Connect with us

News

Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Stance on Epstein Testimony Nov. 3

Published

on

Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Stance on Epstein Testimony Nov. 3

WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
Hon. James Comer
Hon. Robert Garcia November 3, 2025 Page 2

compel Attorney General Bondi to release what you have stated is a large trove of unseen files, which the public to date is still waiting to see released.

Your October 22 letter does not provide a persuasive rationale for why deposing the Clintons is required to fulfill the mandate of your investigation, particularly when what little information they have may be efficiently obtained in writing.

You state that your investigation into the “mismanagement” of the Epstein and Maxwell investigations and prosecutions requires the depositions of three individuals: former President Clinton, former Secretary of State Clinton, and former Attorney General William Barr – who was serving in the first Trump Administration when Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in federal custody. Compounding this inexplicable choice of deponents, you also have chosen not to depose the dozens of individuals whose links to Mr. Epstein have been publicly documented.

My clients have been private citizens for the last 24 and 12 years, respectively. President Clinton’s term ended six (6) years before allegations surfaced against Mr. Epstein. Former Secretary of State Clinton’s position was in no way related to law enforcement and is completely afield of any aspect of the Epstein matter. While neither of my clients have anything to offer for the stated purposes of the Committee’s investigation, subpoenaing former Secretary Clinton is on its face both purposeless and harassing. I set forth in my October 6 letter the facts that she did not know Epstein, did not travel with him, and had no dealings with him. Indeed, when I met with your staff to learn your basis for including former Secretary Clinton, none was given beyond wanting to ask if she had ever spoken with her husband about this matter. Setting aside the plainly relevant consideration of marital privilege, this is an entirely pretextual basis for compelling former Secretary Clinton to appear personally in this matter.

It is incumbent on the Committee to address the most basic questions regarding the basis for singling out the Clintons, particularly when there is no obvious or apparent rationale for it, given the mandate of the Committee’s investigation. Your October 22 letter does not provide such a justification. And your previous statements, belied by the facts, that President Clinton is a “prime suspect” (for something) because of visits to Epstein’s island betokens bias, not fairness. You said, on August 11:

“Everybody in America wants to know what went on in Epstein Island, and we’ve all heard reports that Bill Clinton was a frequent visitor there, so he’s a prime suspect to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee.”

“1

Regrettably, such statements are not the words of an impartial and dispassionate factfinder. In fact, President Clinton has never visited Epstein’s island. He has repeatedly stated that, the Secret Service has corroborated that denial, Ghislaine Maxwell’s recent testimony to Deputy Attorney General Blanche reconfirmed this, as did the late Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her

Fields, “Comer: Bill Clinton ‘Prime Suspect’ in Epstein Investigation,” The Hill (Aug. 12, 2025).

News

Jury Convicts Florida Ex-Rep. David Rivera in Conspiracy Trial

Published

on

Jury Convicts Florida Ex-Rep. David Rivera in Conspiracy Trial

A federal jury convicted former Representative David Rivera of Florida on Friday, finding him guilty of conspiracy and six other crimes for secretly lobbying officials in Washington on behalf of the Venezuelan government in 2017 and 2018.

Prosecutors presented evidence during the five-week trial in Miami showing that Venezuela’s state-run oil company had secretly hired Mr. Rivera’s consulting firm for $50 million to lobby members of Congress and the White House for a thaw in U.S.-Venezuela relations.

The revelation ran contrary to how Mr. Rivera, a Republican, had portrayed himself in public. He made a political career, first as a state lawmaker and later as a congressman, as a strident anti-Communist. Mr. Rivera served in Congress from 2011 to 2013.

He had previously been the subject of several state and federal investigations into improper campaign dealings. He was also found guilty in the criminal case of failing to register as a foreign agent and money laundering, and faces about 10 years in prison.

His defense lawyers in the criminal case had argued that Mr. Rivera was not working for Nicolás Maduro’s government but rather surreptitiously trying to oust him. They also said that Mr. Rivera did not need to register as a foreign agent because his firm’s contract was with an American company, PDV USA, a U.S. subsidiary of the Venezuelan state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, and not with the state-run company itself.

Advertisement

The 12-member jury also convicted one of Mr. Rivera’s associates, Esther Nuhfer, on four charges. Prosecutors said that Mr. Rivera, 60, split the secret contract earnings, which ultimately amounted to about $20 million after the company terminated the contract, with Ms. Nuhfer and two people who were not charged in the case. Ms. Nuhfer, 52, is a political consultant based in Miami.

Roger Cruz, an assistant U.S. attorney and the lead prosecutor, said in his closing argument on Tuesday that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer decided to keep the contract secret because of “greed.”

“Without their keeping it secret, they would not have got a single penny,” he said. “If anyone found out, their careers would be over.”

The trial drew widespread attention when it began because prosecutors called Secretary of State Marco Rubio to testify against Mr. Rivera, his longtime friend and former housemate in Tallahassee when they both served in the Florida Legislature.

Mr. Rubio, who has not been implicated in any wrongdoing, was a Republican U.S. senator from Florida in the years that Mr. Rivera was secretly lobbying for Venezuela. Mr. Rubio held two meetings with Mr. Rivera at that time and testified in court that he had no idea about Mr. Rivera’s secret contract.

Advertisement

Other prosecution witnesses included Brian Ballard, a major lobbyist and top fund-raiser for President Trump, and Hugo Perera, one of the other two men who admitted to taking part in the conspiracy. Mr. Perera was not charged because he agreed to testify against Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer.

Mr. Perera testified that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer had kept the contract secret because they knew it would create a political scandal if it became public. Defense lawyers noted that Mr. Perera, a developer who had served prison time for cocaine trafficking and tax fraud in the 1990s, was allowed to keep the roughly $5 million he made from the Venezuela deal.

One of the defense witnesses was Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, a Republican, who testified that he worked with Mr. Rivera in 2017 to try to persuade Mr. Maduro to step down and hold presidential elections. Mr. Sessions also said that he did not know at the time about Mr. Rivera’s secret Venezuela contract.

Edward R. Shohat, one of Mr. Rivera’s defense lawyers, told jurors in his closing argument that prosecutors had tried to confuse them. “All that he was about was removing Mr. Maduro,” Mr. Shohat said of Mr. Rivera.

David O. Markus, a defense lawyer for Ms. Nuhfer, said she had signed onto the contract “in good faith,” believing it was with a U.S. subsidiary. She would never “in a billion years” have tried to help the Maduro government, Mr. Markus said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Thousands in US to join ‘no school, no work, no shopping’ May Day protest in economic blackout

Published

on

Thousands in US to join ‘no school, no work, no shopping’ May Day protest in economic blackout

Thousands are set to join an economic blackout for International Workers’ Day on Friday, as part of 3,500 “May Day Strong” events across the country. Organizers are calling for “no school, no work, no shopping” with walkouts, marches, block parties and other gatherings planned into the evening.

May Day has long been an annual day of protest for the labor movement, and this year, many active movements are converging to fight for “a nation that puts workers over billionaires”. Demanding no ICE, no war, and taxing the rich, the May Day Strong coalition includes labor unions, immigrants rights groups, political organizations such as the Democratic Socialists of America, and the organizers behind the No Kings protests. Friday’s economic disruption builds on a similar coordinated effort out of Minnesota in January, when tens of thousands of Twin Cities residents took off from school and work to flood the streets in protest of federal immigration agents storming the city.

Neidi Dominguez, founding executive director of Organized Power in Numbers and an executive team member of May Day Strong, said that they expect more than twice the number of May Day events than last year.

Leah Greenberg of Indivisible, one of the main organizations behind No Kings, described the May Day economic blackout as a “structure test” for the movement.

“We are asking people to take a step into further exerting their power in all aspects of their lives – as workers, as students, as members of local organizing hubs,” she said. “It’s important as it builds muscles towards greater non-cooperation.”

Advertisement

Teachers’ unions and students are an active part of the fight, a continuation of their months of organizing against ICE. At least 15 school districts in North Carolina have given teachers the day off to join a statewide May Day “Kids Over Corporations” rally for public education funding. In Chicago, Illinois, the Chicago Teachers Union fought and won to have May Day made a “day of civic action”.

“As educators, we feel a very real accountability to the young people in the families that we serve,” Stacy Davis Gates, president of the Chicago Teachers Union and Illinois Federation of Teachers, said earlier this week. “We want to connect people not just to the affordability crisis but the crisis of our institutions being marginalized in this moment and the impact on our young people.”

Sanshray Kukutla, a student at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, and organizer with the campus’s Sunrise Movement chapter, is helping coordinate a local walkout for students, teachers, workers and residents. “We’re taking collective action to send a message to the billionaire class: it’s our labor, our spending, and our participation that keeps the whole system running, and if we don’t work, they don’t have profits,” said Kukutla.

Organizers say the day of action is an effort to build toward a general strike, which was essentially outlawed through the 1946 Taft-Hartley Act and hasn’t happened in the US since. As a workaround, Shawn Fain, president of the United Auto Workers (UAW), has called for unions to work toward a general strike on 1 May 2028, by having existing union contracts expire in unison.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Schumer and Platner Talk After Mills Suspends Her Campaign

Published

on

Schumer and Platner Talk After Mills Suspends Her Campaign

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic minority leader, and Graham Platner, the party’s now presumed candidate in Maine’s crucial Senate race, talked by telephone on Thursday after Gov. Janet Mills, Mr. Schumer’s favored candidate, abruptly suspended her campaign.

A person familiar with the call would provide few details when asked about any contact between the two men, but acknowledged they had spoken and said they agreed that Democrats needed to win Maine and take back the Senate majority from Republicans. Another person familiar with the conversation said it was cordial and stressed the importance of unseating Senator Susan Collins, the five-term Republican incumbent.

It was the first exchange between them. Mr. Schumer, the New York Democrat long deeply involved in his party’s Senate campaign strategy, had heavily recruited Governor Mills and saw her as the party’s best opportunity to defeat Ms. Collins, the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee who has repeatedly fended off Democratic challengers.

But Mr. Platner, a populist oysterman and political novice, proved formidable despite Governor Mills’s political pedigree. Mr. Schumer now finds himself trying to establish a relationship with the party’s presumed candidate in what is likely a must-win race if Democrats are to have any chance of taking the Senate.

The decision by Governor Mills was a significant setback for Mr. Schumer that underscored discontent about him among some in the party and had some Democrats questioning whether he had lost a step in his political calculations. But he struck an optimistic tone as he left the Capitol on Thursday night.

Advertisement

“We are going to beat Susan Collins and we are going to win back the Senate,” he told reporters.

Democrats believe that voter discontent in Maine with the direction of the Trump administration gives them a strong chance to defeat Ms. Collins, who has proved politically resilient at home.

Annie Karni contributed reporting.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending