I’ve watched both now, or I should say as much of both as I am willing to, and I’ve come away with a handful of observations.

No factual bombshells were launched or landed, which I expected: while Bill had a quid pro quo with Epstein for use of his planes in return for an hour of discussion on any flights of more than four hours, Epstein had contributed to various mutual causes, and Maxwell had attended their daughter’s wedding, the Clintons were simply not in Epstein’s orbit and did not have any factual information to offer.

However, and this was especially evident in Hilary’s testimony, the Clintons did have extensive knowledge and understanding of the Oversight Committee in general as well as the wide discrepancy in what the committee claims to be doing (finding truth) and are actually doing (political scapegoating and distraction). The committee was clearly trying to have another Bengazi hearing, and instead she kept taking them to the woodshed, pointing out repeatedly that she’d read all the witness depositions of the committee so far, and in none of them had a single majority member asked any witness a question directly in regard to Jeffrey Epstein.

As someone deeply disturbed by the present administration’s disregard of the Constitution, it was refreshing to hear Hilary remind the committee that they (Congress) are co-equal to both the judicial and executive branches of government, that they “are not beholden to the Justice Department” in any way, and have a clear Article I responsibility to finding the truth, including getting whatever is being falsely withheld (the remainder of the unredacted files, the records of Epstein’s financial transactions from the Department of the Treasury that are being withheld from Sen. Ron Wyden, etc).

The introduction to Bill’s testimony also gave insight as to what the photo business during Hilary’s testimony was about: their lawyer reiterated the Clintons’ desire to have the press present because, as they had suspected would be the case and had now become fact, select unauthorized bits from the deposition were used to create deepfakes that are now circulating. As the lawyer explained, when everyone watches the same thing at the same time, that kind of real-time public knowledge leaves no room for deepfakes. But for myself, and the reason I mention it, it seems quite clear from listening to the hours of testimony that that was the purpose from the start, for at least some of the majority members: they were not asking questions, they were putting out soundbites.

The difference in how the witnesses were treated was also incredibly different. For whatever reason, a number of majority members routinely interrupted, spoke over, contradicted, and even fought with Hilary. Bill had to suffer through very little of that by comparison: in fact I’d say that for the most part everyone on both sides was at least polite toward him, though he too got his share.

Which brings me to my last point. The behavior of Nancy Mace, specifically, toward both witnesses was an absolute disgrace and a dishonor to the office she holds. It was thoroughly disgusting toward both witnesses and brought forward no truth at all, it just wasted time as an exercise in personal harassment of witnesses. With Hilary she was trying to catfight about who was doing what during 9/11; with Bill she was trying to catch him in a non-existent lie by using a Daily Beast article that very questionably quoted a statement he made in 2019 but without ever referring to the actual statement, demanding that he answer to the article as opposed to asking him about what he actually, provably said himself. That last bit was such a confusion that no one ever did figure out what the question was supposed to be (probably the point) and in the end one of Bill’s staffers produced the literal statement, which his attorney then read into the record.

Overall Mace’s behavior was just obscene, and reminiscent of so many of the Epstein deposition transcripts I’ve read where the victims were just battered for hours with pointless hostile confusion, and for that reason alone it was sickening. Several majority members did this to Hilary, but none so openly as Mace, and she did it to both of them. While they both held their ground, they’re also both almost eighty years old, and Bill especially is obviously not in great shape. Since when do we scream at and badger our elders in an open attempt to confuse them and beat them down? It was such a deliberate shitshow and abuse of power that it made me ashamed to watch it. I ended up skipping large portions of the majority questioning for Hilary for this reason: it was literally sickening, and I’ve seen enough evil in my life already.

TL;DR: if you’re looking for the truth of the files and the breadth of the trafficking allegations, as I am, then it’s pretty goddamn clear many of the majority members are openly batting for Team Coverup.

EDITED a word

I’ve been watching Hilary’s deposition, and at about halfway in, she directly accuses the attorney general and the justice department of either “gross incompetence” or an active coverup. It starts with a question from Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-CA) at 1:50:56 and Sec. Clinton’s answer, and lasts about eight minutes.

It is incredibly powerful, and if this is all anybody watches it’s well worth the time, IMO.

Direct link with timestamp: https://youtu.be/siiAk6WXc0M?t=6659

Transcript (lightly edited for clarity, emphases mine)

Question by Ranking Member Garcia: Madam Secretary, just lastly, I want to also thank you for your testimony and broadly speaking, you’ve probably been following just recently. This week we’ve seen and there’s been reports that numerous files are missing from the group of files released. For the record, only about approximately 50% of the total files have likely been released; the other percentage have been withheld for whatever reasons we’re not really sure of and don’t really understand. It’s also been reported by numerous outlets this week that the FBI has removed files that are supposed to be being made available to the Congress that include serious allegations of alleged abuse by President Trump, sexual abuse to a minor. Now these are allegations that we know have been corroborated in other ways, and the media have have reported on these, but these files themselves have been removed. Now this we view this is a very serious matter. I’ve personally looked for these files in the archive manifest that lists which files should be placed there. Those files are no are no longer there. and we have been calling on the DOJ and the Attorney General to release all of the files.

I’m wondering if, in your experience obviously in the US Senate or as Secretary of State, if you have any response to the behavior of the DOJ in their withholding of critical information and the apparent removal of files that could suggest serious crimes by folks in this administration.

Answer by Secretary Clinton: Congressman, I appreciate you’re raising this issue and I appreciated the statement that you put out when this became public knowledge, thanks to investigative reporting which revealed it. And I think that this behavior by the Justice Department deserves the most thorough investigation that the Congress could carry out.

As I understand the sequence of events, this committee subpoenaed the Justice Department, as well as the Epstein estate, as well as law enforcement officials from prior administrations, as well as my husband and me. The Justice Department refused to comply, which is what led to the passage by the Congress of the Transparency Act which then was signed into law.

And I think from the very beginning, the behavior of the Attorney General and her staff has demonstrated either a gross incompetence, which is bothersome because they are the keepers of information that should be evaluated for law enforcement purposes, or a clear cover up because they are protecting the president and others.

Either one of those should be the focus of this committee to try to get to the bottom.

If they are incompetent and they are incapable of complying with the law that the Congress passed, we need to know that because they are falling down on the job. They have an FBI director who’s more interested in drinking beer in a hockey dressing room after our team won the Olympics rather than being responsive and complying with the law as it has been promulgated.

So, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that, given the sequencing of the events – starting with the way that President Trump made the release of the files a key element of his 2024 campaign, the promise that he and then his attorney general made that the files would be released, then a walking back of that as they began began to look at the files, and [then] ignoring what they had promised, including that they had a client list on the desk of the attorney general – reasonable people would have to assume they are engaged in a massive coverup which is infuriating.

As an American, as a citizen, all of us should be, regardless of party, wondering what are they hiding.

And that’s why I said in my opening statement, the president of the United States is not above the law, and should be in a setting like this answering questions under oath, as should others who are prominently featured in the files. Especially the group that is featured after 2008, because prior to 2008 when Jeffrey Epstein plead guilty to the watered down charges that Alex Acosta negotiated (and then was rewarded for in the first Trump administration with a cabinet position) there are so many unanswered questions. I looked at the transcript of the Alex Acosta testimony that was taken before this committee and I don’t think that any Republican members asked him a question.

So you have to conclude that there is something rotten in the state of Denmark, or clearly the Justice Department, starting in the White House and at the top with the Attorney General, and this latest example of the missing files about the allegations. And they are absolutely nothing more than allegations, but the FBI interviewed that witness four times. You don’t interview a non-credible witness four times. You don’t put into the FBI reporting “protect this source” if you think there is nothing to it.

So, of course, I would like to know, like every other American deserves to know, what is in those files and who is going to hold people accountable, because the Justice Department seems to be either unwilling or incapable of doing so.