Table of Contents
The House Oversight Committee, under Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is delivering a long-overdue reckoning to two figures who have long operated as if congressional subpoenas are mere suggestions rather than binding law.
For years, the Clintons have perfected the art of evasion—dodging accountability while lecturing the rest of America about rules and norms.
Now, in the stark light of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, that pattern has collided head-on with congressional authority.
Former President Bill Clinton failed to appear for a scheduled closed-door deposition on January 13, 2026.
The following day, January 14, 2026, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton likewise skipped her subpoenaed appearance.
Comer announced the committee will vote next Wednesday on holding both in contempt of Congress.
"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joined her husband in defying a bipartisan, lawful congressional subpoena to show up today," Comer told reporters. "We're going to hold both Clintons in criminal contempt of Congress."
BREAKING: Hillary Clinton will now be held in Contempt of Congress after refusing to testify before the Oversight Committee in the Epstein investigation. pic.twitter.com/KsY0s80huq
— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) January 14, 2026
The subpoenas, issued August 5, 2025, after unanimous bipartisan approval in subcommittee on July 23, 2025, sought testimony on the Clintons' past associations with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Republicans cited Bill Clinton's documented flights on Epstein's aircraft in the early 2000s.
The committee has obtained documents from Epstein's estate and is pursuing records from the Justice Department.
The Clintons' attorney, David Kendall, argued in an October 6, 2025, letter that Hillary Clinton "has no personal knowledge of Epstein or Maxwell's criminal activities, never flew on his aircraft, never visited his island, and cannot recall ever speaking to Epstein."
He added that Bill Clinton's contact with Epstein "ended two decades ago, and given what came to light much after, he has expressed regret for even that limited association."
Neither Clinton has faced accusations of wrongdoing related to Epstein's crimes, and no public allegations from survivors or associates implicate them.
In a joint four-page letter sent Tuesday, the Clintons declared the subpoenas "invalid and legally unenforceable, untethered to a valid legislative purpose."
"Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences. For us, now is that time," they stated.
They accused Comer of partisan politics.
"There is no plausible explanation for what you are doing other than partisan politics," they continued. "We are confident that any reasonable person in or out of Congress will see, based on everything we release, that what you are doing is trying to punish those who you see as your enemies and to protect those you think are your friends. Continue to mislead Americans about what is truly at stake, and you will learn that Americans are better at finding the truth than you are at burying it."
Comer dismissed these claims, noting the bipartisan subpoena origin and prior cooperation from figures like former Attorneys General Bill Barr and Alex Acosta.
He expressed skepticism about the Clintons' assertion of limited knowledge, insisting the committee—not the witnesses—determines relevance. The panel also plans to depose Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year sentence.
If approved by the Republican-majority committee and full House, the contempt resolution would refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for potential prosecution, carrying possible fines or imprisonment.
This brazen refusal is not mere legal maneuvering; it is a calculated thumb in the eye of congressional oversight at a time when Americans demand transparency about one of the most grotesque scandals in modern history.
The Clintons, who once weaponized subpoenas against political foes, now cry foul when the process turns on them.
If the rule of law means anything, this contempt vote must proceed, and the consequences must follow.
