Clinton royalty

The post you shared is a **direct quote** from Rep. James Comer (@RepJamesComer), the Republican Chairman of the House Oversight Committee. He posted this statement on X (formerly Twitter) on January 20, 2026, amid ongoing developments in the committee's investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's crimes and associated networks.

### Key Details from Comer's Statement and Related Reporting

- The House Oversight Committee issued **bipartisan subpoenas** (approved unanimously by Republicans and Democrats on a subcommittee in July 2025) requiring **Bill Clinton** and **Hillary Clinton** to appear for **transcribed, under-oath depositions**.

- Both Clintons did not appear for their scheduled depositions (Bill Clinton's was set for January 13, 2026, and Hillary Clinton's around January 14, 2026, after prior rescheduling attempts).

- In response to looming **contempt of Congress** proceedings, the Clintons' lawyers (including longtime attorney David Kendall) proposed an alternative: an informal "conversation" in New York with only Comer (and possibly the ranking Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia), limited staff, **only involving former President Bill Clinton**, **no other committee members**, and **no official transcript**.

- Comer rejected this as "ridiculous" and "untenable," arguing it shows entitlement to special treatment, lacks accountability (no formal record), and contradicts the subpoenas' requirements.

- He highlighted Bill Clinton's past (impeachment for perjury-related issues in 1998 and suspension from law practice) as a reason for insisting on sworn, transcribed testimony.

- For Hillary Clinton, he cited her relevant knowledge: her role as Secretary of State on countering international sex trafficking, personal acquaintance with Ghislaine Maxwell, and the Clintons' family ties to Epstein.

- The committee has released other transcripts (e.g., from former AG Bill Barr and former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta) for public transparency, contrasting with the proposed no-transcript setup.

- **Contempt proceedings** were scheduled to begin on January 21, 2026 (today in the query's timeline), with a markup session to vote on resolutions holding both Clintons in contempt. If passed by the committee, it could advance to a full House vote, potentially referring the matter for criminal prosecution (though enforcement is rare and politically complex).

### Broader Context

This is part of a longer-running Oversight Committee probe (starting in 2025) into Epstein/Maxwell's sex-trafficking network, federal handling of related cases, and potential legislative reforms. The subpoenas targeted multiple figures (e.g., former officials like James Comey, Merrick Garland), but the Clintons' defiance drew particular attention due to their documented social ties to Epstein (e.g., Bill Clinton's flights on Epstein's plane, photos, etc.). The Clintons and their team have argued the subpoenas lack a valid legislative purpose, are politically motivated, and that they've cooperated in other ways (e.g., written declarations). One Clinton spokesperson disputed aspects of Comer's characterization, saying they "never said no to a transcript."

The situation remains highly partisan: Republicans frame it as accountability and no one being above the law; critics see it as selective targeting amid other ongoing political probes.

This matches breaking news coverage from sources like the committee's official site, The New York Times, ABC News, Fox News, The Hill, and others as of January 21, 2026. The contempt markup was set for today, so further developments (e.g., vote outcome) may emerge soon.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals