Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrive to attend the inauguration of President Donald Trump on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images)
The U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee advanced resolutions Wednesday to recommend former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton be held in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena the panel issued related to the investigation of late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The votes on both resolutions were bipartisan, though Democrats argued over several points during the nearly day-long meeting. The next step would be consideration by the full House. If approved on the House floor, the matter would be referred to the federal prosecutor’s office in Washington, D.C., and could potentially lead to a fine of up to $100,000 or even prison time of up to one year.
The resolution on Bill Clinton passed 34-8, with all Republicans and nine Democrats voting in favor.
The Democrats who voted to approve the resolution were Maxwell Frost of Florida, Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Stephen Lynch and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Emily Randall of Washington, Lateefah Simon of California, Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.
Yassamin Ansari of Arizona and Dave Min of California voted present. Greg Casar and Jasmine Crockett of Texas did not vote.
The resolution covering Hillary Clinton was narrower, 28-15, with only three Democrats, Lee, Stansbury and Tlaib, voting in favor.
Subpoenas defied by Clintons, others
Republicans on the committee, including Chairman James Comer of Kentucky, said the Clintons defied subpoenas to provide depositions about Epstein’s long-running record of sexual abuse of young girls.
“No witness, not a former president or a private citizen, may willfully defy a duly issued congressional subpoena without consequence,” Comer said. “But that is what the Clintons did.”
Democrats said they, too, wanted to hear testimony from the Clintons, whose depositions were ordered by bipartisan subpoenas last year, but that the committee Republicans were singling out the couple because of their partisan affiliation.
Various other officials, of both parties, who’d received subpoenas also did not comply. Neither did Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislane Maxwell.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice under President Donald Trump has not turned over documents related to the investigation, despite a November law requiring their full release, Democrats on the panel said.
Yet only the Clintons, influential Democrats, were being prosecuted for defying the committee, Democrats said.
“It’s interesting that it’s this subpoena only that Republicans and the chairman have been obsessed about putting all their energy behind,” ranking Democrat Robert Garcia, of California, said.
Comer responded that the other examples were different. Other officials had less personal knowledge of Epstein than the Clintons; Maxwell had said she would invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, obviating the need for testimony; and the Justice Department was working, however slowly, on releasing the millions of documents required under the law, he said.
“As I’ve stated many times publicly, we wish this process was going quicker,” he said. “There’s a lot of documents, a lot of redactions. A lot of eyes have to be put on this. The Department of Justice is complying.”
In an open letter to Comer last week, the Clintons said they were working to assist in the investigation, but complained they were being treated more harshly than other witnesses, while also criticizing Comer’s handling of the case.
“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.”
Negotiations or stalling?
Members of each party argued over various issues the panel members had been negotiating with the Clintons, such as the location of the interview, whether notes or a transcript would be allowed and whether the Clintons could provide written testimony only, as other witnesses had.
Democrats on the panel said the Clintons and their lawyers had been working with the committee in good faith to iron out those issues. But Comer said they were stalling the panel in the hopes that Democrats would retake the House in November.
“We have been negotiating for five months,” Comer said. “This is clearly a stall tactic, hoping that the time clock runs out and the House flips and you all let them off the hook.”
Contrary to Democrats’ argument, not every witness was allowed to offer written testimony, Comer added, including Republican former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr.
Hillary Clinton inclusion questioned
Bill Clinton had a well-documented personal relationship with Epstein, including travel on the billionaire’s private plane. Photos of the two were among the documents released in the initial tranche the Justice Department provided under the November law.
But Garcia objected to the inclusion of Hillary Clinton in the committee’s resolution Wednesday, saying the available evidence appeared to confirm her public account that she had no knowledge of Epstein’s activities.
“No one who is serious about justice for Epstein’s survivors believes that Hillary Clinton has somehow been involved in Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes,” Garcia said.
He added that Trump pledged to prosecute Hillary Clinton after he won the 2016 presidential campaign against her. Garcia said it appeared Trump was weaponizing the federal government against a political opponent.
Other Democrats said the committee was enforcing Trump’s political prosecution.
Comer said Hillary Clinton had a personal relationship with Maxwell and a financial one with Epstein.
Trump also had a personal relationship with Epstein for years. Democrats on the panel repeated Wednesday the widely made assertion that Trump’s Justice Department was shielding the president by resisting the production of documents.
