Clintons Now Face Real Possibility of Prison for Refusing To Testify About Epstein: Could They Still Cut a Deal With Comer?

The defiance of bipartisan congressional subpoenas by President Clinton and his wife and former Democratic presidential nominee, Secretary Hillary Clinton, pushes one of America’s most powerful and accomplished couples to the brink of becoming criminal defendants.Nine Democrats – including a disciple of Vice President Harris, Congresswoman Lateefah Simon and two “Squad” members, Congresswomen Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Tlaib — joined Republicans on Wednesday in recommending that Mr. Clinton be held in contempt. Mr. Clinton has refused to answer questions about his longrunning relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. In a separate vote three Democrats joined Republicans to recommend that Mrs. Clinton also be held in contempt for not testifying about what she knew about the disgraced financier, although the nature of her ties, if any, to Epstein, are far murkier. Both reports will now proceed to the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote. If the motion passes, the referrals will be passed onto the Department of Justice. The decision of whether to prosecute the Clintons will belong to Attorney General Pam Bondi. During President Trump’s 2016 presidential run, “lock her up” was a constant refrain at rallies with respect to Ms. Clinton. The subpoenas were first issued in August, and since then the Clintons have been in negotiations with Chairman James Comer, who leads the House Oversight Committee. In the meantime, the DOJ has released photographs that show the relationship between Mr. Clinton and Epstein One photograph shows the former president in a hot tub, and the other features him with a young woman. The Clintons call the photographs “irrelevant.” Like Bill Gates, Larry Summers and other “friends of Jeffrey,” Mr. Clinton was, according to his supporters, working with Epstein to raise money for a nonprofit — in his case for the Clinton FoundationRegarding Mr. Comer’s subpoena, the Clintons also contend that “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.” They insist that the subpoena are “literally designed to result in our imprisonment” and are “invalid and legally unenforceable, untethered to a valid legislative purpose.”Nevertheless, the Clintons and Mr. Comer got close to a deal for their testimony, in which the chairman and a small cluster of committee members and staff would have traveled to Harlem to interview the former first couple. The talks collapsed at the 11th hour, reportedly over whether the depositions could be recorded or — as the Clintons desired — only documented via human note-taking. Some observers of how Mr. Comer has conducted himself in the past with hostile witnesses such as Hunter Biden believe a deal will yet be reached.Should the contempt proceeding more forward, it’s hard for the Democrats to decry “lawfare” after the Biden Administration prosecuted and sent to prison two of Mr. Trump’s senior advisers, Peter Navarro and Stephen Bannon, for refusing to testify before the Democrat-controlled House January 6 committee. After Messrs. Navarro and Bannon were held in contempt by the Democrat-controlled House, the Biden DOJ pursued criminal contempt charges. Both men were convicted and served four months in prison. Mr. Navarro, who turned 75 during his prison term, is back as a White House adviser, and Mr. Bannon is still podcasting.Convicting the Clintons for contempt, though, would be no sure thing. A District of Columbia grand jury would have to hand up an indictment. Such a body would likely be dominated by Democrats. Ms. Clinton won some 90 percent of the nation’s capital’s vote in the 2016 election, and her husband likewise posted strong numbers there. Vice President Harris secured 90 percent of the vote against Mr. Trump as recently as 2024.A trailer for the grand jury challenge might be found in Virginia, where two consecutive grand juries refused to indict a popular Democratic figure, New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, after the original indictment against her was dismissed from the bench. The DOJ is appealing that ruling, which also applied to the case against the former director of the FBI, James Comey. Even if the Clintons are indicted, conviction would require a unanimous jury beyond a reasonable doubt — difficult to imagine in the ultramarine District of Columbia.Both sides could reason that a deal to avoid criminal proceedings is a more prudent course. Mr. Clinton reached an agreement with prosecutors on his last day in office — after he had already been acquitted in impeachment proceedings — to avoid an indictment for perjury with respect to his testimony about Monica Lewinsky. He paid $25,000 and agreed to a five year suspension of his law license. The lawyer who brokered that deal, David Kendall, is one of the attorneys representing the Clintons in the Epstein matter.The collapse of the cases against Mr. Comey and Ms. James has, the Wall Street Journal reports, put Ms. Bondi on somewhat of a hot seat within the administration. CNN reports that she was “enraged” by the refusal of a federal magistrate judge in Minnesota to sign a misdemeanor complaint against the fired CNN star Don Lemon, who was part of an anti-ICE demonstration at a St. Paul Church. Mr. Lemon claims he was there as a journalist, though he separately said he did “reconnaissance”of the church prior to the demonstrators’ incursion. Prosecuting a former president would only ratchet up the pressure on Main Justice. Ms. Clinton also came close to being indicted for her use of a private email server while she served as America’s top diplomat under President Obama. In July of 2016 Mr. Comey, then the director of the FBI, called Ms. Clinton “extremely careless” but concluded that “we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws.” Mr. Comey later announced the case’s reopening 11 days before the election, causing more chaos, but no charges were ever filed. Another sign that negotiations are top of mind is that the Clintons have also retained a partner at the Jenner & Block firm, Ashley Callan, who previously served as a general counsel for Speaker Mike Johnson and as a staffer for the Oversight Committee under Mr. Comer. Those relationships suggest that negotiations over the terms of testimony — a common prelude to high-profile appearances — could be a priority. Redacted emails from the negotiations appear to show Ms. Callan, not Mr. Kendall, 81, leading the Clinton side of the talks. The talks appear to have come close — but not close enough — to a resolution.

Clintons Now Face Real Possibility of Prison for Refusing To Testify About Epstein: Could They Still Cut a Deal With Comer?

More from the New York Sun

Kim Jong Un Glorifies North Korean Lives Lost in Ukraine War at Opening of Luxury Apartment Complexes at Pyongyang

Colbert Lashes Out at CBS for Blocking Him From Hosting Texas Democrat, Makes Snide Comment About His Show Being Canceled

Israel’s Historic Bobsled Debut at Winter Games Collides With Politics

More from the New York Sun

Kim Jong Un Glorifies North Korean Lives Lost in Ukraine War at Opening of Luxury Apartment Complexes at Pyongyang

Colbert Lashes Out at CBS for Blocking Him From Hosting Texas Democrat, Makes Snide Comment About His Show Being Canceled

Israel’s Historic Bobsled Debut at Winter Games Collides With Politics

CFTC Chairman Joins Battle Over Prediction Markets, Promising To Protect Companies That Employ Donald Trump Jr. From State-Level Legal Challenges

County GOP Chairman in Utah Charged With Felony Child Abuse for Allegedly Waterboarding Daughter

New Show at Neue Galerie Discloses a Good Doctor’s Influence on Austrian Painter Egon Schiele

Francesca Albanese Must Go

How Iran Blocked the Impenetrable Starlink Internet Is Being Closely Watched by Other Oppressive Regimes