oct. 31; prosecutors later secured a more complete transcript after Bondi requested it on Nov. 5 ^[3]. That reporting portrays a timing and document‑availability issue in the courtroom record but does not, in the provided reporting, equate to a criminal investigation into Bondi herself for intentionally hiding or losing documents ^[3].

3. No sourced reporting here that an external agency opened an investigation into Bondi

Among the supplied sources there is detailed coverage of Bondi directing internal DOJ/FBI review of Epstein materials ^{[2] [1] [4]} and of judicial questions about when grand jury transcripts became available in the Comey matter ^[3]. None of the provided items state that a federal inspector general, state prosecutor, the FBI, or any other law‑enforcement body opened an investigatory case against Bondi over missing documents. Available sources do not mention any law enforcement probe opened into Pam Bondi on that basis.

4. Competing narratives in the record — Bondi’s allegations vs. other institutions’ prior conclusions

Republican officials and Bondi framed the discovery of additional Epstein materials as proof of prior withholding and demanded accountability ^{[2] [5]}. By contrast, reporting cited a July DOJ/FBI memo saying investigators “did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties,” a conclusion House Democrats and others later challenged when the new administration pushed for renewed scrutiny ^{[6] [7]}. That tension frames the dispute: Bondi asserts the FBI withheld files; prior DOJ/FBI determinations publicly stated there was no predicate for further probes into uncharged third parties ^{[6] [7]}.

5. Context: political and institutional incentives influencing coverage

Bondi’s public letter and the selective, early release of files to friendly outlets drew immediate partisan attention; Republican lawmakers pressed for disclosure and oversight, while Democratic committee leaders demanded explanations for decisions to close prior investigations ^{[5] [7]}. The sources show both oversight demands from Republicans and investigative skepticism from Democrats, meaning statements about “missing” documents can serve political signaling as well as calls for administrative accountability ^{[5] [7]}.

6. What would count as a law‑enforcement investigation into Bondi — and what the sources show

A formal investigation into Bondi would typically be opened by an internal DOJ disciplinary unit, an inspector general, a U.S. attorney’s office, or the FBI; it would be reported as an inquiry or referral. The supplied reporting documents Bondi directing an FBI inquiry into its own actions and judges noting transcript timing, but it does not report any inspector general or outside prosecutor opening a probe into Bondi for missing documents ^{[2] [3] [1]}.

7. Bottom line and limitations of this review

Based solely on the provided sources, there is no evidence that a law‑enforcement agency has opened a criminal or administrative investigation into Pam Bondi over missing documents; the record shows Bondi accused the FBI of withholding files and ordered the FBI to investigate itself, and judges flagged incomplete grand‑jury records in related court proceedings ^{[2] [1] [3]}. If you want confirmation beyond these sources — for example, any inspector‑general activity, ethics referrals, or new filings since these items — that is not found in current reporting and would require further, updated reporting.