Yesterday, a curious thing happened in a House Committee. Bill and Hillary Clinton were actually held accountable for flouting the law — at least as a preliminary matter. In the House Oversight Committee, Democrats joined Republicans in approving contempt resolutions against the two political figures after they refused to appear to answer questions about their connections to Jeffrey Epstein.
The House panel voted 34-8 to advance the resolution on Bill Clinton to a floor vote. It voted 28-15 to advance a resolution on Hillary Clinton.
As previously discussed, the Clintons adopted a position that was devoid of any cognizable legal defense. It was simple hubris, telling Congress that they did not want to appear to be saying that congressional subpoenas are discretionary for them.
From the Whitewater case to the Lewinsky matter to the email scandal, the Clintons have always escaped accountability for their actions. Courts can find perjury and prosecutors can find classified material without a criminal charge. Evidence can suddenly surface after investigations, or thousands of emails can be destroyed without any repercussions.
After that history, it is little surprise that the Clintons would believe that they, unlike other Americans, can choose whether to comply with a subpoena. After standing in flagrant contempt, the Clintons only reaffirmed the sense of entitlement by offering to allow an interview in New York without a transcript. There would be no “what the meaning of ‘is’ is” moments.
It is a demonstration of our partisan times that the mere fact that Democrats joined in the motion came as a surprise to many. Nine Democrats voted with their GOP colleagues against the Clintons
What is disgraceful are those Democrats who dispensed with any institutional or ethical obligations in opposing the resolution. Here were the eight Democrats who voted to allow the Clintons to disregard lawfully issued subpoenas from the Committee:
Wesley Bell (D., Mo.)
Shontel Brown (D., Oh)
Robert Garcia (D., Cal.)
Ro Khanna (D., Cal.)
Kweisi Mfume (D., Md.)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D., D.C.)
Suhas Subramanyam (D., Va.)
James Walkinsaw (D., Va.)
Then there are the two Democrats who voted “present” rather than take responsibility by making an actual decision: Reps. David Min (D., Cal.) and Yassamin Ansari (D., Wash.). That is the “profile of courage” for some members: voting that “I’m here” without taking a position on open contempt for the Committee.
Figures like Ro Khanna have long portrayed themselves as more moderate voices, but appear to be yielding to the far left, including his recent support for the disastrous wealth tax in California. Now he is effectively saying that congressional subpoenas simply do not apply to the Clintons like they would every other American.
The three Democrats who voted to advance the resolution against Hillary Clinton are Lee, Stansbury and Tlaib, according to Politico.
Two Democrats voted “present” for the Bill Clinton contempt resolution: California Rep. David Min and Washington Rep. Yassamin Ansari, while just Min voted “present” on the Hillary Clinton resolution.
This vote was the true test of courage for House members. There has to be something that is not entirely dispensable in the face of political advantage. Even if you disagree with the need for a subpoena, members should be able to support the authority of their colleagues to demand that everyone, even the Clintons, respect such subpoenas.
For a party that runs on fighting the privileged and entitled wealthy class, this vote is comically ironic. They are supporting the claim of the Clintons that they get to decide when they will be subject to legal demands without offering an even remotely plausible legal defenses.
Everyone who has read this analysis would benefit even further by reading Peter Schweizer’s well researched solid book ‘Clinton Cash’ and you will see in spades how right Prof. Turley is about their sense of entitlement…. it comes from getting away with what they got away with…..
Congress should subpoena 3 other people to make this a legitimate hearing:
1) Epstein’s best friend Donald Trump
2) Epstein’s close friend Melania Trump – possible witness to Epstein’s crimes
3) Pam Bondi – actually in contempt of Congress for refusing to release the Epstein files
Dear Troll ‘Anon’ DT kicked Epstein out of his Mar-a-lago Club… do you kick ‘best friends’ out on the street…? your lies are -again- Ridiculous but we know yiouu are trying hard to earn the blood money you are being paid to write such lies….. even though you are comically bad at it…..
DEMS spent 98 percent of their time complaining how unfair it was to pick on Vilhelm and Hillbilly. On and on. Never mentioned they could have very simply shown up.
Let’s be frank, okay? Both of them are serious criminals who have a great deal to hide. Everyone knows that. Come on. Many Americans aren’t as dumb as they were 50 years ago. Some become sick wackos like the radical libs, but many have gotten educated about the ways of some lib politicians and the way the leftist media protects them.
Why are the marxists suggesting redesigning ICE badges shaped like yellowish 6-pointed stars? Like a sheriff badge??
Just another example of liberals using the pain and suffering of other people as a political weapon. They don’t care about Epstein’s victims, they’re just weapon to use against Trump. Trump is the only person that we can say with certainty had nothing to do with any of Epstein’s crimes, if he had, he would have been prosecuted for it. He’s the most investigated man in history. Biden had four years to find something, if anything was there, it would have been used. The victims, even Maxwell herself, have never accused him of anything. And they were probably offered a lot to do so. The Left is simply garbage. They created an illegal immigration crisis that enriched the cartels, opened the border to gangs, drug and sex traffic, all for the purpose of politics. They use their lunatics like pawns, now they’re raising campaign funds from Good’s death. If you an example of how disgusting these people are, just look at the posts from people wishing harm to Leavitt and Vance’s pregnant babies. Show me an example of conservatives doing anything like that. I suppose one reason is that leftists usually abort their babies, so there probably isn’t an example available.
The bourgeois Clintons were dragging down their neo communist ideology what with their champagne and designer dresses etc.
Thus, the ‘democrats’ voting against the Clintons. Keep an eye on that list for future reference.
C R A P
Acronym for the Democratic wing of their supporters:
Clinton’s
Rapists
and
Pedophiles
American Citizens join Democrats and Republicans in Voting the Clintons in Contempt of Congress
The radical communist leftist in the Democratic party want the old guard traditional Democrats out they are just no where radical enough. The Clinton’s represent the old guard traditional Democrats. It is not a real wonder to see why they voted for them to testify, what ever slime comes out it will even further reduce Hitlery’s influence on the party and by proxy the rest of the old guard’s power too. Mamadani and Spanberger are the future of the Democratic party. Lie and cheat to get elected and then screw the people that elected you.
Just read the names from the Democrats list of dissenters. Not many American names on that list. America has been invaded and overrun by immigrants, their idea of America started 30 years ago at best.
invaded and overrun by immigrants,…. um, just like your family did?
“invaded and overrun by immigrants,…. um, just like your family did?”
No, that was conquest in a much less civilized time.
we won’t tolerate any invasions, stop asking.
Trump Can’t Staff U.S. Attorneys In New Jersey
A federal judge will hear arguments Friday that the Trump administration is illegally running the New Jersey federal prosecutor’s office — the latest challenge to the administration’s attempts to circumvent the Senate confirmation process.
In December, Trump loyalist Alina Habba resigned as the U.S. attorney for New Jersey after an appeals court upheld a ruling that she was disqualified from holding the job.
After Habba left, Attorney General Pam Bondi put a trio of Justice Department lawyers in charge of the office: Philip Lamparello, Jordan Fox and Ari Fontecchio. That appeared to be a way around rulings that said President Donald Trump could not place someone in the job indefinitely without Senate confirmation.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/22/after-habba-more-drama-in-new-jersey-prosecutors-office-00740923
…………………………………..
Trump’s DOJ can’t seem to find a way of legally staffing Federal Prosecutors in certain blue states. That old fashion method of getting senate confirmation just isn’t working here. Consequently criminal defendants have been successfully challenging prosecutions.
“Spinning wheels got to go round”
Trump can not staff AUSA’s except temporarily unless the Senate confirms them.
Traditionally the Senate judiciary committee will not hold hearings on an appointment if one of the senators from the relevant state blue slips that appointment.
So in numerous states we have a single senator precluding the confirmation of appointees.
The constitution appointments clause provides for temporary acting appointments, until someone is confirmed.
Federal law covers that process.
Things have been Gummed up because Judge Curry misread the law in the Haligan case – that appeal will eventually hit the supreme court.
You are a complete moron if you think that SCOTUS is going to decide that after 120 days ONLY a federal judge can fill an executive branch appointment. If that were the case that would be an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers.
BTW there is no such thing as “illegally staffing”
The only issue is the extent of the authority of those people who have been appointed.
Regardless, this will reach SCOTUS shortly and with near certainty the log jam will be cleared.
BTW Trump can not place someone in a temporary position indefinitely and that has NEVER been the issue.
The issue is whether at the expiration or resignation of a temporary appointment, Trump can make subsequent temporary appointments.
You are looney if you think SCOTUS is going to decide the position must remain vacant.
And you are loonier still if you think SCOTUS is going to decide that after 120 days ONLY judges can fill executive branch positions.
Absolutely nowhere in the constitution is there any power for judges to make executive branch appointments.
The so called “old fashioned process” of senate confirmations does not constitutionally involve blue slips that allow a single senator to thwart appointments in their state. But even in the past – including the recent past Blue slips were incredibly rare.
Democrats have made them common place. Either they are going to go – they are only a tradition, they are not even part of the rules of the senate like the Fillibuster. Or we will see future republicans block as many Democrat appointments as possible without confirmation hearings
Trump has had ZERO problems filling positions were blue slips are not applicable – such as cabinet positions.
I would further note – that if Democrats keep this game up – there are ways arround it.
DOJ can do lateral transfers. Trump can get an AUSA appointed and confirmed in a red state where their appointment will not be blue slipped and then transfer them to wherever he wishes.
Trump could as an example appoint Habba in West Virginia and after confirmation transfer her to NJ.
That is not occuring because Trump is making deliberate efforts to disempower activist left wing nut judges, and wants this issue to reach the supreme court.
Democratic hijinks and cheating by woke TDS suffering activist judges and Democratic Senators. It has nothing to do with legally appointing an Attorney General. They keep goading Trump to declare martial law, I hope he does, it is the only way to save the Republic and democracy from the Democrats plan for a communist dictatorship.
We’ve seen this play before.
Nazi Germany, 1930s. It didn’t end well, for the Jewish people, or for Germany.
What the FU-K is going on!
Take your meds Anon!! DEMS are the Jewish haters!!
You better start looking at the Jews in our own government and some from afar that are destroying us. There are Jews that are the modern Bolsheviks, Socialists or Communists aka Democrats.
A commie is a commie no matter how small…
Like all other people, Jews are in all parts of life, both good and bad, even though they tend to be better educated, with so many in science who are Nobel Prize Laureates. The Jews you despise are the people who refused to surrender the truth even when they had no country to protect them. If you value America, that is the exact same courage you’re depending on.
A communist take over by the Democrats. Anyone that hasn’t notice they are trying to establish a socialist dictatorship is just plain stupid.
Why is the trump administration collecting jewish names?
“The administration recently sued the University of Pennsylvania to surrender a list of Jewish faculty, staff, and students, all without obtaining consent from Jewish community members themselves. The administration claims they require the Jewish registry to “combat antisemitism” on college campuses.”
Trump’s border czar Tom Homan, similarly, is threatening to create his own “database” of ICE protestors.
Nothing to see here, move along…
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Don’t worry, they never bother coming for the dullards.
+100
I guess social security is a Nazi scheme.
I thought the name Ponzi was yiddish…
“Why is the trump administration collecting jewish names?”
They said why
Regardless, are you realling going to claim that a President who the Israelis celebreate as Irael’s best friend ever, whose son-in-law is jewish and whose daughter converted to Judiasm is anti-semetic ?
If so YOUR NUTS
Rabble:
“putting things” in “quotes” without “providing the source” just means “you pulled it out your ass.”