What's happened
As of February 3, 2026, Bill and Hillary Clinton have agreed to sit for filmed, transcribed depositions before the House Oversight Committee on February 26 and 27, ending months of resistance to subpoenas related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The committee had advanced criminal contempt charges, with some Democrats joining Republicans. The depositions will be closed-door but recorded, with Republicans emphasizing accountability.
What's behind the headline?
Political Dynamics and Legal Precedent
The Clintons' reluctant agreement to testify under oath marks a significant moment in congressional oversight, potentially setting a precedent for holding former presidents accountable through contempt proceedings. The bipartisan support for contempt charges, including from some Democrats, underscores a rare moment of cross-party consensus on transparency in the Epstein investigation.
Strategic Positioning
Republicans, led by Comer, have shifted focus from investigating Epstein's broader network, including ties to former President Trump, to scrutinizing the Clintons' past associations with Epstein. This pivot reflects political motivations to target prominent Democratic figures, complicating the investigation's impartiality.
Legal and Political Implications
The threat of criminal contempt and possible prosecution is unprecedented for former presidents, raising questions about congressional authority and political weaponization. The Clintons' initial resistance and subsequent capitulation highlight the tension between legal obligations and political strategy.
Future Outlook
The closed-door, videotaped depositions will provide the committee with sworn testimony, but the Clintons' request for public hearings was denied, suggesting continued control over narrative framing. The investigation's trajectory will likely influence public perceptions of accountability and may impact the broader discourse on political elites' immunity.
Impact on Public Trust
This development may bolster public confidence in congressional oversight mechanisms, demonstrating that no individual is above the law. However, the partisan undertones risk deepening political polarization, potentially undermining the investigation's credibility among some constituencies.
What the papers say
The Independent's Alex Woodward details the Clintons' initial defiance and eventual agreement to testify, highlighting Comer’s insistence on sworn, filmed depositions and the bipartisan support for contempt charges. The New York Times' Annie Karni provides insight into the negotiation breakdowns, noting the Clintons' request for public hearings and Comer's rejection, emphasizing the political stakes. AP News outlines the broader context of the investigation and the Clintons' criticism of Comer for politicizing the probe while also noting the bipartisan nature of the contempt votes. The NY Post reports on the timeline and the Clintons' final acceptance of deposition terms, quoting Comer’s statement that "no one is above the law." France 24 and The Times of Israel emphasize the bipartisan votes and the political dynamics, including Democrats' mixed support and the focus on transparency. Sky News adds context on related Epstein investigation developments, including Ghislaine Maxwell's scheduled deposition, underscoring the wider scope of congressional scrutiny. Together, these sources paint a picture of a politically charged investigation with significant legal ramifications, where the Clintons' compliance marks a pivotal shift in congressional efforts to hold powerful figures accountable.
How we got here
The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the Clintons in August 2025 as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. The Clintons resisted, calling the subpoenas invalid and politically motivated. The committee, led by Republican James Comer, advanced criminal contempt charges after months of non-compliance, with some Democrats supporting the move. The investigation focuses on Epstein's sex trafficking network and government handling of related records.
Go deeper
- Why did the Clintons initially resist the subpoenas?
- What are the legal consequences of contempt of Congress?
- How does this investigation affect the broader Epstein probe?
More on these topics
-
William Jefferson Clinton is an American politician who served as the 42nd president of the United States from 1993 to 2001. Prior to the presidency, he was the governor of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981, and again from 1983 to 1992, and the attorney general
-
Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is an American politician, diplomat, lawyer, writer, and public speaker who served as the 67th United States Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, as a United States Senator from New York from 2001 to 2009, and as First Lady o
-
Jeffrey Edward Epstein was an American financier and convicted sex offender. He began his professional life as a teacher but then switched to the banking and finance sector in various roles, working at Bear Stearns before forming his own firm.
-
James Richardson Comer Jr. is an American politician from the Commonwealth of Kentucky who currently represents the state's 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives.
-
Ghislaine Noelle Marion Maxwell is a British socialite, known for her association with financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
-
Pamela Jo Bondi is an American attorney, lobbyist, and politician. A Republican, she served as the 37th Florida Attorney General from 2011 to 2019.
-
The United States House of Representatives is the lower house of the United States Congress; the Senate is the upper house. Together they compose the national bicameral legislature of the United States.
-
Donald John Trump is an American politician, media personality, and businessman who served as the 45th president of the United States from 2017 to 2021.
-
Hakeem Sekou Jeffries is an American lawyer and Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives, representing New York's 8th congressional district in Brooklyn and Queens.