Congress

9 Democrats vote to hold Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress for evading Epstein testimony

Published

8 months ago

January 21, 2026

Nine Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted with Republicans Wednesday to recommend holding former President Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena to testify as part of the panel’s investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Three Democrats sided with Republicans in voting for a separate measure to recommend also holding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt.

Their votes underscore the continued pressure Democrats are under to remain consistent in their calls for transparency and accountability in the Epstein case — no matter the person or the party affiliation or the dire consequences.

The contempt reports now head to the House floor. Assuming the measures advance, the administration could choose to prosecute the former first couple, which could lead to potential jail time for one or both.

For Hillary Clinton especially, it could mark the culmination of President Donald Trump’s decadelong hostility towards his 2016 political rival, who he repeatedly called to be put behind bars for using a private email server while leading the State Department.

“No witness – not a former president or a private citizen — may willfully defy a duly issued congressional subpoena without consequence,” said House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-Ky.). “But that is what the Clintons did, and that is why we are here today.”

Reps. Maxwell Frost of Florida, Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Emily Randall of Washington, Lateefah Simon of California, Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, alongside Reps. Stephen Lynch and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, joined Republicans in voting in favor of holding Bill Clinton in contempt. Two Democrats — Yassamin Ansari of Washington and Dave Min of California — voted “present.”

Lee, Stansbury and Tlaib voted in favor of holding Hillary Clinton in contempt, with one Democrat, Min, recording himself as “present.”

Comer issued subpoenas to the Clintons as part of his committee’s Epstein probe. Though Bill Clinton has not been implicated in any illegal activity, he had a well-documented relationship with the late disgraced financier and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been eager for information about what he might know.

But Republicans have sought to position Epstein as an alternative bogeyman to Trump, who also has not been accused of coordination in Epstein’s sex trafficking scheme but has been at the center of Democrats’ focus in demanding all federal case files related to Epstein be released.

The Clintons have maintained that Comer’s subpoenas are not tied to a legitimate legislative purpose and are therefore invalid. They have also accused Comer of pursuing partisan antics designed to put them in prison.

Like other public figures who received subpoenas from the Oversight panel in the Epstein probe, the Clintons submitted sworn declarations to the panel. In their written statements, the former first couple attested to their lack of knowledge about the criminal activities of both Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell.

The Clintons also, through their legal team, negotiated with the panel for months to determine terms for an appearance before lawmakers and staff investigators. Bill Clinton had offered to sit down for an interview with Comer and his staff, but Comer rejected the proposed conditions.

In a statement on social media Wednesday morning before the contempt vote, a Clinton spokesperson said, “We have offered to help, we have helped, and to this very moment we are ready to help. But the Republicans REFUSE to say YES.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the committee’s top Democrat, voted against the contempt resolutions, saying he also wanted Bill Clinton to answer his panel’s questions but arguing Comer was applying different standards to witnesses.

“Where is the pressure to get [Attorney General] Pam Bondi to release the files?” Garcia said. “Instead, you are focusing the committee’s focus on whoever you perceive to be you, your enemies and the enemies of Donald Trump.”

Congress

GOP Senator wants to subpoena Donald Trump Jr. over Russian-funded wedding

Published

2 hours ago

September 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A Senate Republican from Utah is asking the Senate Judiciary Committee to subpoena Donald Trump Jr. following reports that the president’s son had parts of his wedding paid for by a Russian oligarch with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Sen. John Curtis’ request, which comes following a news story by ProPublica, marks a significant break with President Donald Trump from a member of his own party.

“Questions have arisen about the relationships of President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., with foreign business figures and the acceptance of significant gifts. These include a lavish wedding afterparty, on a private island, provided by Russian oligarch Umar Kremlev, who reportedly traveled to China as part of a delegation accompanying Vladimir Putin shortly before giving the gift,” Curtis wrote in a letter dated Sept. 21 to Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and the panel’s top Democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.

“These concerns are compounded by Donald Trump Jr.’s active promotion of family-backed cryptocurrency ventures, his continued pursuit of international real estate deals involving direct meetings with foreign heads of state, and his reported investments in defense contracting,” Curtis added.

Curtis, also noting the profits the Trump family has made through cryptocurrency deals, indicated this incident is part of a broader pattern where the relatives of U.S. presidents can improperly leverage their proximity to power.

In addition to probing Trump Jr., Curtis asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to subpoena President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, who over the years found himself enveloped in numerous self-dealing scandals. Both men, he said, should testify “regarding their past business dealings, relationships with foreign individuals and entities, gifts, or other benefits they have received, and any instances in which their relationship to the President was invoked or understood to provide value.”

“The country should not have to accept one standard for the family of a Republican president and another for the family of a Democratic president. Nor should congressional oversight begin and end when control of the White House changes hands,” Curtis said.

The White House did not immediately return a request for comment Wednesday, but it’s unlikely that Trump, who demands loyalty from the GOP, will consider the bipartisan nature of Curtis’ request to be anything other than a personal affront.

Trump said in a statement he has “no idea who Umar is” and that he has “never heard of him, and he didn’t pay for Don and Bettina’s wedding, which took place at a totally different location, and on a different day from the wedding.”

Kremlev is president of the International Boxing Association and received an Order of Friendship medal from Putin for his “contribution to international sport and his commitment to the global boxing family.” He’s also been sanctioned by the Ukrainian government for his ties to Putin.

A spokesperson for Judiciary Committee Republicans confirmed Grassley was in receipt of the letter but could not commit to investigating the matter. The spokesperson noted that hearing dates are extremely limited through the end of 2026 and investigative hearings usually take months of background work before they can be scheduled.

It’s sure to be an issue Democrats pursue if they win the majority in either chamber next year. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote to the White House and Donald Trump Jr. last week demanding information about the president’s son’s ties to Kremlev.

Cheyanne M. Daniels contributed to this report.

Congress

Capitol agenda: Senate GOP eyes exit plan as trail calls

Published

3 hours ago

September 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Senators dreaming of the smell of jet fumes might get their wish.

The chamber, initially scheduled to be in session until the beginning of October, is instead eyeing departure by the end of the week. To get there, though, Republicans will need to strike a time agreement with Democrats to fast-track the remainder of their work.

And while GOP members are antsy to spend more time in their states campaigning ahead of the midterms, some in their ranks are also uncomfortable that their final agenda items aren’t doing more to address issues voters increasingly care about — like the cost of living, data centers or AI safety.

For now, senators’ agenda includes: a sweeping college athletics bill, an Iran war powers resolution, a handful of nominees — including for labor secretary — and potential votes to roll back California’s stricter standards for vehicle emissions.

So far Democrats haven’t tipped their hand on whether they will agree to speed up consideration of the college sports legislation. Without a deal, the bill will drag into at least Friday evening, but Democrats first want details about the entire pre-recess agenda, according to two people granted anonymity to disclose private deliberations.

Whether the Senate will get around to doing something — anything — to address public alarm about the growing capabilities of artificial intelligence or pass permitting reform legislation remains to be seen.

Discussions are ongoing about whether the chamber will take a vote on Sen. Jon Husted’s so-called Ratepayer Protection Act, which aims to curb the energy costs associated with data centers.

Negotiators dragged past what was viewed as an unofficial deadline (over the weekend) to reach a deal to streamline energy permitting before the midterms.

Also to potentially get the boot if senators leave this week: a planned Senate Judiciary hearing next week with former special counsel Jack Smith.

Chair Chuck Grassley, asked last week, said “we gotta go ahead with that” hearing but added that he hasn’t grappled with an early dismissal: “Gosh, I haven’t thought about that.”

An aide of his chimed in saying the committee is “working on options” but that “it’s hard with the uncertainty” of the schedule.

What else we’re watching:

— SOARING DIESEL COSTS EXPOSE GOP SPLITS: Several farm state Republicans this week have all but begged President Donald Trump to do something to lower record-high diesel prices fueled by the Iran war, even if it means crossing their traditional allies in the oil and gas sector. The cacophony of outcry puts pressure on GOP leaders and exposes divisions among Republicans as members grapple with an unpopular war led by the president. Grassley posted over the weekend that high diesel prices are “KILLING FARMERS INCOME” and urged Trump to “put an embargo on diesel exports like presidents in the 70s put embargoes on ag products bc food prices were inflated.” Michigan’s GOP Senate candidate Mike Rogers on Monday also threw his support behind a “temporary embargo” on diesel exports and called for an end to the Iran war, as did Iowa Senate candidate Rep. Ashley Hinson in a Monday morning post. Reps. Zach Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks also called for diesel price relief.

— JEFFRIES SNAPS BACK AT GOLDEN: Hakeem Jeffries slammed exiting Rep. Jared Golden’s endorsement of a battleground Republican Monday, showcasing a rare display of frustration by the minority leader against a member who’s bucked his party multiple times this month. Jeffries and Democratic leaders were already weighing potential punishment for Golden after he twice in recent weeks was a key vote unfreezing Republicans’ floor agendas. On Monday, Golden twisted the proverbial knife by endorsing Rep. Mike Lawler in a district Democrats are spending millions of dollars in in an effort to flip. “Mike Lawler is an unadulterated phony who has never shown bipartisan courage when it matters,” Jeffries wrote in a statement that didn’t mention Golden by name. “In desperation, he is peddling an 11th hour endorsement from a retiring Congressmember who represents an out of town district more than 400 miles away.”

Jordain Carney, James Bikales, Rachel Shin and Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.