Why the Clintons' ordeal might end up backfiring on Trump

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

And the testimony of the Clintons is raising uncomfortable parallels that will discomfit Trump and his inner orbit. For instance, if the standard for required testimony is being mentioned in the Epstein files, why are prominent Republicans also mentioned in the files not being hauled before the committee? Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s descriptions of his past interactions with Epstein were undercut by files released by the DOJ — but he has not so far received a subpoena to match those sent to the Clintons. There is no allegation of criminal wrongdoing against Lutnick.

Bill Clinton’s past contact with Epstein will surely interest the committee. But isn’t there a double standard if Trump, who was mentioned in the files numerous times, is not also put under oath?

And former Secretary Clinton’s appearance — although, in her telling, she had no information about Epstein’s conduct — creates a model of a spouse being asked about her husband’s links to the accused sex trafficker. Some observers might wonder whether first lady Melania Trump might have similar insight about the times her husband and Epstein moved in similar orbits before and after their marriage in 2005. While there would surely be a mighty constitutional fight over an attempt to compel testimony from a sitting president, the first lady has no formal constitutional role, and there appear to be no legal barriers to such a summons.

(snip)

Trump refused a subpoena to testify to the House committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, riot by his supporters at the US Capitol. He sued to block the summons amid a fierce constitutional dispute over the separation of powers, and it was eventually withdrawn when the committee’s work ended.

(snip)

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/27/politics/clinton-epstein-investigation-trump-analysis