Clintons don't show- ignore subpoena

The questions Comer wants to ask is why did Epstein visit the White House so often.....was it 17 times ?
Comer says he has only been there 9 times in his career.


And he wants to ask about the 25 or so times Bill flew on Epstein's plane.


Another question could be how are the Clintons able to stay married.... Originally Posted by VitaMan

... So here we are, mate:

The House Oversight Committee has issued LAWFUL Subpoenas.
And they're BI-PARTISAN... As BOTH Democrats and Repubs
from the Committee do WANT the Clintons to testify.

... And let's not forget that the subpoenas were issued
back in August of last year - for the Clintons to
then appear in mid-October. ... The Clintons then asked
to move the appearance to mid-December. .. The Committee
agreed - and that was done - until the Clintons asked
yet AGAIN that the appearance be moved - so they could
attend a Funeral... So the Committee agreed to accomodate
them AGAIN - and moved to mid-January - last week -
and the Clintons have now REFUSED to come in.

... So, NOW it's time for the Clintons to face prosecution
and jail time for defying the Law. ...

##### Salty

wait, but the Supreme Court said presidents are immune from prosecution. so Bill is clearly immune, and Hillary was busy writing policy during the relevant time frames..

maybe the Clintons are just waiting for the DOJ to comply with a lawful court order to disclose everything first..

what's good for the goose is good for the gander, my good salty mate..

... So here we are, mate:

The House Oversight Committee has issued LAWFUL Subpoenas.
And they're BI-PARTISAN... As BOTH Democrats and Repubs
from the Committee do WANT the Clintons to testify.

... And let's not forget that the subpoenas were issued
back in August of last year - for the Clintons to
then appear in mid-October. ... The Clintons then asked
to move the appearance to mid-December. .. The Committee
agreed - and that was done - until the Clintons asked
yet AGAIN that the appearance be moved - so they could
attend a Funeral... So the Committee agreed to accomodate
them AGAIN - and moved to mid-January - last week -
and the Clintons have now REFUSED to come in.

... So, NOW it's time for the Clintons to face prosecution
and jail time for defying the Law. ...

##### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

... WHEN did they say that?? ...

Besides, Bill Clinton IS NOT President anymore... So NOW he can
be prosecuted... Though I don't think the Committee has so far
mentioned any charges for Bill - except defying the subpoena.

But we'll surely see what happens. ... ...

#### Salty

Trump vs. United States said presidents are above the law. basically, if a president does it, it must be legal. i think they overruled the Constitution. i'm pretty sure the 4th Amendment was the one that said there were to be no kings in America after the whole George the 3rd fiasco. the Roberts Court was like, eff that noise, we love kings and we need more of them..


#iluvkingdonaldthe1st..
#longlivetheorangeking..
#americansforkings..
#trump2028..
#trumpforlife..

... WHEN did they say that?? ...

Besides, Bill Clinton IS NOT President anymore... So NOW he can
be prosecuted... Though I don't think the Committee has so far
mentioned any charges for Bill - except defying the subpoena.

But we'll surely see what happens. ... ...

#### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

...

... So, NOW it's time for the Clintons to face prosecution
and jail time for defying the Law. ...

##### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

Under your logic, Jim Jordan should be in jail as well……he defied his Congressional subpoena as well.

This whole “prosecute your opponent” stuff is insanity, anyway. They go nowhere, and spend millions for nothing. You want savings in the Federal Government? Restrict the ability to do these politically motivated “investigations”.

This bullshit has been going on since Clinton’s blowjob. It’s got to stop.

elg……

Under your logic, Jim Jordan should be in jail as well……he defied his Congressional subpoena as well.

This whole “prosecute your opponent” stuff is insanity, anyway. They go nowhere, and spend millions for nothing. You want savings in the Federal Government? Restrict the ability to do these politically motivated “investigations”.

This bullshit has been going on since Clinton’s blowjob. It’s got to stop.

elg…… Originally Posted by elghund

... The topic and subject of the thread is concerning
the Clintons - who Did Not show.

Thus, whining and crying about procedure and rules may be
all well and good - but don't really address the subject.

The Clintons either need to come in - or need to be
held to accounte, as others have been...

#### Salty

... WHAT do the Clintons have to hide?? ... Originally Posted by Salty Again

Not really the issue, and you know it. The main reason they don't want to testify is because these hearings are nothing but staged shows to allow assholes like Comer and his pals to state prepared, partisan propaganda as if it has relevant, legal meaning.

Look up the video of Nancy Mace criticizing Tim Walz about not knowing the "definition of a woman" as an example. It was pure theatrical garbage. You would swear it was satire if you didn't already know how ridiculous and egotistic these idiots are.

.

... Yet the point IS - that the Congressional Oversight Committee
has standing to compel the Clintons to come in and testify.

Now, the Clintons could wander in and thus "plead the 5th"
and say precious little ---- but they still need to come in.

#### Salty

...but they still need to come in. Originally Posted by Salty Again

Nah. I sure wouldn't if I were them. Mostly just to piss them off and dare them to pursue contempt charges.

Which will not succeed.

But I DO hope that they try! Watching these inept clowns pursue their blatant agenda of fealty is amusing as fuck...exceeded only when they fail in their attempts.

Just...WAIT! Me insiders say no contempt charges will be filed.

Let me remind you that Congress has never COMPELLED a former President to appear. Even these fucking morons will not break that precedent. Cuz they know that if they do...Trump will get subpoenaed endlessly when the Dems take full control after he's gone. I hesitate to give these morons that much credit. But if they don't get it, someone from WH staff will tell them to back off.

.

As I understand it:

The committee approached a number of people to testify. All of them gave affidavits of their testimony but the only ones subpoenaed to testify in front of the committee were the Clintons.

Even though Hillary is not mentioned or accused of any wrongdoing in the epstein investigation she was still subpoenaed.

Trump is mentioned many many times more than Clinton but he was not questioned or subpoenaed.

Melania was in the epstein files but she was not questioned or subpoenaed.

Before this committee was even formed Bill and Hillary Clinton told Congress, the FBI, the Justice Department, pretty much every one involved to publicly release any and all information revealed about them to the public.

As far as I can see this entire episode is nothing more than a political stunt whose intent is to feed the conspiracy minded MAGA crowd and media a story that distracts from the real issue. Is Trump trying to hide evidence of his guilt from the public?

A Trump publicity stunt?

Say it isn’t so!

As I understand it:

The committee approached a number of people to testify. All of them gave affidavits of their testimony but the only ones subpoenaed to testify in front of the committee were the Clintons.

Even though Hillary is not mentioned or accused of any wrongdoing in the epstein investigation she was still subpoenaed.

Trump is mentioned many many times more than Clinton but he was not questioned or subpoenaed.

Melania was in the epstein files but she was not questioned or subpoenaed.

Before this committee was even formed Bill and Hillary Clinton told Congress, the FBI, the Justice Department, pretty much every one involved to publicly release any and all information revealed about them to the public.

As far as I can see this entire episode is nothing more than a political stunt whose intent is to feed the conspiracy minded MAGA crowd and media a story that distracts from the real issue. Is Trump trying to hide evidence of his guilt from the public? Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Yeah, yeah, yeah, NaCl-y

Whatever you say. TxDot has a very good point you should explain why everyone is treated one way *BUT* the Clintons another.

Salty, I say you being the one who is a stickler for procedure when it comes to a certain Peach State, even though you give naught a shit for the voters getting who they wanted, Why Sire, should the same procedures not apply to the Clintons as everyone else who got a writ to appear?

As i've stated, why bother to have a meet if you ain't released *ALL* the Epstein files. That is viewed as only having a narrowed list of skewed documents to query about.

Just for reference...

Multiple members of the House were subpoenaed by the January 6th Committee in 2022 and refused to comply. While they were referred to the House Ethics Committee for review, no criminal prosecutions or formal disciplinary actions were ever taken:
Jim Jordan (R-OH)
Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)
Scott Perry (R-PA)
Andy Biggs (R-AZ)
Mo Brooks (R-AL)

Executive Branch Officials (Prior Administrations)
The DOJ has historically declined to prosecute Cabinet-level officials held in contempt by Congress, often due to claims of executive privilege:
Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino: In 2022, the DOJ declined to prosecute these former Trump White House aides despite a House contempt vote.
William Barr and Wilbur Ross: Both were held in contempt in 2019 (Trump administration), but the DOJ declined to pursue charges.
Eric Holder: Held in contempt in 2012 (Obama administration); the DOJ did not prosecute.
Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten: Held in contempt in 2008 (Bush administration); the DOJ declined prosecution.