this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2026
384 points (98.5% liked)

News

36583 readers
2243 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Oversight committee chair James Comer said that he will move to hold former president Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress for refusing to testify as part of the ongoing investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein case. Speaking to reporters, the Republican lawmaker from Kentucky said that he will begin the proceedings during the committee’s markup period next week.

This comes legal representatives for both Bill and Hillary Clinton sent an eight-page letter to Comer notifying him that they would not comply with the subpoenas compelling them to appear before the committee to deliver in-person testimony.

“To my knowledge, former president Clinton has never answered questions about Epstein, and we just had questions,” Comer said today. “I think anyone would admit they spent a lot of time together while Bill Clinton was president and post-presidency.”

Depending on the type of contempt citation, Clinton could either be forced to comply with the subpoena by a federal court, or even face prosecution by the justice department.

all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 162 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hasn't Trump demonstrated that contempt of congress has no consequences?

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 75 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Only if you have the magic (R) after your name, because there's no "R" in "Consequences"!

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

There is no "D" either so the Clintons get a free pass too.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh no, Bill Clinton has definitely exposed his "D" to some consequences in his time ...

[–] hopesdead@startrek.website 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Is it really a consequence if the impeachment didn’t result in removal from office?

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago

Besides legitimizing powerful men using positions of power to coerce young women?

Oh... You meant consequences for the offender? I guess people made some jokes about him.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 82 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Come on Bill, just go in there and let them ask you that question. Did you have sex with Donald Trump? And then reply, I did not have sexual relations with that man.

You owe it to us. You owe it to the country you had to deal with your bullshit in the 90s.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

"Depends on what your definition of 'man' is" would be a roast for the ages.

[–] TomMasz@piefed.social 57 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Doing what they can to divert attention from Trump's presence in the Epstein files after not doing fuck all about anything else.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

clinton saying under oath trump sucked him off would be great soundbite, and possibly shatter some maga brains would be hilarious

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Yeah, and this probably isn't even in the top 10 for terrible things the Clintons have done to politics in this country

[–] Honse@lemmy.dbzer0.com 53 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Depending on the type of contempt citation, Clinton could either be forced to comply with the subpoena by a federal court, or even face prosecution by the justice department.

Ill believe it when I see it, too much gesturing and posturing these days. Lock him up.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 43 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes, we should lock trump and the clintons up for ignoring all of those subpoenas.

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Does any prison have a presidential cell?

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Call it The Imperial Suite, you could probably get him to go in

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 43 points 2 months ago

Lock her up

Lock him up

Lock trump and all his cronies up

Why? Politics? Nope, because they're all criminals who committed crimes.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lol. Thinking of all the republicans who couldn’t be bothered to show up for their subpoenas. This game can be played both ways.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Right. All the people here upset with the Clintons for not going to "explain themselves" are missing the point. They have already tried that route, it led nowhere. Remember how many times Hillary was called in to explain her emails?! Trump and the Republicans decided that Congress has no power and the rule of law doesn't matter. Nobody should comply with them.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 months ago

Look... bill is a known sex pest and hilary is a politician with a LOT of skeletons in her closet (also way better at politics than bubba ever was but...).

Any testimonial is going to be tainted by the prosecution. Expect questions like "Is it true that you are a liar who framed our dear president donald j trump" and similar. And even if the objections are recognized (as they should be), it is out there. "Hilary Clinton doesn't deny claims that she framed our dear rapist in chief!" and so forth.

Just because you have very strong feelings as to what should happen to people who rape children doesn't mean you support them being put through a kangaroo court. Especially when it is in service to protecting a different rapist.

[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

These two have a chance to do something right, to show real leadership and responsibility, and to kick the fucking doors open and shine the light of day on the whole damn mess.

How many working years do they have left? How viable are they as politicians? What purpose does trying to save their own image serve? Do they really think people give a shit about them anymore? Do they really think they're relevant as anything other than a symbol of why their party has failed the nation?

Fucking spineless.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 9 points 2 months ago

Bill doesn't have any excuses, but I can definitely understand Hillary not wanting to get involved in an inquiry by a majority Republican Congress. I mean, Trump has literally called for her assassination before.

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

Lock him up. Kick him in the balls and lock him up.

Fuck all these people. They knew all this shit was going on and either took part in it themselves or let it happen when they actually had power to stop it.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

If Trump and his cabal don't have to respect the law, why does anyone else?

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are there democrats on that committee at could ask if Bill was the bubba referenced in the files?

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Asking the important questions! And how was Donald's suck technique?

Bill's an ass in many ways but at least he turned the deficit around

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Just say you don't want to implicate Donald.

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 months ago

Jail for them is literally a tax-paid resort. The worst for them is better than you and I suffer through in employment

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 months ago

Who doesn't hold congress in contempt given whom they choose to question and whom they don't?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 9 points 2 months ago

Now this is a distraction from the Epstein files, but fuck it do it anyway.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Clinton has been openly demanding all the epstein files release.

So I wager hes not trying to avoid any personal consequences, so much as hes trying to avoid being made center stage at the distraction circus with a kangaroo court.

[–] phx@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And why would Clinton need to speak before CONGRESS? He's not a sitting president, in any sort of government position, or AFAIK involved in anything really close to government at all.

If he's a suspect, have the fucking police interview him.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Only reason to drag him before congress (and cameras) is to distract from Trumps actual complicity in not only raping young girls, but trafficking them through Mar-A-Lago.

If there was any actual evidence of Clintons criminal activities, he'd already be arrested and being paraded infront of cameras nonstop by this admin

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Any dental is an admission of guilt.

[–] MrSelatcia@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] tooclose104@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

They a root canal to get to the bottom of this

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

they must have had one fucked up fling on epstein island for him to be this butthurt about it, probably because of Bill's Dick

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago

But no guys when we vote them in they'll be different. Trust time bro, they are aren't the same.

[–] bookmeat@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 2 months ago

Everyone has known for a very long time that he would refuse. This is performative.