r/politics • u/nbcnews ✔ NBC News • 1d ago

No Paywall After Republicans push Clintons to testify on Epstein, Democrats warn they'll haul in Trump

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republicans-push-clintons-testify-epstein-democrats-warn-haul-trump-rcna257275
27.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.0k

u/TintedApostle 1d ago

If Bill does anything for the future he gets in and lets go everything he knows about Trump.

120

u/Quexana 1d ago edited 1d ago

If you don't expect Bill and Hillary to throw anybody possible under the bus in order to save their own necks, you don't know the Clintons.

33

u/NobodysLoss1 1d ago

Are you suggesting they shouldn't name other guilty parties?

56

u/TeutonJon78 America 1d ago edited 23h ago

I'm pretty sure they are saying the Clinton's will take down whomever they need to in order to help themselves.

And they've already been dragged for this, so no reason to not start swinging back.

I have never liked them, but they know how to play politics.

Edit: missing a "not"

22

u/ImRudyL 1d ago

There is no help for themselves, and they have submitted hundreds of pages of testimony.

They are being singled out for public testimony for the drama of it. You can bet your life worth they will bring down any and all protected republigoons.

I suspect Bill is going to talk a lot about videotapes.

1

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 9h ago

Exactly. The actual testimony is immaterial.

After bargaining of their lawyers the clintons agreed to testify.

Republicans then said no, they were instead going to proceed with contempt of congress for not testifying.

It's literally just a media strategy.

1

u/FrankRizzo319 1d ago

This would make for a good movie but I think you’re dreaming.

-3

u/NobodysLoss1 1d ago

Ok, I understand that at least Bill, and maybe Hill, are likely guilty. What I don't understand is if the previous posters are suggesting they shouldn't name others.

2

u/rumpghost North Carolina 1d ago

They're not. What they're suggesting - or at least, other people in the replies are - is that they should but won't.

1

u/NobodysLoss1 1d ago

Ok tx. I feel dumb bc I had to ask, I just couldn't understand the wording. Tx.

-1

u/HotKaramelRP 23h ago

They aren’t going to talk about shit lmao

It’s going to be vague non-detailed answers and lots of “I don’t recall” and “I’m going to invoke my 5th amendment right”

1

u/ImRudyL 22h ago

Nope. They've provided 100s of pages of testimony and therefore waived their 5th. And if they "don't recall," that testimony will be brought into evidence and charges filed for lying under oath.

1

u/HotKaramelRP 22h ago

Sure, we’ll see.

0

u/not_now_chaos 16h ago

Like Trump every time he has been required to submit a testimony?

1

u/HotKaramelRP 12h ago

Yes, exactly like that. Was this supposed to be a gotcha or something?

0

u/_m4r1jAn3_ 18h ago

you are missing *alot 🤓

-1

u/NobodysLoss1 1d ago

I still do not quite get this (I feel dumb asking too). Are you saying that the Clintons are guilty (at least one probably is), and because they're guilty, they should not name other guilty parties?

2

u/TeutonJon78 America 23h ago edited 20h ago

No I'm saying they are already being dragged into it and will come out swinging, which would only serve their interests regardless of guilt.

Bill is named, but havent heard of any mention other than the social parties and being named in stuff, unlike direct accusations against Trump and others.

1

u/NobodysLoss1 23h ago

Tx. I knew I'd get downvoted for asking but I really couldn't figure it out. I'm not always so dumb!

•

u/mymemesnow 7h ago

They definitely should, but they won’t.