“I Will Not Sit Idly As They Use Me As A Prop”: Is Bill Clinton Moving Back Into Contempt?

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The Clintons are again suggesting that they might not agree to a deposition after previously yielding to the threat of a contempt vote.

Hillary Clinton taunted House Oversight Chair James Comer “if you want this fight…let’s have it—in public.”

For his part, Bill Clinton seemed more conclusive on X in opposing a deposition: 

“I will not sit idly as they use me as a prop in a closed-door kangaroo court.”

The question is whether the Clintons are again gaming the system after avoiding a bipartisan vote to hold them in contempt.

As with the Hunter Biden deposition (which was also delayed by such tactics), there are various reasons for holding a closed deposition before public hearings.

• First, these depositions allow professional staff to conduct questioning in a methodical and professional manner.

• Second, the Clintons must be asked about a range of documents and communications that contain names and privacy-protected information.

• Third, these depositions allow for in-depth questioning on transactions and communications.

  • In a public hearing, members are confined to a five-minute rule that guarantees questioning cannot achieve much, if any, depth.

Those are all reasons the Clintons want a public hearing in which members, not staff, ask questions under tight time limits. It produces superficial examinations with little ability to pursue substantive conflicts or issues.

None of this really matters legally.

All citizens are compelled to appear at such hearings.

They may invoke the Fifth Amendment, but they must appear. Even the Clintons.

However, the Clintons have spent a lifetime gaming the system, avoiding accountability for alleged crimes, including (in the case of Bill Clinton) federal perjury.

This is vintage Clinton.

After a bipartisan vote in committee to hold them in contempt, they took a 180-degree turn and agreed to the depositions. The final vote was then cancelled.

Once cancelled, Bill Clinton is again suggesting that he will “not sit idly by” for such a deposition.

It is not clear what that means. He will sit for this deposition or be held in contempt like any other citizen.

The declaration could mean anything from laying the groundwork for invoking the Fifth Amendment to another act of defiance of the subpoena. He could be planning to refuse to answer certain questions in a combative approach to the deposition. However, that could still result in a contempt sanction.

Notably, the Clintons have long been able to control the conditions of their questioning. Even with the Independent Counsel, Clinton was able to secure concessions on time and questions. He still tripped the wire and committed perjury, according to a federal court.

This is a rare occasion where they will not dictate such conditions. That raises the intriguing possibility that Bill Clinton could set a precedent by invoking the Fifth Amendment. Otherwise, he may not be idle, but he will be present.