Clintons Agree to Testify in Epstein Inquiry, Averting Contempt Vote After Tense Standoff
In a significant development in the long-running congressional probe into the Jeffrey Epstein network, former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have agreed to testify before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee. The agreement comes as the Republican-led committee prepared to hold a vote to hold the couple in criminal contempt of Congress for initially resisting the subpoenas.
The committee, chaired by Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), announced on social media that the Clintons had been "trying to dodge contempt by requesting special treatment," asserting that "the Clintons are not above the law." The investigation seeks to ascertain what, if anything, the prominent political figures knew about Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell's activities. A particular line of inquiry involves Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, during which she oversaw U.S. efforts to combat international sex trafficking.
Angel Ureña, deputy chief of staff to Bill Clinton, confirmed the agreement but framed it as a capitulation to political pressure. "They negotiated in good faith. You did not," Ureña stated in a post. "But the former president and former Secretary of State will be there and look forward to setting a precedent that applies to everyone."
According to correspondence obtained by Fox News Digital, attorneys for the Clintons sent an email to the committee confirming their clients would testify "on mutually agreeable dates" under the terms set by Chairman Comer, on the condition that contempt proceedings be halted.
Ranking member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) characterized the Clintons' response as "full compliance." "They’ve accepted every single term that James Comer has asked for, and they’re willing to come in and testify," Garcia said.
Chairman Comer, however, pushed back, telling Fox News Digital that the agreement remained vague. "The Clintons’ counsel has said they agree to terms, but those terms lack clarity yet again, and they have provided no dates," Comer said. He indicated he would seek to clarify the terms before deciding on next steps with the committee.
The episode highlights the intensely partisan nature of the investigation. Democratic members have noted that Comer has not pursued contempt against other witnesses who failed to appear, nor has he threatened the Justice Department for missing a congressional deadline to produce all its Epstein-related documents. The DOJ has so far provided only a fraction of the expected material.
Analysis: This agreement temporarily defuses a constitutional showdown but ensures the politically volatile Epstein probe remains in the headlines. The Clintons' testimony, when it occurs, will be scrutinized for any new details about their limited social interactions with Epstein and could refocus attention on the handling of the case by multiple administrations.
Reaction from Readers:
Michael T., Political Historian: "This is a necessary step for transparency. Regardless of party, anyone with relevant information about this horrific case should cooperate fully. The committee must now ensure the questioning is substantive and not merely political theater."
Sarah Chen, Legal Analyst: "The contempt threat was the leverage point. It's a standard but high-stakes maneuver in congressional investigations. The coming depositions will be a test of the committee's ability to extract factual testimony versus scoring political points."
David P., from Florida: "This is an absolute disgrace and a blatant witch hunt. Comer and the GOP are exploiting the victims of a monster to smear their political enemies. Where's the contempt vote for the DOJ officials stonewalling the documents? The hypocrisy is staggering."
Lisa G., Independent Voter: "It's about time. For years, the powerful connected to Epstein have hidden behind lawyers and delays. If the Clintons have nothing to hide, they should testify openly and on the record, not just in a closed deposition."