Hillary Clinton’s Epstein deposition goes off the rails after leaked photo triggers meltdown



The House Oversight Committee's first closed-door hearing with the Clintons concerning their ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein encountered a brief snag moments into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's deposition.

Members of the committee traveled to Chappaqua, New York, this week to depose Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton, after months of back-and-forth negotiations and a vote finding the two in contempt of Congress.

'Hillary is trying to get out of answering questions about Epstein because of a picture. Does this sound desperate to you?'

Hillary Clinton was scheduled to testify under oath on Thursday and Bill Clinton on Friday.

After initially defying congressional subpoenas and then pressing the committee to hold public hearings, Hillary Clinton's team abruptly halted Thursday's closed-door deposition when a photograph of her from the session was leaked on social media.

The picture of Clinton was shared by political commentator Benny Johnson, who stated that it was provided to him by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

"This is the first time Hillary has had to answer real questions about Epstein. Clinton does not look happy," Johnson wrote.

RELATED: Bill and Hillary Clinton to testify under oath about Jeffrey Epstein this week

Photo by Melina Mara - Pool/Getty Images

A short time later, Nick Merrill, a Clinton adviser, exited the deposition hearing to address the media. He explained that the session had been temporarily paused after a photograph was posted to social media, which he described as being "against chamber rules that were read at the top of the meeting."

Johnson responded to Merrill's announcement by highlighting the inconsistency: Clinton had advocated for a public hearing, yet her team was displeased with the release of a photograph.

"The deposition is being filmed and will be released in full. Hillary wanted it to be done LIVE on TV. Rep. Boebert gave me permission to post a photo she took before the hearing started with credit," Johnson wrote in a post on X. "Hillary is trying to get out of answering questions about Epstein because of a picture. Does this sound desperate to you?"

Boebert replied to Johnson's comments, defending him for posting the photo of Clinton.

"Benny did nothing wrong," she wrote, adding that the deposition had proceeded after the temporary pause.

Ahead of Thursday's deposition, Clinton posted her opening statement on social media. She insisted that she has no information regarding Epstein's criminal activities or those of co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell.

"As I stated in my sworn declaration on January 13, I had no idea about their criminal activities. I do not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein. I never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes or offices," Clinton wrote.

RELATED: Former Clinton official to quit Harvard University position amid backlash for Epstein ties

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

She accused House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) of refusing to hold any public hearings regarding Epstein.

"You have held zero public hearings, refused to allow the media to attend them, including today, despite espousing the need for transparency on dozens of occasions," she stated.

Comer has not ruled out holding public hearings, but has insisted that initial depositions will be behind closed doors.

Maxwell previously stated that she had gone to the Clintons' Chappaqua home "a few times." Maxwell also attended the wedding of the Clintons' daughter in 2010.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Bill and Hillary Clinton to testify under oath about Jeffrey Epstein this week



Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are scheduled to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee this week regarding their ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

The Clintons, who had previously defied the committee’s subpoenas, agreed in early February to appear before lawmakers after months of back-and-forth and a vote that found the two in contempt of Congress.

'Our goal for this investigation is straightforward: We seek to deliver transparency and accountability for the American people and for survivors.'

Hillary Clinton is scheduled to testify under oath on Feb. 26 and Bill Clinton on Feb. 27. Both hearings will be closed-door.

Committee lawmakers have agreed to hold the depositions in the Clintons’ place of residence rather than in Washington, D.C.

“The Clintons’ depositions will be held in Chappaqua, New York, on February 26 and 27 as an accommodation for their schedules. The depositions are in accordance with House and Committee rules,” a House Oversight Committee spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has called the Clintons’ testimony “critical” to understanding Epstein's and Ghislaine Maxwell’s “sex trafficking network and the ways they sought to curry favor and influence to shield themselves from scrutiny.”

“Their testimony may also inform how Congress can strengthen laws to better combat human trafficking. Our goal for this investigation is straightforward: We seek to deliver transparency and accountability for the American people and for survivors,” Comer told Fox News Digital.

RELATED: Bill and Hillary Clinton agree to testify about Jeffrey Epstein after contempt of Congress threat from Republicans

Photo by the US Justice Department/Handout/Anadolu/Getty Images

After initially defying congressional subpoenas, the Clintons have since pressured the committee to hold public hearings.

“I have called for the full release of the Epstein files. I have provided a sworn statement of what I know. And just this week, I’ve agreed to appear in person before the committee. But it’s still not enough for Republicans on the House Oversight Committee,” Bill Clinton wrote on social media of Feb. 6. “Now, Chairman Comer says he wants cameras, but only behind closed doors. Who benefits from this arrangement? It’s not Epstein’s victims, who deserve justice. Not the public, who deserve the truth. It serves only partisan interests. This is not fact-finding, it’s pure politics.”

“I will not sit idly as they use me as a prop in a closed-door kangaroo court by a Republican Party running scared. If they want answers, let’s stop the games & do this the right way: in a public hearing, where the American people can see for themselves what this is really about,” the former president added.

RELATED: Bill Clinton accuses GOP of setting up 'kangaroo court' over Epstein testimony — and demands public hearing

James Comer. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Comer has not ruled out public hearings, but has insisted on first holding depositions behind closed doors.

“The subpoena and the contempt was on a deposition. If we get to the deposition and there’s something meaningful to have a hearing, if they still want some more oversight, then I think the members of my committee would love to have them in for a public hearing,” Comer told reporters in early February.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Do the Epstein files confirm this Pizzagate theory? NY Mag contributor makes stunning admission.



WikiLeaks published tens of thousands of leaked emails from the personal account of John Podesta, former President Bill Clinton's chief of staff, in late 2016.

The decentralized army of sleuths that subsequently combed over the leaked emails found not only damning insights into Hillary Clinton and her doomed presidential campaign but odd messages about pizza, hot dogs, ice cream, and other foods.

'842 occurrences of the word pizza, which seems like a lot.'

The recurring references to food in non-culinary contexts prompted some to theorize that they were code words related to pedophilia and human trafficking — a theory that the mainstream media and so-called fact-checkers emphasized was "dangerous," "fake news," and, in essence, a "moral panic."

New York Magazine, one of the publications that strenuously criticized the so-called Pizzagate theory nine years ago, suggested in the wake of the new Jeffrey Epstein documents' release that "pizza" might be a code word, after all.

Dan Brooks, writing for New York Magazine, noted that the latest trove of Epstein files published by the Department of Justice "contains 842 occurrences of the word pizza, which seems like a lot. By comparison, the word hamburger appears only 190 times, while the phrase 'sex with children' appears 20 times."

Brooks admitted that "some of the pizza-related material seems pretty weird."

RELATED: Gov. Pritzker's cousin steps down at Hyatt over Epstein relationship

Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images

Not only did Epstein appear to have automated alerts reminding him to deliver a certain individual pizza, but he was asked on more than one occasion if individuals could have a "quick pizza" together in his absence.

One email said, "I wanted to let you know that the crew really enjoyed the pizza today. Thank you for letting us do that."

Another message from a redacted sender stated, “This is better than a Chinese cookie! Let's go for pizza and grape soda again. No one else can understand."

Additional emails carry subject lines such as “The Pizza Monster!” and include more peculiar uses of the word.

“You mean radiating a soft glow with the look of bliss and excitement. Yeah, that's the pizza...” one message reads.

"These recent Epstein materials do make the financier seem strangely interested in pizza and unusually committed to having it delivered to other people," added Brooks.

There are also recurring references to "pizza and grape soda" in the child sex offender's texts and emails.

Despite the strangeness of the exchanges, a photograph in a text conversation between Epstein and his urologist appears to indicate that on at least one occasion, they were actually discussing pizza and grape soda.

While there has been plenty of speculation in recent weeks about the pizza references, particularly because they appear in both the Epstein and Podesta files, the term "cream cheese," which appears 196 times throughout the Epstein messages, has also raised eyebrows.

In one exchange, a participant wrote, "Lol, I don’t know if cream cheese and baby are on the same level," alongside discussions of scheduling activities that some observers say raise further concern. The phrase also appears in other unsettling contexts, including "cream cheese baby."

The use of cheese and pizza imagery in reference to pedophilia and child abuse is not limited to so-called Pizzagate conspiracy theorists.

In 2020, the Telegraph, a U.K.-based newspaper, reported that a parents' group working to curb the dissemination of child sex abuse material online allegedly found that cheese and pizza emojis were being used as stand-ins for "CP," meaning "child porn."

The founder of the group, a London woman identified only as India, indicated that in some cases, individuals using the emojis shared images of children scraped from parents' social media accounts.

"There are pictures of little boys aged 5 or 6 on the beach in their swimming trunks and chances are that picture was taken by their parents on their holiday," said India. "Somehow that picture has gotten into their hands."

Brooks, prickled by recent declarations by Redditors and others that at least one core Pizzagate claim might have been accurate all along, stated, "If Epstein and his friends did use pizza as a code word for sex, that wouldn’t mean that the original Pizzagate conspiracy theory was correct — even if it was also the case that pizza was a sexual code word in the Podesta emails."

After spending the bulk of his article entertaining the possibility that "a syndicate of pedophiliac celebrities, financiers, and their urologists," equipped with code words, committed "unimaginable acts of cruelty," Brooks spends his final paragraphs attacking those who made similar claims nearly a decade ago.

The NY Mag contributor suggested that such "conspiracists" — not the allegedly vampiric cosmopolitan elites who might refer to their preferred victim types with fast-food references — are "one of the most terrifying forces in 21st-century America."

Having turned his ire away from the dead pedophile and his associates to those Americans searching for justice and accountability, Brooks concluded his article by smearing American democracy as a "well-documented conspiracy of morons."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hillary Clinton fumes as Czech politician calls out her Trump derangement syndrome



Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton continued her failed campaign against President Donald Trump during a Munich Security Conference discussion on Saturday, characterizing him as a betrayer and destroyer.

After one of Clinton's more loveless Valentine's Day rants, an official from the Czech Republic highlighted her Trump derangement syndrome and defended the president, stressing that the man whom Clinton so despises is a "reaction" to the extremism and failures that preceded his rise to power.

'Can I please finish my points?'

When asked whether America's shifting relationship with international law "brings a new rift within the West," Clinton — a champion of the Iraq War and other foreign entanglements that proved ruinous — attacked Trump's efforts to broker an end to the Ukraine-Russia war, calling his position toward Kyiv "disgraceful" and claiming the embattled nation, which hasn't had presidential elections for nearly seven years, is "fighting for our democracy and our values of freedom and civilization on the front lines."

The moderator of the Rockefeller Foundation-backed panel discussion, Bronwen Maddox, director of Chatham House, pressed Clinton further on whether she thinks Trump "has destroyed the West."

Clinton — the point woman on the Obama administration's "reset" policy with Russia — enthusiastically responded, "He has betrayed the West. He's betrayed human values. He's betrayed the NATO Charter, the Atlantic Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

RELATED: How Hillary Clinton turned empathy into a political cudgel

Photo by Johannes Simon/Getty Images

Asked by Maddox whether he agreed with Clinton's assessment, Czech Republic Deputy Prime Minister Petr Macinka made clear that his outlook isn't colored by the same personal animus.

Macinka, a right-wing populist, turned to Clinton and said, "First, I think you really don't like him."

"You know that is absolutely true!" Clinton responded. "Not only do I not like him, I don't like him because of what he's doing to the United States and the world, and I think you should take a hard look at it if you think that there is something good that will come out of that."

'Too far from reality.'

Macinka proceeded to note that Trump and his actions in America are a "reaction" to "policies that really went too far — too far from the regular people, too far from reality."

Despite multiple interruptions from Clinton, the Czech suggested Trump rose in reaction to cancel culture, the "woke revolution," the "gender revolution," and climate alarmism.

"Which gender [revolution]?" Clinton interrupted. "Women having their rights?"

After clarifying that he was referring to the incursion of radical gender ideology into the mainstream and anticipating another interruption, Macinka said, "Can I please finish my points? I'm sorry that it makes you nervous. I'm really sorry for that."

While audience members booed, Clinton said, "Doesn't make me nervous. It makes me very, very unhappy."

Macinka proceeded to point out that Ukraine is not fighting for a collective freedom and future but its own, then cast doubt on the supposed beneficence of those in the West trying to help out Kyiv.

While Clinton was attacking him in Germany on Saturday, Trump reshared a Feb. 5 message from Steve Witkoff, his special envoy for peace missions, which noted that "delegations from the United States, Ukraine, and Russia agreed to exchange 314 prisoners — the first such exchange in five months. This outcome was achieved from peace talks that have been detailed and productive."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hillary’s attack backfires: Allie Beth Stuckey tells Glenn Beck that Clinton’s hit piece is a ‘badge of honor'



Allie Beth Stuckey, the host of BlazeTV’s “Relatable” podcast, joined “The Glenn Beck Program” on Tuesday morning to discuss the hit piece Hillary Clinton wrote about Stuckey last week.

Clinton mentioned Stuckey several times in a Thursday op-ed in the Atlantic, arguing that “Christian influencers” like Stuckey have promoted a distorted view of Christianity that has waged a “war on empathy.” Clinton positioned herself as an authority on Jesus’ teachings, despite admitting that she has “never been one to wear my faith on my sleeve.”

'Sometimes people need to see that there’s another side of the story that demands your heart too.'

The former secretary of state’s hit piece mentioned Stuckey’s book, “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion,” and mocked the concept that empathy could ever be “toxic,” calling Stuckey’s position “appalling.”

Stuckey told Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck on Tuesday’s podcast that Clinton’s article was a “badge of honor” that had effectively backfired, noting that it had boosted sales for the 2024 book.

Beck called Clinton’s hit piece on Stuckey “a good endorsement.”

Stuckey stated that while Clinton’s op-ed failed to detail how Stuckey had defined toxic empathy in her book, she believes that “the left actually understands the concept.”

“They talk about things like toxic masculinity, and what they’ll say is that not all masculinity is toxic, but this form of masculinity is toxic. And yet when I talk about toxic empathy, they pretend that I say that all compassion is toxic and bad, and that’s not what I’m saying at all,” Stuckey told Beck.

RELATED: Hillary Clinton baselessly attacks Allie Beth Stuckey in desperate op-ed — accuses MAGA Christians of 'war on empathy'

Photo by Kimberly White/Getty Images

Stuckey explained that empathy becomes toxic when it leads a person to affirm sin, validate lies, or support destructive policies.

“Your empathy becomes toxic when you feel so deeply for one particular person, a purported victim, that you are blinded to both reality and morality. You are so focused on this person that you forget that there are other people on the other side of the moral equation,” Stuckey stated.

She contended that toxic empathy is to blame for the support of destructive policies.

“If you concentrate on feelings, then reason shuts down,” Beck said. “You have all of these people that, I think, they’re actually thinking they’re doing the right thing, but they’ve shut down the thinking process so deeply that they’re just trapped.”

RELATED: ‘They’re scared’ — Allie Beth Stuckey fires back at Hillary Clinton’s hit piece on the biblical movement she helped ignite

Photo by Dominik Bindl/Getty Images

“How do you reverse this?” Beck asked Stuckey.

“We need to tell the story on the other side of every issue,” Stuckey responded. “Sometimes people need to see that there’s another side of the story that demands your heart too.”

Stuckey gave the example of the legacy media’s narrative about a woman who wishes to have an abortion but feels forced to carry her pregnancy to term because of pro-life legislation.

“I tell the story from the baby’s perspective. This is what would have happened to this baby had there not been this pro-life law in Texas. She would have been poisoned; she would have been dismembered; she would have been tossed aside like toxic waste,” Stuckey said.

“When you allow people to zoom out and show them there are other people on the other side of this political issue that you’re talking about, sometimes that expands their understanding to the point that they can be persuaded by facts,” she added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hillary Clinton baselessly attacks Allie Beth Stuckey in desperate op-ed — accuses MAGA Christians of 'war on empathy'



Failed presidential candidate and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote an op-ed in the Atlantic on Thursday, claiming to be a devout follower of Jesus Christ and accusing BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey of promoting a distorted version of Christianity that, Clinton asserted, has led to violence in Minneapolis.

The desperate op-ed demonstrated that Stuckey's warnings about "toxic empathy" are pushing through left-wing efforts to guilt-trip Christians — which Stuckey made a point of in a special episode of her "Relatable" podcast. The reason Hillary Clinton attacked her, Stuckey said, "is so incredibly clear to me, and that is that we are over the target. We have gotten to the heart of progressive manipulation."

'When Hillary Clinton is writing 6,000 word op-eds in the Atlantic attacking warnings against toxic empathy, you know you’re over the target. Keep. Going.'

Clinton claimed that “hard-right ‘Christian influencers’” have waged a “war on empathy” and rejected bedrock values, including “dignity, mercy, and compassion.” She appeared to depict true Christian faith as nothing more than “love thy neighbor.”

The former secretary of state contended that President Donald Trump and his allies have altogether abandoned empathy, instead aiming to “spread fear,” particularly among “undocumented immigrants,” through “inhumane” treatment.

Clinton called out recent events in Minneapolis, claiming that Trump’s federal agents killed Alex Pretti while he was trying “help a woman they had thrown to the ground and pepper-sprayed.”

“Christian nationalism” is threatening to “replace democracy with theocracy in America,” according to Clinton.

She criticized Stuckey for calling a sermon by Mariann Edgar Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, “toxic empathy that is in complete opposition to God’s Word and in support of the most satanic, destructive ideas ever conjured up.”

RELATED: Anti-ICE influencers explained: How women get radicalized

Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

Clinton mentioned Stuckey’s book, “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion,” and mocked the concept that empathy could ever be “toxic,” calling it an “oxymoron.”

“I don’t know if the phrase reflects moral blindness or moral bankruptcy, but either way it’s appalling,” she wrote.

Clinton argued that the “mainstream Christian view” of welcoming illegal immigrants “enrages” Stuckey.

“The author of Toxic Empathy, who styles herself a voice for Christian women, has more than a million followers on social media. In between lifestyle pitter-patter and her demonization of IVF treatments, she warns women not to listen to their soft hearts,” Clinton continued. “This commissar of MAGA morality targets other evangelicals whose empathy, she warns, has left them open to manipulation. Maybe they recognize the humanity of an undocumented immigrant family and decide that mass deportation has gone too far. Or they make space in their heart for a young rape survivor forced to carry a pregnancy to term and start questioning the wisdom and morality of total abortion bans. It’s all toxic to Stuckey.”

RELATED: 'Conflicts of interest': Democrat-led federal agencies allegedly blocked efforts to investigate Clinton Foundation

Photo by ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images

Clinton’s call to action to her Christian supporters was to “follow the example of courageous faith leaders standing up to the Trump administration’s abuses.” She urged Democrats to fill the gaps of “compassion and community” that conservatives “give up.”

“I hope grassroots faith leaders across the country who are appalled by what they see from an immoral administration and an extremist political right also find their voice. It is understandable that some stay silent out of fear. Influencers like Stuckey are zealously policing any deviation from the party line. But speaking truth to power has been part of the Christian tradition since the very beginning. The Christian community — and the country — would be stronger and healthier if we heard these voices,” Clinton said.

Stuckey responded to the hit piece in a post on X, writing, "When Hillary Clinton is writing 6,000 word op-eds in the Atlantic attacking warnings against toxic empathy, you know you’re over the target. Keep. Going."

“I’m not being sarcastic when I say I’m glad to hear that Hillary Clinton identifies as a Christian,” Stuckey stated on her podcast. “I did not know that we had that in common, sincerely, but for her to position herself as someone who is an authority on faith, when she admits here that she’s never been public about her faith, that’s a problem. That’s actually not something that’s an option within Christianity.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Clintons found to be in contempt of Congress — but Bannon-treatment far from certain



The House Oversight Committee issued deposition subpoenas on Aug. 5 to failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton requiring their testimony "related to horrific crimes perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein."

Evidently the Clintons didn't feel that they should be held to the same standard to which Democrats previously held President Donald Trump's former adviser Steve Bannon and current trade adviser Peter Navarro, who were both jailed for defying subpoenas issued by the Jan. 6 committee.

'The Clintons were legally required to appear and instead responded to our good-faith negotiations with defiance.'

After repeated warnings that the Clintons risked criminal exposure by failing to comply with the subpoenas, the committee advanced two resolutions on Wednesday recommending that the House of Representatives find them in contempt of Congress.

The resolution finding Hillary Clinton in contempt passed in a 28-15 vote. The three Democratic lawmakers who joined Republicans in supporting the resolution were Reps. Summer Lee (Pa.), Melanie Stansbury (N.M.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).

The resolution finding Bill Clinton in contempt passed in a 34-8 vote with the help of Lee, Stansbury, Tlaib, and six other Democrats: Maxwell Frost (Fla.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Stephen Lynch (Mass.), Emily Randall (Wash.), and Lateefah Simon (Calif.).

"By voting to hold the Clintons in contempt, the Committee sent a clear message: No one is above the law, and justice must be applied equally — regardless of position, pedigree, or prestige," Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said in the wake of the votes. "The Clintons were legally required to appear and instead responded to our good-faith negotiations with defiance, delay, and obstruction."

RELATED: Ghislaine Maxwell scheduled to testify before House Oversight Committee

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images.

The Clintons' lawyers, apparently aware that the other shoe was about to drop, proposed that Comer travel to New York for a conversation with Bill Clinton where "no official transcript would be recorded and other Members of Congress would be barred from participating," Comer indicated on Tuesday.

Comer noted both that the "Clintons' latest demands make clear they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment" and that the proposal for a transcript-free interview was unworkable because "Clinton has a documented history of parsing language to evade questions, responded falsely under oath, and was impeached and suspended from the practice of law as a result."

Angel Urena, deputy chief of staff to Bill Clinton, denied Comer's framing and stated hours ahead of the votes that "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."

Urena suggested that the dealbreaker was ultimately lawmakers' alleged refusal to "keep their questions about the Epstein investigation to questions about Jeffrey Epstein."

House GOP leaders are reportedly not expected to vote on whether to refer the contempt findings to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution until lawmakers return in February. The Washington Post suggested that the delay will afford the Clintons time to talk their way out of hot water and into an arrangement with the committee.

Democrats have a history of evading consequence for defying congressional subpoenas.

Eric Holder, former President Barack Obama's attorney general, was held in contempt of Congress in a decisive 255-67 vote in 2012 for refusing to turn over documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal.

The Obama Justice Department rewarded Holder for keeping Obama's documents from the American people's elected representatives by refusing to prosecute.

In 2024, House Republicans voted to hold former Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas for audio recordings of former President Joe Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

The Biden Department of Justice revealed on June 14, 2024, that it would not bother prosecuting the Democratic official.

House Republicans talked a big game in early 2024 about possible repercussions after Hunter Biden defied a congressional subpoena. Biden managed to get out unscathed as lawmakers dropped their proposed contempt resolution to give the pardoned felon's attorneys more time.

Republican allies have not been so lucky.

After the Democrat-controlled House voted 229-202 in 2021 to hold him in contempt of Congress, the Biden DOJ energetically prosecuted Steve Bannon, securing a conviction and recommending that he serve at least six months in prison and pay a $200,000 fine. He ultimately served four.

Navarro received a similar treatment and ended up serving a four-month prison sentence as well.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Sara Gonzales mocks Clinton statement in Epstein investigation: ‘You can’t make this up’



When Hillary Clinton was asked to sit for a sworn deposition on Wednesday morning as a part of the House’s bipartisan probe into Jeffrey Epstein, she refused to appear. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, also defied a subpoena to appear before the House Oversight Committee.

Now the House Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings.

“Now on the one hand, it’s rather upsetting to see more Democrats use this situation as just another political pawn. But on the other, Donald Trump has the opportunity to do the funniest thing ever and finally make good on one of his biggest campaign promises,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says.

“And now remember, the Democrats said, ‘Oh, it’s the Republicans who don’t want to investigate. It’s the Republicans who don’t want to release the files.’ Actually it’s the Republicans right here who are trying to investigate. The Republicans run the House,” she continues.


“And Bill and Hillary Clinton right there, kind of key figures in this whole thing. They should probably tell us what they know,” she says, adding, “I mean, hey, Democrats, if we’re serious about getting to the bottom of this, we should hear from those two evil ghouls on the screen, shouldn’t we?”

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) has announced he will be moving to hold the pair in contempt — but they don’t appear to be willing to go quietly.

“This past year has seen our government engage in unprecedented acts, including against our own citizens. People have been seized by masked federal agents from their homes, their workplaces, and the streets of their communities. Students and scientists with visas permitting them to study and work here have been deported without due process,” a statement from the Clintons began.

“The people who laid siege to the U.S. Capitol have been pardoned and called heroes, agencies vital to the country’s national security have been dismantled,” the statement continued.

Finally after pointing out more grievances they have with the Trump administration, they wrote, “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. For us, now is that time.”

“I mean, you just couldn’t make that up if you tried,” Gonzales laughs.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Democrat support for jailing Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro could blow back on Clintons



House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) issued deposition subpoenas in August to failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton requiring their testimony "related to horrific crimes perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein."

Comer made clear on Tuesday that the Clintons risk criminal exposure should they continue not to comply with the subpoenas — and that he is willing to make use of the precedent set in recent years by Democrats.

'They're the one group in this investigation that's never had to answer questions ... from attorneys or members of Congress.'

The chairman noted in his Aug. 5 letter to Bill Clinton that owing to the former president's past relationships with Epstein and child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, the committee believed him to have information regarding their activities relevant to the investigation.

"By your own admission, you flew on Jeffrey Epstein's private plane four separate times in 2002 and 2003. During one of these trips, you were even pictured receiving a 'massage' from one of Mr. Epstein's victims," wrote Comer.

"It has also been claimed that you pressured Vanity Fair not to publish sex-trafficking allegations against your 'good friend' Mr. Epstein, and there are conflicting reports about whether you ever visited Mr. Epstein's island," continued the chairman. "You were also allegedly close to Ms. Ghislane Maxwell, an Epstein co-conspirator, and attended an intimate dinner with her in 2014, three years after public reports about her involvement in Mr. Epstein’s abuse of minors."

RELATED: Epstein emails SHAME Obama/Clinton ally: Larry Summers quits public life amid calls for Harvard to cut ties

Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Comer noted in his letter to Hillary Clinton that her testimony was of interest to the panel not only because of her husband's relationship with the dead sex offender but because of her links to Maxwell, whose nephew worked for Hillary Clinton's first failed presidential campaign, then later for the State Department while Clinton was secretary of state.

The Oversight Committee compelled Hillary Clinton to testify on Oct. 9, but she didn't show up.

When Bill Clinton's Oct. 14 deposition date came around, a committee spokesperson announced that it would be delayed as the panel was "having conversations with the Clintons' attorney to accommodate their schedules."

Republicans on the committee are apparently still trying to settle on a date with the Clintons' attorneys, a source familiar with the matter told ABC News.

"We expect to hear from Bill and Hillary Clinton," Comer told "Just the News, No Noise" on Tuesday. "Donald Trump answered questions for years about Jeffrey Epstein. Every day he gets asked questions about Epstein, and he answers them in front of the American people. We've subpoenaed Republicans and Democrats."

"Other Democrats have sent letters saying they knew nothing about Epstein, which would hold in court if something ever comes out that they did know something, then they've committed perjury there," continued the chairman.

"But the Clintons have never responded. They're the one group in this investigation that's never had to answer questions in front of a credible reporter, and they've never certainly answered questions from attorneys or members of Congress," added Comer.

Comer, evidently tired of the Clintons' avoidance, added, "So we expect the Clintons to come in, or I expect the Clintons to be met with the same fate that Bannon and [Peter] Navarro were met with when the Democrats were in control."

Democrats would likely condemn the Clintons' visitation by legal consequence over their refusal to comply with congressional subpoenas — but such criticism would amount to rocks thrown from a glass house.

Eric Holder, Obama's attorney general, was held in contempt of Congress in a decisive 255-67 vote in 2012 for refusing to turn over documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal.

The Obama Justice Department rewarded Holder for keeping the Democratic president's documents from the American people's elected representatives by refusing to prosecute.

House Republicans voted last year to hold former Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas for audio recordings of former President Joe Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

The Biden Department of Justice revealed on June 14, 2024, that it would not bother prosecuting Garland.

Although keen to shield their own from consequence, Democrats held Republicans to a different standard.

The Democrat-controlled House voted 229-202 in 2021 to hold former Trump adviser and "War Room" host Stephen Bannon in contempt for defying a subpoena issued by the Jan. 6 committee.

Whereas the Biden DOJ would later let Garland off the hook for the same charge, the same outfit energetically prosecuted Bannon, securing a conviction and recommending that he serve at least six months in prison and pay a $200,000 fine. Bannon ended up languishing in prison for four months.

The president's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, received similar treatment for not complying with a subpoena from the Jan. 6 committee. Navarro, who figured he was bound by executive privilege when he defied the subpoena, served a four-month prison sentence.

Navarro noted in a speech last year at the Republican National Convention, "I got a very simple message for you: If they can come for me, if they can come for Donald Trump, be careful. They will come for you."

Comer's apparent threat came a week after President Donald Trump directed the Justice Department and the FBI on Friday to "investigate Jeffrey Epstein's involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton" and others, and "determine what was going on with them, and him."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Bitter rival Hillary Clinton admits Trump would deserve glory if he ends Russia-Ukraine war



Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D) admitted that rival President Donald Trump would deserve high praise and acknowledgement if he succeeds in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine.

During a "Raging Moderates" podcast interview released on Friday, Clinton told host Jessica Tarlov that she would consider nominating Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize herself if he ends the war without requiring Ukraine to give up territory.

'Hillary is not serious.'

Trump is scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday around 3:00 p.m. Eastern at Alaska's Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson.

He has referred to the upcoming summit as a "feel-out meeting" to determine whether Putin is willing to reach a ceasefire agreement and initiate peace talks. Trump seemed optimistic about the discussion with Putin, estimating that it has a 25% chance of failure.

Clinton told Tarlov, "Honestly, if he could bring about the end to this terrible war, if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, could really stand up to Putin — something we haven't seen, but maybe this is the opportunity — if President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize."

She added, "Because my goal here is to not allow capitulation to Putin, aided and abetted by the United States."

RELATED: Trump is optimistic ahead of Putin meeting — predicts 25% chance of failure

Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

Clinton stated that she believes Trump "would very much like to receive a Nobel Peace Prize."

Trump has already indicated that an end to the war will likely require some "land swapping" that would be "good" and "bad" for both countries.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has rejected the idea, insisting that Ukraine "will not give land to the occupier."

RELATED: Trump 'bothered' after Zelenskyy shoots down compromises ahead of peace summit

Photo by MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/SPUTNIK/AFP via Getty Images

David J. Harris Jr., a conservative political commentator, reacted to Clinton's nomination statement.

"Did not have this on my 2025 bingo card!" he stated in a post on social media.

Paul Szypula, another commentator, wrote, "Of course, she sets conditions that'll never happen like Ukraine not having to give up territory. Hillary is not serious."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!