共和党领导的众议院监督委员会主席表示，该委员会将继续推进对前总统比尔·克林顿的藐视国会诉讼，此前他未能在周二出庭作证，这是该委员会对被定罪的性犯罪者杰弗里·爱泼斯坦的调查的一部分。
此前，前总统和国务卿给他们发了一封措辞严厉、内容全面的四页信，这封信可能意味着与国会就一项被他们抨击为“党派政治”的举措进行了长期斗争。
该委员会曾威胁称，如果前总统和前国务卿希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)不出席分别定于周二和周三举行的单独闭门作证，他们将被判藐视国会。
“我想现在每个人都知道，比尔·克林顿没有露面。我认为值得注意的是，这份传票是由这个委员会以两党合作的方式投票决定的。这不是我作为委员会主席刚刚发布的。这是众议院监督委员会全票通过的，要求传唤前总统克林顿和前国务卿希拉里·克林顿，”监督委员会主席詹姆斯·卡莫周二早上说。
“我们下周将在众议院监督委员会的标记中采取行动，以蔑视国会的罪名起诉前总统克林顿，”共和党人卡莫后来补充说。
克林顿夫妇的律师大卫·肯德尔没有回应记者的置评请求，即希拉里周三是否会出现在国会山接受传唤作证。
在周二早上发布在社交媒体上的克林顿夫妇的信中，他们公开宣布卡莫威胁要以藐视国会罪拘留他们。
“每个人都必须决定他们什么时候已经看够了，什么时候已经准备好为这个国家、这个国家的原则和这个国家的人民而战，不管后果如何，”克林顿夫妇写道。“对我们来说，现在是时候了。”
“尽管我们需要尽一切努力来帮助我们的国家，但你正处于让国会停止推行一项很少使用的程序的风口浪尖上，这项程序实际上旨在导致我们入狱。这不是美国摆脱困境的出路，我们将有力地捍卫自己，”信中继续写道。
克林顿夫妇在信中称，卡莫对委员会关于爱泼斯坦调查工作的做法“阻止了发现政府角色事实的进展”，而且主席“没有采取任何行动”迫使司法部遵守去年底通过的爱泼斯坦文件透明法案要求的披露义务。
克林顿夫妇写道，“我们已经尽力给你我们所掌握的一点信息。”。“我们这样做是因为爱泼斯坦先生的罪行令人发指。如果政府没有尽全力调查和起诉这些罪行，无论出于什么原因，这都应该是你工作的重点——了解原因并防止这种情况再次发生。没有证据表明你在这么做。"
他们指出，他们“希望，也许是徒劳的”，其他议员不会允许卡莫“独自劫持国会”对他们提起藐视法庭的指控，但他们表示，如果真的到了那一步，他们准备战斗。
“我们准备向你们的45名委员会成员说明我们的情况，如果有必要，甚至更多。重要的是，我们还将在公共领域为自己辩护，并确保这个国家知道你们这样做的确切原因，而不是帮助需要国会工作和保护的美国人民，”信中说。
几个月来，该委员会的共和党人一直要求克林顿夫妇向立法者提供证词，援引前总统的证词2000年代初乘坐爱泼斯坦的私人飞机旅行以及克林顿家族的“过去关系”爱泼斯坦和他的助手吉斯莱恩·麦克斯韦尔。小组最初8月5日对克林顿夫妇发出传票10月份出现。
肯德尔继续辩称，这对夫妇没有与委员会调查联邦政府处理对爱泼斯坦和麦克斯韦尔的调查有关的信息，不应被要求出庭作证。肯德尔认为克林顿夫妇应该被允许以书面形式向委员会提供他们所掌握的有限信息。
肯德尔在去年10月发给该委员会的一封信中写道，“鉴于前总统和前国务卿在政府中的时间和角色与手头的事情无关，强迫他们亲自出庭根本没有合理的理由。”。他认为，委员会应该原谅克林顿夫妇，就像委员会对五名前司法部长所做的那样，他们在向委员会证明他们没有相关知识后都被原谅了。
比尔·克林顿并否认对爱泼斯坦的病情有任何了解犯罪。没有一个爱泼斯坦的幸存者或同事曾经公开指控过前任总统在他和爱泼斯坦之前的关系。
前国务卿克林顿“对爱泼斯坦或麦克斯韦尔的犯罪活动一无所知，从未坐过他的飞机，从未到过他的岛屿，也不记得曾与爱泼斯坦说过话。她个人对麦克斯韦尔和爱泼斯坦的活动一无所知，”肯德尔写道。“克林顿总统与爱泼斯坦的接触在20年前就结束了，鉴于很久以后才曝光的事情，他甚至对这种有限的联系表示遗憾，”10月6日写给该委员会的一封信说。
卡莫在10月份给肯德尔的一封信中写道，委员会“怀疑”克林顿夫妇只有有限的信息，并表示应由委员会而不是克林顿夫妇来确定信息的价值。
"[T]he Committee believes that it should be provided in a deposition setting, where the Committee can best assess its breadth and value," Comer wrote.
真实的意大利风味在瀑布餐厅大放异彩阅读更多跳跃莫斯科发射新导弹后，乌克兰无人驾驶飞机点燃俄罗斯油库路易吉·曼乔内最新消息:法官下令对没收背包进行听证获取从课堂到职业的支持。找到你的王冠。加拿大国王大学赞助
Clintons say 'now is that time' to 'fight for this country' as they're targeted for contempt
The chairman of the Republican-led House Oversight Committee said the panel will move forward with contempt of Congress proceedings against former President Bill Clinton after he failed to appear for a subpoenaed deposition on Tuesday as part of the panel's investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The announcement came after the former president and secretary of State sent them a scathing and sweeping four-page letter that potentially signaled a protracted fight with Congress over a move they blasted as "partisan politics."
The committee had threatened to hold the former president and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress if they did not appear for separate scheduled closed depositions set for Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively.
"I think everyone knows by now, Bill Clinton did not show up. And I think it's important to note that this subpoena was voted on in a bipartisan manner by this committee. This wasn't something that I just issued as chairman of the committee. This was voted on by the entire committee in a unanimous vote of the House Oversight Committee to subpoena former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton," Oversight Chairman James Comer said Tuesday morning.
"We will move next week in the House Oversight Committee markup to hold former President Clinton in contempt of Congress," Comer, a Republican, later added.
A lawyer for the Clintons, David Kendall, has not responded to requests for comment on whether Hillary Clinton will appear on Capitol Hill for her Wednesday subpoenaed deposition.
In the Clintons' letter, posted on social media Tuesday morning, theypublicly called outComer for threatening to hold them in contempt of Congress.
"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,"the Clintons wrote. "For us, now is that time."
"Despite everything that needs to be done to help our country, you are on the cusp of bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a rarely used process literally designed to result in our imprisonment. This is not the way out of America's ills, and we will forcefully defend ourselves," the letter continues.
The Clintons contend in the letter that Comer's approach to the committee's work on the Epstein investigation has "prevented progress in discovering the facts about the government's role" and that the chairman has "done nothing" to force the Justice Department to comply with its disclosure obligations required by Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed late last year.
"We have tried to give you the little information that we have," the Clintons wrote."We've done so because Mr. Epstein's crimes were horrific.If the Government didn't do all it could to investigate and prosecute these crimes, for whatever reason, that should be the focus of your work -- to learn why and to prevent that from happening ever again.There is no evidence that you are doing so."
And they noted that they "hope, perhaps in vain" that other lawmakers will not allow Comer to "singlehandedly hijack the Congress" to pursue contempt charges against them, but indicate that they are prepared for the fight, if it comes to that.
"We are prepared to make our case to your 45 committee members, and if need be, more.Importantly, we will also defend ourselves in the public arena and ensure this country knows exactly why you are doing so, instead of helping the American people who need this Congress's work and protection," the letter says.
For months, Republicans on the committee have been demanding that the Clintons provide testimony to lawmakers, citing the former president'stravels on Epstein's private aircraft in the early 2000sand the Clinton "family's past relationship"with Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. The panel initiallyissued subpoenas for the Clintons on Aug. 5to appear in October.
Kendall has continued to argue that the couple has no information relevant to the committee's investigation of the federal government's handling of investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, and should not be required to appear for in-person testimony.Kendall has contended that the Clintons should be permitted to provide the limited information they have to the committee in writing.
"There is simply no reasonable justification for compelling a former President and Secretary of State to appear personally, given that their time and roles in government had no connection to the matter at hand," Kendall wrote in one of the letters sent to the committee in October of last year. He argued that the committee should excuse the Clintons, as the committee had done for five former attorneys general who were each excused after certifying to the committee that they had no relevant knowledge.
Bill Clintonhas not been accused of wrongdoing and denies having any knowledge of Epstein'scrimes.No Epstein survivor or associate has ever made a public allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior bythe former presidentinconnection with his prior relationship with Epstein.
Former Secretary of State Clinton "has no personal knowledge of Epstein or Maxwell's criminal activities, never flew on his aircraft, never visited his island, and cannot recall ever speaking to Epstein. She has no personal knowledge of Maxwell's activities with Epstein," Kendall wrote."President Clinton's contact with Epstein ended two decades ago, and given what came to light much after, he has expressed regret for even that limited association," an Oct. 6 letter to the committee says.
Comer wrote in a letter to Kendall in October that the committee is "skeptical" that the Clintons have only limited information and stated it was up to the committee, not the Clintons, to make determinations of the value of the information.
"[T]he Committee believes that it should be provided in a deposition setting, where the Committee can best assess its breadth and value," Comer wrote.
Last month, in response to the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the Justice Departmentreleased several photographs of former President Clintonapparently taken during his international travels with Epstein and Maxwell from 2002 to 2003, although the released photographs contained no information identifying when or where they were taken.Following that disclosure, aspokesperson for the two-term Democratic president arguedthatthe Trump administration released those images to shield the Trump White House"from what comes next, or from what they'll try to hide forever."
"So, they can release as many grainy 20-plus-year-old photos as they want, but this isn't about Bill Clinton. Never has, never will be," Clinton's spokesperson Angel Ureñawrote on X Dec. 22.
Ureñadid not respond to an email inquiry from ABC News on Monday.
What is contempt of Congress?
The House of Representatives can hold an individual "in contempt" if that person refuses to testify or comply with a subpoena. The contempt authority is considered an implied power of Congress.
"Congress's contempt power is the means by whichCongress responds to certain acts that in its view obstruct the legislative process. Contempt may be used either to coerce compliance, to punish the contemnor, and/or to remove the obstruction," according to a report from the Congressional Research Service.
Any person summoned as a congressional witness who refuses to comply can face a misdemeanor charge that carries a fine of up to $100,000 and up to a year in prison if that person is eventually found guilty.
What would the process look like?
To hold someone in contempt of Congress, the Oversight Committee would first mark up and then vote to advance the contempt resolution. Once the committee approves the resolution, which is expected given the GOP majority, the resolution now could go to a vote in the full House.
A simple majority is needed to clear a contempt resolution on the floor. Notably, it does not require passage in the Senate.
The resolution, if passed, would direct the speaker of the House to refer the case to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia -- under the Department of Justice -- for possible criminal prosecution.
History of contempt
Congress has held Cabinet officials in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a House subpoena, including Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in 2019 and then-Attorney General Eric Holder in 2012. The DOJ never prosecuted them even though the House voted to hold them in contempt.
The House held Peter Navarro, a former top trade adviser in the Trump administration, in contempt of Congress in 2022 for defying a subpoena to provide records and testimony to the now-defunct House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Navarro was sentenced to jail time.
Steve Bannon, a Trump ally, was also held in contempt of Congress in 2022 for not complying with the Jan. 6 select committee. Bannon was also sentenced to prison time.
The GOP-led House voted to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress in 2024 over the DOJ failing to provide audio of then-President Joe Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur. The DOJ did not prosecute the case, but the audio was released.
