House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., issued a set of subpoenas Tuesday to several high-profile former officials that includes former President Bill Clinton, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former FBI Director James Comey, as part of the panel’s ongoing investigation into the federal government’s handling of sex trafficking laws and the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who was a former associate of former Anchorage Daily News owner Alice Rogoff.
Others subpoenaed were issued to former US Attorneys General Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, William Barr, Jeff Sessions, and Alberto Gonzales, and former FBI Director Robert Mueller.
The move is an escalation in the House-led probe into what Comer has described as “decades of institutional failures” in the investigation and prosecution of Epstein and his network. The committee is specifically scrutinizing the use of non-prosecution agreements, the handling of plea deals, and the role of federal officials in decisions related to Epstein and Maxwell’s cases.
In a letter to former President Clinton, Comer cited his past ties to Epstein, referencing flight logs showing Clinton aboard Epstein’s private jet in the early 2000s. Comer also pointed to an unearthed photograph showing Clinton receiving a massage from a woman who has since identified herself as one of Epstein’s trafficking victims.
The letter further alleges Clinton may have intervened to suppress reporting on Epstein. “It has also been claimed that you pressured Vanity Fair not to publish sex trafficking allegations against your ‘good friend’ Mr. Epstein,” Comer wrote. The committee is also seeking clarification on conflicting reports about whether Clinton ever visited Epstein’s private island.
Chairman Comer’s letter to Hillary Clinton raises questions about her proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell and notes that Maxwell’s nephew worked for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and was later hired at the State Department when Clinton served as Secretary of State.
Comer says the purpose of the subpoenas is to “inform legislative solutions to improve federal efforts to combat sex trafficking and reform the use of non-prosecution agreements and/or plea agreements in sex-crime investigations.”
The subpoenas arrive just ahead of highly anticipated testimony from Ghislaine Maxwell, which had been scheduled for Aug. 11. That appearance has been postponed pending the outcome of Maxwell’s appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The House inquiry adds to mounting pressure on the Department of Justice to declassify files related to Epstein, including records believed to detail his associates and clients. Critics have long accused the federal government of stonewalling the release of those documents — including surveillance videos and visitor logs — since Epstein’s death in federal custody in 2019.
Chairman Comer has not indicated whether additional subpoenas may follow or if public hearings will be scheduled.
All individuals named in the subpoenas have been given until later this month to respond.
Does anyone really think – believe that any of these traitorous democrats will ever be held accountable? Especially given there has been “0” held accountable for any of these and/or more crimes – abuses:
… Russian Collusion Hoax
… Jan 6th
… Mar-A-Lago Raid
… Biden Auto Pen
… 2020 Rigged Election
… Epstein Pedophile Arrests
… Covid
… Benghazi
… Doge Findings
… Ukraine Impeachment Hoax
… Fast & Furious
… Rose Law Firm Corruption
About time
Can we finally “Lock her up?”
Take a look at the description of sexual assault in the Katie Johnson v Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump. She was 13 when Trump and Epstein argued for the “privilege” of taking her virginity. There are several attacks detailed about oral sex and hand jobs provided to Donald Trump. She was THIRTEEN years old.
Manny,
Something to get through that thick little skull of yours.
We don’t care what team they play for, if they are guilty of harming a child in such a way, they ALL must meet the wood chipper. This isn’t a left vs right thing, this is not a LGBT vs Catholic thing.
Our country needs actual JUSTICE, not a just-us system. If Trump did really do these things, then he too should pay the same price as all the sickos who taint the innocent.
Stop playing for your team and stand up for accountability.
Manny, prove it. Where is your evidence beyond the DNC talking points? None?
I thought so.
It should be noted that this article is about Hillary & Bill Clinton and you are again attempting to distract! The “he did it too” defense is no defense at all, because what is wrong, is still wrong, no matter who did it first or too. In this case the “he did it too” defense is not applicable anyway, as we have no real proof of your assertions. It seems that if there is any negative bad act in the Epstein files on Donald Trump, Joe and Kamala would have not kept them sealed, but instead used them to derail his candidacy (and if proven rightfully so).
In theory, these hearings, if we get to them, must be for the purpose of gathering facts that would lead to legislation. Putting some serious legal guardrails around the use of consent agreements and plea agreements would be a good start. I would not limit legislation to sex crimes; consent agreements in civil litigation have been abused for years.
Nothing to see here Suzanne. All the pictures, postcards & memos have “all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.”
Furthermore, “What difference at this point does it make?”
Signed, The Famous Fifty One
Hilary’s memory will not have improved since that last time she testified under oath.
Looks like the Tower card has just been drawn.
Next up: Judgement, the Hanged Man, and Death.
tarot
What the public really wants……
are the secret videos taken on Pedophile Island that show Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and other perverts actually having sex with the underaged teen girls. That’s the money shot in this entire Epstein drama. Those videos exist. And it scares the beejesus out of many powerful people.
I suspect those videos exist too. The pervy perps are certainly members of both political parties.
Uff-ta!
In 1955 Vladimir Nabokov’s 12 year old Dolores Haze was scandalously romanticized as Lolita.
We’ve had our impressions shaped by modern views. My Great Grandfather married his wife when she was 13. Yours wasn’t all that different. Get off your high horse.
Except we no longer live in 1890 or even 1955 and there is a huge difference between literature and REAL LIFE!
Quit making excuses!
What is acceptable in literature of the time is a barometer of what’s acceptable in real life.
Odd that the voices you hear focus on underage sex which is a lot like the sloven and morbidly obese guy w/ terrible hygiene saying that he’s particularly moral. Uh, no… he has little choice.
In this case the aspect that’s most important is blackmail. These girls on Epstein’s Lolita Island were largely street wise girls and were they not the likelihood that their parents might say “sure, just take a jet to some middle aged guy’s private island, Sweetie. He must have good intentions!” is zero.
It’s tough to hear a story of abuse from a kid but the major issue is that Epstein was facilitating the blackmail of influential people including the leader of the free world. Abusing kids is wrong but Epstein Island’s underbelly is much worse. The key element lurks behind the question, ‘for whom was he facilitating this’?
Another would be, where did a grossly unqualified math teacher cum unqualified stock trader get all that money? Hearing the girl’s tawdry tales might be your thing but following that money path would be more interesting to a thinking man.
“What is acceptable in literature of the time is a barometer of what’s acceptable in real life.”
Still making excuses, I see. You are incorrect “Lolita” was never acceptable reading. The premise of the book was then and still is unacceptable in real life, disturbing and wrong today.
Generally speaking just because something is in print does not make it automatically legitimate or accepted.
Please explain how you get from your original comment (basically demanding all get over that underage sex thing) to your comment above, implying that we all just have dirty minds and need to focus on more important issues?
Well, Taxi, it appears you prefer a bonk on the head as opposed to a light touch so I’ll be a little more indelicate. I don’t vote for or against a politician’s p*cker; I vote for a politician’s ability to lead my nation to greater prosperity.
If he rogers someone other than his wife I may or may not deem that a character flaw… for example, w/ Trump I might not be impressed but I’d happily look the other way as whatever he does w/ his business is his business. With Clinton it was different as I couldn’t see myself enjoying a steady diet of what he had on the menu either and I could feel his pain.
I know you’re having difficulty juxtaposing a man’s marital fidelity with his ability to lead a nation but I don’t have such a restriction. My interest is in who may be blackmailing world leaders and with what goal in mind. That there may be a handful of street girls that were provided some time in a beautician’s chair may be inarguable… but I care less about that than their raison d’être
Short Pencil, you are all over the place and make assumptions not in evidence about your fellow commentators.
It is now clear that your original comment was not simply for shock value(or an excuse for the whole Epstein machinations), but you assigned it meaning that could not be obvious to the literal reader.
There is a vast moral, ethical and legal difference between an extramarital affair between adults and your initial scenario of 12 y/o rape victim and 13 y/o brides. These two scenarios are not even in the same ballpark.
This has nothing to do with voting for anyone. This is about men objectifying women, simply because they can and the pimp, who made it possible. Just because there are rich and famous people involved doesn’t change that fact.
I’m inclined to let some things slide as a detail oriented man cannot get hung up on everything. I do have an issue when people make up facts to suit their perspective as you have, Taxi.
You said:
“You are incorrect “Lolita” was never acceptable reading”.
That would seem to conflict w/ actual real data. “The book has received critical acclaim regardless of the controversy it caused with the public. It has been included in many lists of best books, such as Time’s List of the 100 Best Novels, Le Monde’s 100 Books of the Century, Bokklubben World Library, Modern Library’s 100 Best Novels, and The Big Read. The novel has been twice adapted into film: first in 1962 by Stanley Kubrick, and later in 1997 by Adrian Lyne. It has also been adapted several times for the stage.”
Please refrain from fabricating details to support your views.
Interestingly you answered you own complaint.
“The book has received critical acclaim regardless of the controversy it caused with the public.”
The “public” clearly has a better moral compass than the critics do, which is unsurprising.
Sadly any kind of sex (even depraved illustration)sells.
You are again incorrect.
I did not make any claim about the book’s popularity, its sale of 50 million copies since 1955 or that it was not lauded by critics. I never claim it was not ACCEPTED reading. Instead I simply stated that the book is really unacceptable reading in its premise. In my opinion it is in the same category as the Marquis de Sade objectifying and mistreating women.
Words short pencil have meaning!
You said:
“You are incorrect “Lolita” was never acceptable reading”.
At least 50mm people would find you imistaken, confused, and inclined to fabricate data to support your premise.
Your comments remind me that critical thinking is America’s second deficit. You are the guy that will screw up pursuit of useful conclusions in the Epstein case. The issue is this… sure he’s a pedo; that’s been sufficiently addressed and he’s dead now. There are many pedo’s and they’re written up in this blog and convicted w/ some regularity. I get it, you’d like to score a brownie point by teetering around on a moral high horse and don’t yet understand that in this instance at least you’re chasing a parked car. He’s dead and there’s no value in digging him up to kill him again.
The bigger picture is the motivation behind flying people to an island teeming with nubile flesh there for the taking. This is about blackmailing world leaders and in the overarching context I’m less concerned w/ what a few street urchins may have gone through as that happens every day every where.
I dislike our system of government when it allows purchase of a politician’s vote, be that w/ forbidden fruit or other forms of currency. I hate that Dan Sullivan accepts money in trade for his vote where anything to do w/ Israel is concerned and I hate that Murkowski has sold her vote for more than $400,000.00 in return for that same influence. I knew a man that ran a German company with international ties. He would occasionally coordinate liaisons between customers and escorts and he’d say openly that there’s no more loyal customer than the married man that took him up on his kind offer.
This is not about tail; it’s about influence and amongst analytical alpha males this need not be explained. Let me know if you have further questions Taxi, I am here to guide you.
This pedo ring goes further than just democrats. Trump is 100% involved, there’s easily as much evidence in the public domain already to support that he is just as involved as the Clintons. Every one of them needs to be held accountable, regardless of party affiliation or government position. We’ve all been hoodwinked into thinking “our side” isn’t involved – newsflash, yes they are. Demand better of our nation. This charade has gone on too long! End the coverup!
Then you should have zero problem providing it. Remember, places like Democracy Now don’t count.
I wouldn’t quote such a worthless rag as Democracy Now. But here’s a good story about how often Trump (and Clinton) flew on Epstein’s plane. I’m sure you’ll just explain Trump’s presence away as a billionaire hitching a ride – but at the same time claim that it is irrefutable proof Clinton was doing horrible things. News flash – they both were.
‘https://nypost.com/2024/01/01/news/clinton-trump-were-frequent-fliers-on-epsteins-lolita-express-jet/
There are LOTS of pictures of Epstein and Trump together being very chummy. You’ve see them.
Bottom line, there’s a cabal of child molesters at the highest levels of government and society. Trump is involved, Clinton is involved. Why do you think Trump wants this thing to go away so quickly? He’s got things to hide, very bad things.
If you saw a democrat resisting the release of Epstein as much as Trump has been, you would point to it as undeniable proof that the Democrats were hiding something. Yet you don’t apply the same analysis to Trump, for some inexplicable reason.