Representative James R. Comer of Kentucky, the Republican chairman of the Oversight Committee, on Monday rejected an offer from Bill and Hillary Clinton to testify in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, just days ahead of an expected House vote on holding them in criminal contempt of Congress.
For months, the Clintons have been adamant that they would not comply with subpoenas from the Republican-led committee that they have described as invalid and legally unenforceable, and part of a plot to target them as President Trump’s political adversaries. They had promised to fight Mr. Comer on the issue for as long as it took.
But after some Democrats joined Republicans on the House Oversight Committee to recommend charging them with criminal contempt, an extraordinary first step in referring them to the Justice Department for prosecution, the Clintons appeared to capitulate.
In a letter on Saturday to Mr. Comer, which was obtained by The New York Times, their lawyers said Mr. Clinton would agree to sit for a four-hour transcribed interview with the entire committee — something he had previously described as an inappropriate and unprecedented request to make of a former president.
The lawyers asked that Mrs. Clinton, who has said she never met or spoke to Mr. Epstein, be allowed to make a sworn declaration instead of testifying. But they said that she, too, would submit to an in-person interview if the committee insisted on it, “with appropriate adjustments for the paucity of information she has to offer in this matter,” according to the letter.
On Monday morning, Mr. Comer flatly rejected the offer, calling it “unreasonable” and arguing that four hours of testimony from Mr. Clinton was inadequate given that he was a “loquacious individual” who might seek to run out the clock.
“Your clients’ desire for special treatment is both frustrating and an affront to the American people’s desire for transparency,” Mr. Comer wrote in a letter to the Clintons’ lawyers on Monday that was also obtained by The New York Times.
In that letter, Mr. Comer also rejected the demand from Mr. Clinton that the scope of the interview be limited to matters related to Mr. Epstein. Mr. Comer said the former president “likely has an artificially narrow definition in mind” of what matters would be related to the Epstein investigation.
Mr. Comer said in his letter that he harbored concerns that Mr. Clinton would refuse to answer questions about “his personal relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, ways in which they sought to curry favor with powerful individuals and alleged efforts to utilize his power and influence after his presidency to kill negative news stories about Jeffrey Epstein.”
Mr. Clinton was acquainted with Mr. Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died in prison in 2019, but has said he never visited Mr. Epstein’s private island and cut off contact with him two decades ago. Mr. Clinton took four international trips on Mr. Epstein’s private jet in 2002 and 2003, according to flight logs.
A spokesman for the Clintons did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Mr. Comer’s letter, or how they planned to proceed.
The offer from the Clintons represented a near-total surrender after they made a defiant stand just weeks ago, vowing to fight back against an investigation they said was unfairly targeting them and holding them to a different standard from others.
“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,” the Clintons wrote in a lengthy letter to Mr. Comer on Jan. 13. “For us, now is that time.”
The Clintons have been attempting to negotiate with the House Oversight Committee behind the scenes to find a way for Mr. Comer to spare them the contempt vote. They agreed that Mr. Comer could interview Mr. Clinton under oath, an offer that the chairman also rejected, insisting that the former president appear before the entire committee for an open-ended, transcribed interview.
In recent days, a member of the Clintons’ legal team went so far as to track down Mr. Comer’s cellphone number and reach out to resolve how the Clintons could answer his committee’s questions, according to a person familiar with the negotiations
Mr. Comer never responded.
And even after the Clintons said they would agree to a transcript, Mr. Comer said there was no deal.
Mr. Comer said in his letter that the latest offer had to be considered “in light of your clients’ demonstrated reluctance to provide testimony” and his concern that Mr. Clinton did not actually want to answer any questions, at all.
Philippe Reines, a longtime adviser to the Clintons, said that “Comer is refusing to accept ‘Yes.’”
But he said he blamed the House Democrats who sided with Republicans this month and voted in favor of recommending that the House hold the Clintons in contempt. The drawn-out saga may still result in the Clintons facing a contempt vote in the House as early as Wednesday.
“Republicans are gonna Republican,” Mr. Reines said. “It’s the Democrats who are disappointing, navel gazing like this is a legitimate exercise in law and democracy.”
Nine Democrats on the Oversight Committee joined Republicans in support of holding Mr. Clinton in contempt, while three Democrats backed holding Mrs. Clinton in contempt, teeing up votes on the House floor.
If it comes to the House floor, a vote to hold the Clintons in criminal contempt is expected to pass. Many Democrats have been reluctant to be seen as defending anyone associated with the convicted sex offender — especially party figures who carry as much baggage as the Clintons.
After the House vote, 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. In a letter they wrote to Mr. Comer in January, the Clintons accused him of potentially bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a politically driven process “literally designed to result in our imprisonment.”
Annie Karni is a congressional correspondent for The Times.
The post Oversight Chairman Rejects Clintons’ Offer for Epstein Testimony appeared first on New York Times.
