Clintons defy subpoena to testify in Epstein investigation, risking being held in contempt
Bill and Hillary Clinton have officially refused to testify in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — defying subpoenas and risking being held in contempt of Congress.
The former president and Secretary of State were scheduled to appear on Capitol Hill for closed-door depositions Tuesday and Wednesday. But, in a letter to House Oversight Chair James Comer, attorneys for the Clintons said their clients would not be complying.
The letter, obtained by POLITICO, claims both Clintons have already provided all the information they have regarding the late Epstein and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is now serving a 20-year sentence for her part in the sex trafficking scheme.
The attorneys called the episode “nothing more than a ploy to attempt to embarrass political rivals, as President Trump has directed.”
They also brushed off threats of legal action by arguing that, because the subpoenas issued to the Clintons are "not related to a valid legislative purpose," the subpoenas are therefore "invalid and legally unenforceable."
Speaking to reporters Tuesday morning outside the hearing room where the interview with Bill Clinton was due to take place, Comer, a Kentucky Republican, announced a vote to hold Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress would be scheduled to take place during next week's committee markup.
“We've communicated with President Clinton's legal team for months now, giving them opportunity after opportunity to come in, to give us a day, and they continue to delay, delay, delay to the point where we had no idea whether they were going to show up today or not,” Comer said. “I think it's very disappointing.”
A similar vote could be scheduled for Hillary Clinton, assuming she does not appear Wednesday.
In a separate letter to Comer published on X dated Jan. 13, the Clintons said the committee leader’s focus should be on preventing crimes like Epstein’s from happening again, but is instead playing “partisan politics.”
“Despite everything that needs to be done to help our country, you are on the cusp of bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a rarely used process literally designed to result in our imprisonment,” they wrote. “This is not the way out of America’s ills, and we will forcefully defend ourselves.”
The seldom-used congressional power to hold someone in contempt of Congress can range in implications — from a symbolic action to a precursor to forcing jail time. But there’s reason to believe a contempt vote at this time, for these individuals, could have dramatic consequences.
The Trump Justice Department has not hesitated in the past to go after its perceived enemies. The administration has sought to cast Bill Clinton at the center of the Epstein files saga, despite there being no evidence of misconduct against him.
Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, was the subject of a “lock her up” rallying cry among President Donald Trump’s supporters during the 2016 presidential campaign, largely amid revelations she used a private email server while serving in the Obama administration.
In previous examples of the potential serious consequences to contempt of Congress charges, two Trump associates, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, were sentenced to prison time for failing to cooperate with subpoenas from the Democratic-led select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attacks on the Capitol.
"We trust you will engage in good faith to de-escalate this dispute," the attorneys wrote in the letter, dated Jan. 12 — a day before Bill Clinton's scheduled appearance.