Pelosi privately blasts Democrats for vote to hold Clintons in contempt in Epstein probe

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was disappointed after nearly half of the House Oversight Committee’s Democrats voted Wednesday to hold Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas in its Jeffrey Epstein investigation. And on Thursday, she let them know it.

In a private meeting, Pelosi said she was upset that Democrats supported the contempt vote because the former president and former secretary of state were still negotiating with the committee over the terms of a possible future appearance, two sources in the room told CNN.

One of the sources in the room described Pelosi as “emphatic” and said of the former speaker’s remarks: “When she speaks, she means it. She knows her voice has power.”

The former speaker suggested no proceedings should move forward against the Clintons until after the Justice Department has released all of the Epstein investigative files.

And she rejected the argument that they should be treated the same as Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, two Trump allies and first-term administration officials who were held in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas from the committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. After being held in contempt, both were later prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to prison terms.

CNN has reached out to Pelosi’s office.

Pelosi’s frustration underscores the Democratic fracture after the Clintons failed to comply with a subpoena in the Epstein case. The Clintons had cast the effort to compel their separate appearances on Capitol Hill to answer questions under oath as unfair and legally unenforceable, and they framed their refusal as a principled stand for America.

“Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences. For us, now is that time,” the Clintons wrote in a letter at the time of their refusal.

But as Republicans on the panel were quick to note, even Democrats had signed off on the subpoenas. And the Clintons’ strategy in dealing with demands that they testify about the late convicted sex offender has put them in a tough legal position, experts say, in addition to the political fallout it has created for them and their political party.

The Clintons are “in a very difficult position, because these cases are very straightforward. They’re pretty much, ‘Did you get a subpoena, and did you go testify?’” said former US Attorney John Fishwick, a Barack Obama appointee. “The courts are going to say that Congress has broad discretion on who they want to ask for a deposition.”

Fishwick pointed to Bannon and Navarro receiving jail sentences, and said the Clintons run the risk that judges would feel they need to be consistent.

David Rapallo, professor at Georgetown Law and the former House Oversight Committee Democratic staff director under the late Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, said that “as a legal matter, Congress clearly has the authority to issue subpoenas, including for depositions, and if witnesses refuse to comply with those subpoenas, they can be held in contempt.”

“Their perceived unfairness is not necessarily a legitimate basis to refuse to comply with a legal requirement, although it does appear the Clintons are being singled out when others, like the attorney general, have not produced information required by law,” he said.

CNN has reached out to representatives for Bill and Hillary Clinton for comment.

The Clintons have sought to negotiate over how they would participate in the House Oversight Committee’s Epstein probe. On January 16, the Clintons’ attorneys offered to make the former president available for an interview with Republican Chairman James Comer and the top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Robert Garcia, “on areas within the scope” of the panel’s Epstein probe. On January 19, Clinton’s counsel followed up to say staff could also attend the interview.

“You rejected those offers, and rather than provide counter offers, chose the spectacle of a contempt proceeding,” Clinton attorneys Ashley Callen and David E. Kendall wrote to Comer.

Comer called the Clintons’ offer “unreasonable” and said it made clear “they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment.” He said he planned to move forward with contempt proceedings.

Ahead of Wednesday’s vote, House Democratic leadership made clear that it did not want the party’s members on the panel to support the effort. Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin held a call with Oversight Committee Democrats to lay out why he felt contempt for the Clintons was not necessary, two sources familiar with the conversations told CNN.

Yet, nine House Democrats voted with Republicans to move forward with holding the former president in contempt, and three Democrats supported the effort against Hillary Clinton.

“We’re going to get through this thing,” Raskin said, when asked if he was disappointed that a number of his Democratic colleagues voted with Republicans on Wednesday.

Congressional Democrats have now found themselves in a political bind.

They have fought vigorously for transparency in the Epstein investigation — often criticizing President Donald Trump and his administration for not releasing materials fast enough. But at the same time, they are treading carefully as Republicans seek to shift the spotlight to the Clintons and highlight the former president’s long relationship with Epstein.

House Democratic leaders want to avoid a floor vote where more members in their ranks would be likely to support contempt. They hope to find a resolution between Comer and the Clintons before a vote would occur in two weeks.

Some House Democratic staff conveyed to the Clinton team Wednesday that Comer indicated there is still an opening for them to avoid being held in contempt of Congress, one source familiar with the matter told CNN.

Comer similarly suggested to reporters Wednesday that “there is an opportunity” for the two sides to reach an agreement.

Democratic leaders have said they want the Clintons to give testimony as part of the investigation. But they have argued that Republicans are treating the Clintons unfairly because they are not allowing them to submit written testimony like some of the other witnesses subpoenaed in the probe.

They also claim that Republicans are politicizing the issue by moving forward with contempt against the Clintons and not for individuals like Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has yet to make public all of the Epstein files that Congress required by law to be released by December 19.

“To the extent that anyone in this town or country should be held in criminal contempt, it is the attorney general of the Department of Justice,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters on Thursday.

Asked by CNN if the Clintons need to answer questions, Jeffries said the former president and secretary of state are “working in good faith to try reach an accommodation with the Oversight Committee in order to sit down and offer their testimony.”

Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat who co-led the legislation that forced the Justice Department to release all of the Epstein files, was one of the Democrats who sided with their leadership and voted against holding the Clintons in contempt. He said Bill Clinton should testify after the full Epstein files were released.

“The only person we should be holding in contempt right now is Pam Bondi, who is refusing to release the files,” Khanna said. “The Clintons have called for the full release of the files, and Bill Clinton should testify after the files are released with Donald Trump. But for Comer to threaten them with jail now is pure political theater.”

“The Clintons absolutely should testify. But it should be after the files are released so we can ask questions about them,” he continued.

Democratic Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, however, said she voted with Republicans to hold both Clintons in contempt to preserve congressional subpoena power.

“I feel very strongly that especially in this moment, when the Oversight Committee plays such a critical role in investigating wrongdoing, especially by the administration, that it’s crucial that we protect the power of the subpoena and Congress’ authority to be able to subpoena current and former presidents and that we hold a hard line in terms of making sure the integrity of our ability to do that is maintained,” she said.

Even though she supported the effort, Stansbury argued that Republicans are “not standing on firm legal ground because there has been cooperation from the witnesses” and similarly claimed that the GOP’s specific focus on the Clintons is “political theater.”

Garcia, who voted against holding the Clintons in contempt, said during Wednesday’s meeting that he does want to hear from the former Democratic president.

“Let’s be clear. We want to talk to President Bill Clinton. We want him to answer our questions. We also want Ghislaine Maxwell to answer our questions. We also want to understand why Pam Bondi refuses to release all the files,” he said.

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com