SELECT LANGUAGE BELOW

James Comer plans to hold the Clintons responsible after their absence from Epstein depositions.

James Comer plans to hold the Clintons responsible after their absence from Epstein depositions.

Clintons Face Congressional Contempt Threat

On Wednesday, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, a Republican from Kentucky, indicated plans to hold Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress. This decision came just a day after former President Bill Clinton declined to give a deposition.

While Republicans had arranged mandatory interviews with the Clintons on January 13 and 14, they were informed that the Clintons would not discuss their “personal relationship” with the late Jeffrey Epstein, who had a notorious background.

“Honestly, it’s quite disappointing for the committee. We’ve been negotiating in good faith with the Clintons’ attorneys for about five months now,” Comer shared on Tuesday. “Throughout this time, they’ve hinted at securing a date.” It feels a bit frustrating, doesn’t it?

The committee voted to subpoena the Clintons along with several former attorneys general, the FBI director, and other federal officials. The intent is to gather information about the Justice Department’s investigations into Epstein’s case.

Epstein was found deceased in a Manhattan jail on August 10, 2019, an event ruled a suicide later on.

The Clintons, in their communication to Comer earlier this week, accused him of focusing on them rather than other witnesses, arguing they possess “no personal knowledge” concerning Epstein’s appalling actions.

Additionally, Bill and Hillary expressed frustration over Comer’s release of unrelated, decades-old photographs to the public, which they felt was aimed at embarrassing them. These images included Bill Clinton at social events alongside Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

“We’ve already shared any information we have regarding Epstein and Maxwell,” their legal representatives mentioned in a letter to the committee. They insisted they did so voluntarily, claiming the subpoenas lacked validity, were unjustified, and represented a questionable infringement on the separation of powers.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Telegram
WhatsApp

Related News