Name: Clintons refuse to testify in Congressional Epstein probe
Uploaded: 2026-01-14T03:21:24.000Z
Duration: 10 min 38 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Now, Hillary Clinton supposed to show up tomorrow.

But with respect to the former president, he did not show up today.

We will move next week in the House Oversight Committee markup to hold former President Clinton in contempt of Congress.

Contempt proceedings against a former president.

Now, Bill Clinton was scheduled to sit down with the House Oversight Committee today as part of its new Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

That's certainly what the committee wanted.

Annie, this is an extraordinary moment that I'm sure will lead to several more extraordinary moments in the coming week or two.

But what we just saw from the chairman is precisely what was predicted in a very lengthy, very hot statement that the former president and his wife, the former secretary of state and first lady, just released a letter to James Colmer.

So, Dana, what we're headed towards next is potentially lengthy and even unprecedented precedented legal battle now that Colmer has announced that he's going to move forward with contempt proceedings against both Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Now, Hillary has one more option for for her deposition date tomorrow.

But from the letter that Bill and Hillary Clinton sent to Colmer directly this morning, they lay out exactly why they are not planning to appear for their depositions.

And this is after months of back and forth, Anna, between the Clinton's legal attorneys and the Oversight Committee where the Clintons have maintained that these subpoenas are not valid, that they are willing to provide written testimony, and

that the committee has even granted this option of written testimony to at least seven of the other witnesses that they've subpoenaed in this investigation.

So why not grant them to the Clintons here?

And in this letter that you mentioned that Bill and Hillary Clinton wrote to Comer, I want to read for you a piece of it that just shows the stakes that both the former president and first lady and secretary of State understand here.

They say, quote, every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country.

It's Princess principles and its people, no matter the consequences for us.

Now, Comer maintains he still has a lot of questions for the Clintons.

He wants to know about Epstein's relationship with them.

But Bill has, Bill Clinton has never been accused of any wrongdoing.

And we are now going to see how far House Republicans are going to take this.

And back here at the table, Bill Clinton, the former president and the former first lady and secretary of State, also, in addition to that letter sent declarations of what they do and do not know to the chairman so much in this letter, because it's pretty long.

You accepted the least from those who know the most, but

demand the most from those who know the least to stay.

You can't complete your work without speaking to us is simply bizarre.

And then, just as Annie was saying, the rallying cry that they have written in this to Democrats and to Americans who they know want to see their leaders fight.

They're clearly providing a roadmap and a place to rally behind.

Yeah, I mean, it's a really interesting decision.

We obviously saw when we did get some Epstein files last month, the White House, the Justice Department made very clear they want to focus on Clintons.

That was a big part of the first initial release.

I can expect, we can expect now the House to try and continue this moving forward.

I think that was really the point of all of this.

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee point out that last year's vote to subpoena Clinton and his wife Hillary, the former Secretary of State, was bipartisan.

So no one's accusing Bill Clinton of any wrongdoing.

And that's why the Democrats voted along with Republicans to subpoena Bill Clinton.

This is the amount of preparation that went into this deposition today.

These were the questions that we were prepared to ask.

We've communicated with President Clinton's legal team for months now, giving them opportunity after opportunity.

Hillary Clinton's deposition is set for tomorrow, but she won't be appearing either.

In a letter to committee chair Comer explaining their no shows, the Clinton's lawyer says, quote, subpoenas themselves are nothing more than a ploy to attempt to embarrass political rivals as President Trump has directed.

Let's turn now to CNN senior legal analyst Ellie Honig, a former federal prosecutor.

All right, Ellie, the Clintons argument here that the subpoenas are not related to a valid legislative purpose, what do you make of that?

The Clintons have taken a risk in the way they've gone about this.

They could have gone to court weeks ago when they received these subpoenas and, and

And maybe they will go to court in the future and maybe they will win.

But as we sit here right now, what we have is a valid subpoena from Congress that says you are to appear on today's date.

we do not have a court order saying this subpoena is invalid.

Now, it seems what's going to happen from here, if Congress does pursue contempt is Bill Clinton will then go into courts and challenge the the subpoena.

But by waiting to do that, he's taking the risk of being held in contempt first.

So they also say they're willing to certify their draft declarations.

That is what the statement from the lawyer says.

They say that there are other subpoenaed witnesses who have not had to appear in person.

I mean, are those witnesses facing different circumstances than the Clintons?

And the Clintons core argument is that this subpoena does not have a valid legislative purpose.

Congress is saying, well, we need to hear from the Clintons because we're considering new legislation having to do with sex trafficking.

And the Clintons are arguing that that's not a valid purpose.

There's no connection between what the Clintons might know about Jeffrey Epstein and some sort of future legislation.

The point though is in the end, it's all up to Congress how they want to treat witnesses.

Sometimes if you're a member of Congress, you accept written declarations, sometimes you accept behind closed doors depositions, and

sometimes you insist on public testimony.

So if Clinton's legal team is able to get together with Congress and work out some sort of mid ground, some sort of agreement and arrangement, then they can go with that.

But ultimately the Clintons are not the ones in the power position here.

Congress is the ones with the subpoena power and Republicans control Congress.

And as you noted earlier, this was a unanimous, not just bipartisan, but

If Congress can pursue a contempt of Congress proceeding here, what happens?

So Congress now has an important strategic decision to make.

If they choose to go to contempt for first, which seems like they're going to do, they do run the risk that the Clintons then go to court and get a ruling that the subpoenas were invalid.

If that happens, it undercuts, probably ends any contempt.

The other alternative is Congress can wait till this plays out in the court.

And if Congress wins, if the subpoena is deemed to be valid and the Clintons still do not comply, then they can go seek contempt.

But important to know if and when Congress does issue contempt, the next step is the case then goes over to the Justice Department, which has the ability at that point to bring criminal contempt charges.

That's been done in the last administration.

We saw criminal contempt charges against Roger Stone and others.

Peter Navarro went to jail because of that.

the way this works is Congress finds in contempt first, then it gets referred over to doj, and

it'll ultimately be Pam Bondi's call whether she wants to pursue criminal contempt.

It's important, Ellie, to note that authorities have not accused Bill Clinton of wrongdoing at this point.

But as we saw the release of a lot of Epstein documents, we also saw photos, a lot of photos that included Bill Clinton, including some where he is in photos with a woman in at least two cases where their face is redacted, raising questions if he's in a photo with a woman who is a known or possible victim.

And that sort of challenges, I think, what we knew, at least publicly, coming from his spokesperson.

So what kind of information would members of Congress want to know from Bill Clinton with that in mind?

Subtitles ListPlay Video

Clintons refuse to testify in Congressional Epstein probe

ultimately

sort

relevant

extraordinary