The House Oversight Committee voted on Wednesday to recommend charging Bill and Hillary Clinton with criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to testify in its Jeffrey Epstein investigation, an extraordinary first step in referring them to the Justice Department for prosecution.
Nine Democrats voted with Republicans in support of holding Mr. Clinton in contempt, while three Democrats joined the G.O.P. in support of holding Mrs. Clinton in contempt, teeing up votes on the House floor within weeks. Should the full House approve the citations, criminal referrals would go to the Justice Department to prosecute the contempt charges, which can carry penalties including a fine of up to $100,000 and imprisonment for as long as a year.
The measures “will pass, and I believe it will pass with Democratic votes,” said Representative James R. Comer of Kentucky, the Republican chairman of the Oversight panel.
The votes came after a heated, daylong meeting, during which many Democrats on the committee made it clear they had no interest in defending the Clintons. They conceded that the subpoenas were lawful, even though the Clintons have repeatedly stated that they are not. They asserted that Mr. Clinton in particular, who had socialized with Mr. Epstein, needed to answer the committee’s questions, and some called his refusal to testify “shameful.” Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender, died by suicide in 2019 while in federal custody.
But many Democrats argued that given the Clintons’ efforts to cooperate with the investigation, including an offer by Mr. Clinton to be interviewed under oath by Mr. Comer and their submission of sworn statements laying out what they would say in testimony, the criminal contempt referrals were inappropriate, particularly for a former president.
And they repeatedly accused the Republicans of applying a double standard in the Epstein inquiry, selectively enforcing subpoenas against their political enemies while letting President Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi off the hook for failing to release the Epstein files.
“I will hold anyone in contempt that will not give us information,” said Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, who voted for the resolutions. “But shame on us for not forcing Bondi before this committee.”
Representative Summer Lee, Democrat of Pennsylvania, proposed a failed amendment to hold Ms. Bondi in contempt for releasing only a small fraction of the Epstein files after the enactment last year of a law that required the Justice Department to make public all unclassified materials about Mr. Epstein, with limited exceptions, within 30 days of its passage.
“You always intended to use this as a one-sided political hit job,” Ms. Lee said, addressing Republicans. “When we think about this kangaroo court, it dishonors the integrity of our committee and the survivors who have put themselves at risk for justice.”
Republicans vehemently opposed her amendment, arguing that Ms. Bondi had been turning over documents and was scheduled to testify before the Judiciary Committee on the matter within weeks.
Mr. Comer also said the committee would depose Ghislaine Maxwell, Mr. Epstein’s longtime confidante, on Feb. 9. Ms. Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking and other charges, had initially asked to delay her testimony. Her lawyers later said that she would invoke the Fifth Amendment if deposed.
As for the Clintons, Mr. Comer said that they “must be held accountable for their actions and Democrats must support these measures or they will be exposed as hypocrites.”
In response, Democrats accused Republicans of being more interested in trying to send Mr. Clinton to jail than in finding a way to have him answer questions related to the Epstein inquiry. And they expressed skepticism about why Mrs. Clinton, who has said she does not recall ever speaking to Mr. Epstein, was even made a target of the investigation.
“It’s interesting that it’s this subpoena only that Republicans and the chairman have been obsessed with putting all of their energy behind,” said Representative Robert Garcia of California, the ranking Democrat on the committee. “Donald Trump is leading a White House coverup right now of the Epstein files.”
Mr. Garcia called it “shameful, illegal and unconstitutional” that the Justice Department had failed to release the majority of the Epstein files and questioned whether Mr. Comer’s goal was to obtain answers from the former president.
“We want to hear from President Clinton,” Mr. Garcia said. “I’m not sure that you do, sir.”
Mr. Comer acknowledged that for five months, the Clintons had been negotiating with his staff about how to answer the committee’s questions. Most recently, Mr. Clinton agreed to an interview under oath in his New York office with Mr. Comer and Mr. Garcia, both of whom would be accompanied by a staff member taking notes. On Wednesday, Mr. Comer said he had rejected that offer because there would have been no official transcript of the proceedings.
But Mr. Garcia pushed back.
“They have been clear that being transcribed is not an issue,” Mr. Garcia said, reading from an email from the Clintons’ attorneys that had been sent to Mr. Comer. “They have not ruled that out.”
While the Justice Department under Mr. Trump has shown a willingness to to prosecute the president’s political rivals, it is not clear whether a grand jury in Washington — where grand jurors have in recent months repeatedly resisted prosectors’ efforts to bring charges — would agree to indict the Clintons, especially given their attempts to cooperate with the inquiry.
Two House Democrats who previously worked as lawyers noted that the Clintons’ negotiations with the committee made it clear they were not willfully defying the subpoenas, the legal standard for criminal contempt.
“Dragging your feet is not the same as noncompliance; it’s not the same as contempt,” said Representative Dave Min, Democrat of California and a former law professor, who tried unsuccessfully to alter the measure to charge the Clintons with civil contempt instead of criminal contempt. “I have deep concerns that this looks like a political witch hunt against Trump’s critics.”
Mr. Min voted “present,” declining to register a position, on contempt charges for both Clintons, as Representative Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, did on Mrs. Clinton’s citation.
Representative Jasmine Crockett, Democrat of Texas and a former attorney, said that “if they responded at all, then there is some sort of compliance, which they did. They didn’t just throw the bird. They didn’t just say, ‘Forget it.’ ”
The committee issued its subpoena for the Clintons over the summer. In July, Democrats on the committee pushed to subpoena the Justice Department for its files on Mr. Epstein. After G.O.P. lawmakers amended the measure to include subpoenas to several other political figures, including the Clintons, the package passed with a bipartisan vote.
But as several others were allowed to cancel or delay their depositions — including Ms. Maxwell, whose testimony has been repeatedly postponed — Mr. Comer has insisted the Clintons come to Washington to testify.
On Wednesday, Representative Kweisi Mfume, Democrat of Maryland, questioned why Mrs. Clinton had been included in the proceedings at all.
“I’m not seeing anything to suggest she ought to be a part of this in any way,” he said, noting that it looked like the former secretary of state had been included because “we want to dust her up a bit if we get her before this committee.”
Michael Gold contributed reporting.
Annie Karni is a congressional correspondent for The Times.
The post House Panel Votes to Hold Clintons in Contempt in Epstein Inquiry appeared first on New York Times.
