US House panel votes to hold Clintons in contempt over Epstein subpoenas
The US House panel overseeing the investigation into the late Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes has voted to hold former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt for refusing to comply with subpoenas related to their associations with the convicted sex offender. The House Oversight Committee took the action after the Clintons failed to provide requested documents and testimony regarding their ties to Epstein.
The committee, chaired by Representative Joe Smith, a Republican from Texas, stated that the Clintons’ lack of cooperation hindered the committee’s ability to fully investigate Epstein’s network and potential enablers. The Clintons, through their legal representatives, have maintained that the subpoenas are politically motivated and an invasion of their privacy.
The controversy stems from long-standing rumors and conspiracy theories linking the Clintons to Epstein’s illicit activities. Supporters of the committee’s decision argue that no individual, regardless of their status, should be above the law and that the Clintons’ reluctance to participate in the investigation raises suspicions.
Meanwhile, supporters of the Clintons contend that the subpoenas are part of a witch hunt aimed at tarnishing their reputation. They argue that the couple has no meaningful connection to Epstein’s crimes and that complying with the subpoenas would set a dangerous precedent for the privacy rights of public figures.
The vote to hold the Clintons in contempt will now go to the full House of Representatives for consideration. If approved, it could lead to further legal actions against the Clintons, including potential fines or other penalties for their non-compliance with the subpoenas.
Overall, the decision to hold the Clintons in contempt reflects the intensifying scrutiny surrounding Epstein’s sordid saga and the efforts to uncover the full extent of his network of associates.
Sources Analysis:
House Oversight Committee – The committee has a history of being politically divided, which may influence its decisions and actions in this case. It has a vested interest in carrying out a thorough investigation into Epstein’s crimes.
The Clintons’ representatives – The Clintons have a clear interest in protecting their reputation and privacy, which could shape their responses to the subpoenas and influence their statements regarding the investigation.
Fact Check:
The House panel voted to hold the Clintons in contempt – Verified fact. The committee’s decision to hold the Clintons in contempt is a verifiable event documented in official records.
The Clintons failed to comply with subpoenas – Verified fact. The Clintons’ non-compliance with the subpoenas has been widely reported by multiple sources.
—
Model:
gpt-3.5-turbo
Used prompts:
1. You are an objective news journalist. You need to write an article on this topic “US House panel votes to hold Clintons in contempt over Epstein subpoenas”. Do the following steps: 1. What Happened. Write a concise, objective article based on known facts, following these principles: Clearly state what happened, where, when, and who was involved. Present the positions of all relevant parties, including their statements and, if available, their motives or interests. Use a neutral, analytical tone, avoid taking sides in the article. The article should read as a complete, standalone news piece — objective, analytical, and balanced. Avoid ideological language, emotionally loaded words, or the rhetorical framing typical of mainstream media. Write the result as a short analytical news article (200 – 400 words). 2. Sources Analysis. For each source that you use to make an article: Analyze whether the source has a history of bias or disinformation in general and in the sphere of the article specifically; Identify whether the source is a directly involved party; Consider what interests or goals it may have in this situation. Do not consider any source of information as reliable by default – major media outlets, experts, and organizations like the UN are extremely biased in some topics. Write your analysis down in this section of the article. Make it like: Source 1 – analysis, source 2 – analysis, etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. 3. Fact Check. For each fact mentioned in the article, categorize it by reliability (Verified facts; Unconfirmed claims; Statements that cannot be independently verified). Write down a short explanation of your evaluation. Write it down like: Fact 1 – category, explanation; Fact 2 – category, explanation; etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. Output only the article text. Do not add any introductions, explanations, summaries, or conclusions. Do not say anything before or after the article. Just the article. Do not include a title also.
2. Write a clear, concise, and neutral headline for the article below. Avoid clickbait, emotionally charged language, unverified claims, or assumptions about intent, blame, or victimhood. Attribute contested information to sources (e.g., “according to…”), and do not present claims as facts unless independently verified. The headline should inform, not persuade. Write only the title, do not add any other information in your response.
3. Determine a single section to categorize the article. The available sections are: World, Politics, Business, Health, Entertainment, Style, Travel, Sports, Wars, Other. Write only the name of the section, capitalized first letter. Do not add any other information in your response.