Bill and Hillary Clinton, federal officials and Justice Department subpoenaed by US House panel

The panel gave the Justice Department until August 19 to turn over records related to Epstein, who died in prison in 2019 as he faced sex-trafficking charges.

Loading

A Justice Department spokesman didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did a spokesperson for the Clintons.

Bill Clinton, who has acknowledged travelling on Epstein’s private airplane, has previously denied knowing anything about the financier’s sex trafficking.

Multiple former presidents have voluntarily testified before Congress, but none has been compelled to do so.

That history was invoked by Trump in 2022, between his first and second terms, when he faced a subpoena by the House committee investigating the deadly January 6, 2021, riot by a mob of his supporters at the US Capitol. Lawyers for Trump resisted the subpoena, citing decades of legal precedent they said shielded an ex-president from being ordered to appear before Congress. The committee ultimately withdrew its subpoena.

Loading

The committee had previously issued a subpoena for an interview with Maxwell, who had been serving a prison sentence in Florida for luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein but was recently transferred to a Texas facility.

Her lawyers have demanded criminal immunity in return for her testimony on August 11.

Comer hasn’t agreed to the request. However, he has indicated he is willing to delay that deposition until after the Supreme Court decides whether to hear an appeal of her conviction. Maxwell argues she was wrongfully prosecuted.

The Justice Department has tried to appease demands for more disclosure and has also turned its attention to Maxwell. Officials interviewed her last month.

It has also asked federal courts to unseal grand jury materials related to Epstein’s case, but hasn’t voluntarily released information in its possession.

Maxwell, however, wants to keep the grand jury records secret, her lawyers said on Tuesday.

She hasn’t seen the material herself, her attorneys said – the grand jury process is conducted behind closed doors – but opposes unsealing what her lawyers described as potentially “hearsay-laden” transcripts of grand jury testimony, which was given in secret and without her lawyers there to challenge it.

The Justice Department has indicated in court filings that the grand jury material is very limited and probably won’t shed any new light on what is already publicly known about Epstein’s operation. In comparison, the department has a huge collection of documents and files obtained during the investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, including interviews with witnesses and victims.

Loading

Separately, the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into claims that national security officials participated in a conspiracy in late 2016 and early 2017 to link Trump to Russia’s election interference and undermine his legitimacy, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Bondi directed prosecutors to use a grand jury to investigate claims made by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, said the person, who asked not to be named speaking about a confidential matter.

Gabbard claimed last month that officials working under former president Barack Obama “manufactured and politicised intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump”. Gabbard made a criminal referral to the Justice Department to investigate that matter.

It wasn’t immediately clear what specific actions are under investigation and whether prosecutors will use an existing grand jury or convene a new one. It also wasn’t clear in which city and court the case would be presented.

Loading

The Justice Department declined to comment.

Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush issued a statement after Gabbard made her claims.

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” he said. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”