What They Are Saying on Contempt Proceedings: The Clintons Aren’t Above the Law
WASHINGTON—This week, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Republicans and Democrats voted to advance two resolutions recommending to the U.S. House of Representatives that former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton be found in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with duly issued subpoenas. Here’s what they’re saying:
No one is above the law, not even Bill and Hillary Clinton.
“The Clintons failed to appear and, instead, issued a chest-thumping letter of defiance, declaring: ‘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.’ The committee is likely to agree that ‘now is that time’ and the consequences are the start of contempt proceedings,” wrote lawyer and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley.
“The Clintons are ‘in a very difficult position, because these cases are very straightforward. They’re pretty much, ‘Did you get a subpoena, and did you go testify?’’ said former US Attorney John Fishwick, a Barack Obama appointee, to CNN. ‘The courts are going to say that Congress has broad discretion on who they want to ask for a deposition.’”
“David Rapallo, professor at Georgetown Law and the former House Oversight Committee Democratic staff director under the late Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, said that ‘as a legal matter, Congress clearly has the authority to issue subpoenas, including for depositions, and if witnesses refuse to comply with those subpoenas, they can be held in contempt,’” wrote Annie Grayer and Eric Bradner in CNN.
“Bipartisan subpoenas issued to the Clintons are not suggestions. They are legally required to appear before the House Oversight Committee, yet they have defiantly delayed and denied their legal obligations. The Clintons are not above the law, and the House Oversight Committee will move to hold them in contempt of Congress,” said Chairman James Comer in a press release announcing the full committee markup of contempt resolutions.
“‘Do I personally think they should comply? Abso-f—ing-lutely.’ […] ‘Absolutely, they should comply, […] and these victims of this heinous case should finally get some of the justice and peace that they deserve.’” said Jon Stewart.
“But some prominent liberal voices have said that it would be better for America as a country if the Clintons testify. ‘As someone who wants to see everything in the Epstein files and wants every single person held accountable, I think the Clintons should show up,’ ‘The View’ co-host Sara Haines said. ‘It was a unanimous vote to subpoena them, and regardless of these affidavits or anything else, I think when people don’t show up, it makes them look guiltier than they are.’
‘President Clinton has showed up in tons of pictures with no wrongdoing but images that have been released in the files,’ Haines continued. ‘And we’ve known of the friendship for years, and two years after Epstein got his sweetheart deal, Ghislaine Maxwell was invited to Chelsea [Clinton]’s wedding, so there are some associations there that I think you leave — you put everything out there. Let it be public. Let people hear.’
‘Because otherwise, you give them the bait to say, ‘Well, you’re not doing it, we’re not doing it. This person is not doing it.’ No, if you want the Epstein files, and you want everyone held accountable, they show up, and they do it.’”
“Last week, Bill and Hillary Clinton refused to testify in the House of Representatives’ Jeffrey Epstein investigation, saying: ‘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.’
“When Mr. Clinton was president, Epstein visited the White House 17 times. Although no one is accusing Mr. Clinton of any wrongdoing, questions abound regarding his relationship with the American financier, human trafficker, child sex offender and serial rapist.
[…]
“House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer is conducting his own investigation and subpoenaed the Clintons to testify behind closed doors, given their relationship with Epstein and his longtime companion, Ghislaine Maxwell. The Clintons said they considered the subpoenas ‘invalid and legally unenforceable’ and accused Mr. Comer of bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a politically driven process ‘literally designed to result in our imprisonment.’
“So, according to Democrats’ own standards, to prison Mr. and Mrs. Clinton should go.
[…]
“Therefore, the Clintons should be held to the same standard for defying a congressional subpoena. Last week, Mr. Comer said he was ‘disappointed’ in their decision to refuse a lawful subpoena and would move this week in committee to hold the former president in contempt.
[…]
“No one is above the law,” wrote Kelly Sadler.
“Now, however, such defiance is viewed as righteous and somehow excusable by figures such as Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., who has routinely chosen political over institutional interests.
“The defiance could result in a criminal referral for the couple, prosecutions that would mirror those under the Biden administration.
“In 2021, Hillary Clinton mocked Bannon’s indictment for contempt of Congress by saying that she planned for a ‘restful’ weekend as he prepared for possible conviction.
“It is an ironic moment. The Clintons are adopting the Bannon strategy that led to his conviction.
“At the time of Bannon’s charge, I noted that all he had to do was appear and invoke his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. The committee would then have had to issue an immunity grant to compel any testimony. The worst thing that you could do is not appear.
“That is precisely what the Clintons just did.
[…]
“What is most striking is the lack of any effort to come up with a cognizable defense. The Clintons simply chose open defiance. For those who have denounced a two-tier justice system, there is nothing more entitled and privileged than this letter. Such rules do not apply to the Clintons, who feel that they have the license to decide when they will appear,” wrote Jonathan Turley.
“But a subpoena is still a subpoena, and Congress has a right to insist it not be ignored. Rep. James Comer, the committee’s chairman, said Tuesday that the Clintons had offered to speak only to him and the Democratic ranking Member, and only if no transcript was recorded. He understandably rejected the idea,” wrote the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board.
“Bill Clinton might have big problems. Once known for being a gifted orator and the backbone of the Democratic Party, Clinton found himself more politically isolated this week than perhaps anytime in decades.”
[…]
“On Wednesday, nine Democrats on the House Oversight Committee voted to hold him in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with an investigation revolving around Jeffrey Epstein,” wrote Damian Paletta.
“Staff at the Oversight Project have decades of combined experience both leading and defending against Congressional investigations. Based on this experience we have concluded that the contempt case against the Clintons is overwhelming. The Clintons must be held in contempt by the House and prosecuted by the Department of Justice.
“Oversight Project Outside Counsel Samuel Everett Dewey offered this statement:
‘Our entire lives we have seen outrageous conduct from the Clintons and their flagrant disregard for the laws that apply to everyone else. Their blatant defiance of the Committee’s subpoena continues this trend. There is a reason the Clintons think they are above the law. They have never been held to account. That must end now. You cannot ignore a bi-partisan House subpoena because ‘you don’t feel like it.’ That is a laughable legal excuse. The Clintons are well-trained lawyers; they know their arguments are hogwash. Their questionable attorneys should know better than to advance such an absurd case.’”