If the House Oversight Committee’s Republican majority – or for that matter most of its Democratic members – felt a powerful motivation to uncover the truth about Jeffrey Epstein, there are many people with far more intimate knowledge of the pedophile financier and his crimes than Bill and Hillary Clinton.

But actual facts about this monumental scandal and real accountability for its perpetrators are of little concern to Rep. James Comer, the committee chairman who has singlemindedly abused his position to focus his "investigation" on the Clintons, or the House Republican leadership. Having failed to suppress the Epstein files as ordered by the White House, they have embarked on a renewed campaign of distraction and deflection.

Even the servile Comer realizes that the most notorious potential witness is Donald J. Trump, whose name appears more than a thousand times, including very troubling allegations, in the files released by the Justice Department. With three million additional files yet to be examined, Trump’s name may appear many more times. Despite his false claim that the voluminous files somehow “exonerate” him, evidence in the public record proves that they had a long and intimate relationship during years when Epstein was abusing hundreds of underage girls – including at least one, the late Virginia Giuffre, who had worked at Mar-a-Lago.

Now Comer would surely insist that the sitting president cannot be required to testify in the House of Representatives. But historically the same has been true of former presidents, a customary stricture that Comer breezily waved aside for an opportunity to harangue Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – who never knew Epstein and can reveal nothing about him, but remains forever a tempting target for House Republicans with nothing better to do.

From past observation of Comer's antics, we know he is uninterested in facts and treats his chairmanship as a perch from which to smear partisan opponents. So we can be confident that he won’t subpoena Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Elon Musk, or Steve Bannon, all of whom have plainly lied about their chummy relationships with Epstein. He isn’t going to take public testimony from the Republican lawyers -- most notably former Trump Labor Secretary Alex Acosta -- who arranged the sweetheart plea deal that allowed Epstein to continue his depredations. (One of those Epstein attorneys was Clinton nemesis Kenneth Starr, who alas is deceased.)

The purpose of Comer's phony inquest isn’t uncovering truth. If that is the objective of anyone else on the Oversight Committee, however, those worthies should educate themselves about the basic facts concerning Clinton and Epstein. To date, members of both parties – including the committee’s ranking member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) – have displayed little knowledge about the witness they threatened with a contempt citation. To assist in their edification, let’s review:

There is no evidence that Bill Clinton knew anything about Epstein’s crimes before he was indicted. Like many other wealthy supporters of the Clinton Foundation, Epstein provided the use of his personal aircraft for charitable trips abroad, including a long 2002 trip to Africa for HIV/AIDS relief. Epstein and members of his entourage accompanied Clinton for parts of that trip, along with many other staff, including a young woman later identified as an Epstein victim. She posed for a photo with Clinton and described him as a “perfect gentleman.”

There is no evidence that Bill Clinton’s relationship with Epstein continued after the sex-trafficker became a target of federal law enforcement -- unlike many well-known and powerful individuals, such as Musk and Lutnick, whose names have turned up in the files. In fact, Clinton’s connection with him ended years before Epstein’s crimes became public.

There is no evidence that Bill Clinton ever visited Epstein’s Caribbean island, the site of many of his crimes, although Trump habitually repeats that particular lie. Among those who have dispelled that claim are Epstein himself, in a disclosed email, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, who said Trump’s accusations about Clinton were “wrong.” That observation was confirmed by former Attorney General William Barr, who oversaw the 2019 prosecution of Epstein, told the committee that “in the case of Bill Clinton, so far as I was aware, there was no evidence that he visited the island. You know, the government did not obtain any such evidence.”

And Ghislaine Maxwell made the same declaration in her famous interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, at a moment when she was seeking clemency from Trump. Knowing that Trump and Blanche would want to hear the worst about Clinton, Maxwell nevertheless exonerated him fully.

“He never, absolutely never went” to Little St. James Island," she said. "And I can be sure of that because there's no way he would have gone. I don't believe there's any way that he would've gone to the island had I not been there. Because I don't believe he had an independent friendship, if you will, with Epstein,” Maxwell continued, noting that Clinton had no interest or relationship with him except as “a rich guy with the plane” to be used for “humanitarian” trips to Africa and Asia. That is assuredly what she would tell Comer if he ever calls her to testify.

As for Hillary Clinton, there is no evidence whatsoever that the former first lady and secretary of state ever had anything to do with Epstein, or that she could reveal anything about him beyond what she has read in the newspapers. At a time when dozens of significant witnesses have escaped without a summons from Comer, the subpoena her issued to her is the ultimate proof that this “investigation” is merely the latest Congressional Republican misadventure.

It’s another episode of bad faith and deception. Nobody with a functioning brain should fall for it.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024). The paperback version, with a new Afterword, will be published in February 2026.

Reprinted with permission from Creators