Clintons Defy Congressional Subpoenas in Epstein Probe, Risking Contempt Charges
Washington, DC – In a dramatic escalation of a long-running congressional inquiry, former US President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to appear for scheduled depositions before the Republican-led House Oversight Committee, prompting threats of contempt proceedings that could lead to criminal referrals.
The committee, chaired by Representative James Comer (Republican-Kentucky), had subpoenaed the couple as part of its investigation into the government’s handling of cases involving the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. Epstein’s crimes involved the abuse of dozens of underage girls, some as young as 14, drawing widespread outrage and scrutiny of his associations with powerful figures.
Bill Clinton was due for a closed-door deposition on January 13, 2026, with Hillary Clinton scheduled for the following day. Neither appeared, leaving empty chairs in the hearing room—a visual symbol that drew immediate attention from committee members and media. Comer addressed reporters after the first no-show, noting Epstein’s documented visits to the White House during Clinton’s presidency and stating the panel simply had “questions” about the former president’s ties to Epstein. “No one’s accusing Bill Clinton of any wrongdoing,” Comer emphasized. “We just have questions.”
In a joint letter to Comer, attorneys for the Clintons described the subpoenas as “invalid and legally unenforceable,” arguing they lacked a valid legislative purpose, sought irrelevant information, and represented an infringement on separation of powers. The couple contended the inquiry had stalled, focusing disproportionately on them while failing to compel testimony from other subpoenaed figures or press the Justice Department for full compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which mandated the release of related documents.
The Clintons’ statement further criticized the committee’s direction, suggesting it served as a distraction from broader governmental failures in the Epstein case and aligned with partisan efforts to target political opponents. They expressed willingness to testify in a public hearing instead, allowing scrutiny by the full committee and the American public rather than in private sessions.
Comer responded swiftly, announcing the committee would move to hold Bill Clinton in contempt as early as the following week, with similar action expected against Hillary Clinton. Contempt of Congress, a federal misdemeanor, carries potential penalties of fines up to $100,000 and imprisonment for up to one year, though prosecutions remain rare and require referral to the Department of Justice. Recent precedents include convictions of Trump-era aides Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro for defying subpoenas during the January 6 investigation.
Bill Clinton’s association with Epstein dates to the late 1990s and early 2000s, including flights on Epstein’s private jet—documented in released logs—often linked to Clinton Foundation activities or international travel. No allegations of criminal involvement have been substantiated against either Clinton; survivors and associates have not accused them of misconduct. The former president has previously stated he cut ties with Epstein years before the financier’s 2008 conviction and was unaware of any illegal activities.
The standoff highlights deep partisan divisions in Washington. Republicans frame the probe as a pursuit of accountability in one of the most notorious sex-trafficking scandals in modern US history, while Democrats and the Clintons view it as a politically motivated spectacle amid ongoing releases of Epstein-related files. The Justice Department has disclosed photographs and logs showing Clinton alongside Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell (Epstein’s associate, convicted in 2021), but these materials contain no evidence of wrongdoing by the former first family.
As the committee prepares for markup votes on contempt resolutions, the episode raises questions about congressional authority, executive privilege precedents involving former presidents, and the limits of compelled testimony in high-profile investigations. Whether the full House will vote to refer the matter—and whether the Justice Department under the current administration would prosecute—remains uncertain, but the defiance has intensified scrutiny on all sides of the Epstein saga.
Leave a Reply