WASHINGTON — Bill and Hillary Clinton will refuse to testify in House Republicans’ investigation into deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, setting the stage for what could be a drawn-out legal battle that the prominent Democrats are calling politically motivated.
The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the couple to appear before Congress this week, with Bill scheduled for Tuesday and Hillary for Wednesday. But the two said they would not be participating in a lengthy letter to committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., who told reporters he would begin proceedings next week to hold them in contempt of Congress.
But the Clintons say there is no legal basis for the two to appear in-person before lawmakers, outlining a number of reasons to justify their absence. The couple also hinted at preparing for a prolonged legal fight if necessary.
Bill Clinton has appeared in several photos released over the past few months by the Department of Justice related to the Epstein investigation, but he has denied any wrongdoing.
“We are prepared to make our case to your 45 committee members, and if need be, more,” the two wrote in a joint letter on Tuesday. “Importantly, we also will defend ourselves in the public arena and ensure this country knows exactly what you are doing and why you are doing so, instead of helping the American people who need this Congress’s work and protection.”
Here is the Clintons’ justification for refusing to testify:
Clintons offered written statements in previous requests
The couple argued they have no knowledge relevant to the House Oversight investigation, but said they have “tried to give you the little information we have.”
After being subpoenaed by Comer in August, the attorneys for the Clintons responded by instead offering a written or sworn statement in lieu of in-person testimony. The committee had already accepted written testimony from other witnesses it subpoenaed for testimony.
Their attorneys again offered written statements in December when the committee doubled down on its request for in-person testimony, claiming the couple had “little to contribute.”
In their letter to Comer, the Clintons said they would continue to cooperate in ways they can “because Mr. Epstein’s crimes were horrific.” But the couple accused the committee of failing to investigate the federal government for failing to prosecute those crimes, instead arguing Republicans only want to play political games.
Republicans won’t give same exceptions they gave others — including Trump, Clintons argue
With the offer of their written testimony, the Clintons accused the panel of unfairly targeting them as political opponents by not offering exceptions they gave to other witnesses who were subpoenaed in the investigation.
The couple pointed to eight other individuals who have been subpoenaed in the inquiry, seven of whom have been dismissed “without any of them saying a single word to you,” they wrote.
“You made no attempt to force them to appear,” the letter states. “In fact, since you started your investigation last year, you have interviewed a total of two people. Two.”
Those two interviews include Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s convicted accomplice, and Alexander Acosta, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida who oversaw the 2008 plea deal with the late sex offender.
The pair also pointed to when Donald Trump, then out of office, failed to appear before Congress after being subpoenaed in relation to Democrats’ investigation into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Trump’s attorneys made similar claims that the subpoena was invalid.
“You claim your subpoenas are inviolate when they are used against us yet were silent when the sitting President took the same position, as a former president, barely more than three years ago,” the Clintons wrote.
Clinton attorneys say subpoenas are invalid
In their letter to Comer, the Clintons cited legal analysis from two law firms provided to the committee on Monday that the couple says proves the subpoenas are “legally invalid.”
Attorneys for the Clinton couple sent a separate letter to Comer late Monday night claiming the subpoenas were “legally unenforceable” because they do not hold a valid legislative purpose, do not request “pertinent information,” and amount to an “unprecedented infringement on the separation of powers.”
The lawyers cited constitutional precedents that they say prove the subpoenas are nothing more than “an effort to publicly harass and embarrass President and Secretary Clinton and an impermissible usurpation of executive law enforcement authority.”
Bill and Hillary Clinton pressed Comer to release the legal analyses their attorneys provided to him that they say excuse them from testifying.