Clintons Agree To Testify Before Congress Amid Epstein Probe

In a move that has sent shockwaves through Washington, Bill and Hillary Clinton have agreed to testify before Congress as part of the ongoing investigation into the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The decision, announced on February 2, 2026, comes after months of high-stakes standoff between the former first couple and the Republican-led House Oversight Committee. The Clintons’ about-face arrived just days before a scheduled House vote on whether to hold them in criminal contempt for their previous refusal to comply with committee subpoenas.

The political drama unfolded swiftly and publicly. According to BBC, the House Oversight Committee, chaired by Republican James Comer of Kentucky, had approved contempt measures against both Bill and Hillary Clinton in late January 2026, with several Democrats crossing the aisle to support the action. The committee’s investigation centers on the Clintons’ connections to Epstein, whose 2019 death in prison ended a sprawling federal case but left lingering questions about his powerful associates and how much they knew of his criminal activities.

Bill Clinton’s relationship with Epstein has been a subject of public scrutiny for years. As BBC reported, Clinton was acquainted with Epstein but has consistently denied any knowledge of his sex crimes. The former president maintains that he severed ties with Epstein two decades ago, long before the financier’s offenses became widely known. “Bill Clinton was acquainted with Epstein, who died in prison in 2019, but has denied knowledge of his sex offending and says he cut off contact two decades ago,” BBC noted. In December 2025, a batch of photos released by the Justice Department—part of a congressional mandate to disclose all Epstein-related investigative material—showed Clinton on Epstein’s private jet and at his estate during 2002 and 2003. Clinton’s spokesman, Angel Ureña, responded at the time that the images were decades old and reiterated that Clinton had ended the relationship well before Epstein’s criminal conduct came to light.

The Clintons’ willingness to testify marks a historical first: not since Gerald Ford in 1983 has a former U.S. president agreed to appear before a congressional panel. The stakes are high, both politically and legally. The House was poised to vote on contempt resolutions as early as February 4, 2026, a move that could have resulted in criminal referrals to the Trump Justice Department. According to Politico, the House Rules Committee was in the midst of preparing for the contempt votes when the Clintons’ announcement forced a sudden pause. “Accordingly the committee will postpone further consideration of the contempt. However, should there not be substantial compliance and agreement overnight, the committee will return to continue the hearing on the contempt,” said Rules Chair Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.).

The Clintons’ decision to comply is, in many ways, an extraordinary reversal. For months, they had defied committee-issued subpoenas, arguing that the investigation was a politically motivated attempt to embarrass and potentially imprison them. In a letter to Chairman Comer last month, the Clintons accused him of prioritizing partisan politics over fact-finding. “There is no plausible explanation for what you are doing other than partisan politics,” the letter stated, as quoted by BBC. They further asserted that they had already provided the committee with sworn statements and the limited information they had regarding Epstein.

Despite their new agreement to testify, the details remain murky. House Oversight Chair James Comer expressed skepticism about the Clintons’ intentions, stating, “The Clintons’ counsel has said they agree to terms, but those terms lack clarity yet again and they have provided no dates for their depositions. The only reason they have said they agree to terms is because the House has moved forward with contempt. I will clarify the terms they are agreeing to and then discuss next steps with my committee members,” Comer said, according to Politico.

The Clintons, for their part, have tried to reframe their compliance as an act of civic responsibility. On social media, Bill Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Angel Ureña declared, “They look forward to setting a precedent that applies to everyone.” This sentiment was echoed in other public statements, with the Clintons’ team emphasizing their willingness to cooperate—albeit on their own terms.

The political reactions have been predictably polarized. Some Democrats have warned that pressing ahead with contempt votes, even after the Clintons’ agreement, would be a grave mistake. “If you try to move forward, that would be insane,” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, told reporters. “I mean, that would be unprecedented. It would be clearly a demonstration that Comer is actually not interested in hearing the Clintons, but he’s only interested in political games. I think that would be a huge disservice to the survivors and to the investigation.” Rep. Suhan Subramanyam (D-Va.) went further, suggesting the real aim was to give former President Trump a pretext to prosecute the Clintons: “The Republicans want to give Trump the ability to prosecute and put the Clintons in jail. That’s what this is really about. This isn’t about the Epstein investigation.”

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) described the entire episode as a “snake pit,” underscoring the perilous political environment in which the Clintons now find themselves. “This is a snake pit. It’s a snake pit,” Pelosi told reporters. “So it’s not a question of whether you have to come in. That’s just the way it is.”

For their part, Republican leaders have insisted that the investigation is about the pursuit of truth and accountability, not political vendettas. “No one is above the law,” Comer has repeatedly stated. He emphasized that the subpoenas were approved in a bipartisan vote and that the committee had communicated with Clinton’s legal team for months, offering multiple opportunities to comply. According to Comer, the Clintons’ delays forced the committee’s hand: “We communicated with President Clinton’s legal team for months now, giving them opportunity after opportunity to come in, to give us a day, and they continue to delay, delay, delay.”

The coming days will be critical in determining whether the Clintons’ agreement to testify will satisfy congressional investigators or whether the threat of contempt and criminal referral will remain on the table. The timing of their depositions, the scope of their testimony, and the political fallout from their appearance are all still up in the air. One thing is clear: by agreeing to testify, the Clintons have set a precedent not seen in over four decades, and their testimony is likely to reverberate far beyond the walls of Congress.

In a capital where brinksmanship and spectacle often overshadow substance, the Clintons’ decision to appear before Congress marks a rare moment of accountability at the highest levels of American public life.