Two days of testimony from the Clintons have left nobody satisfied. This is the enduring impasse of the Epstein inquiry: questions only beget more questions, because nobody is willing to give anything up.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton had been summoned to a closed-door deposition in front of the House Oversight Committee, to answer questions on their relationship with deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Hillary was the first to face questions on Thursday, and in a marathon six-hour deposition, she denied ever meeting Epstein or having knowledge of his crimes. The meeting was overshadowed by a leaked image of the former secretary of state giving testimony, which ended up dominating headlines — another indication of how little has come out. Similarly, Bill Clinton’s testimony, conducted yesterday, dodged any serious mishaps. The former president claimed he ended his acquaintance with Epstein years before the financier’s crimes came to light, and knew nothing of them.

Both husband and wife, each a graduate of Yale Law School, are adept at political hearings. They’re stone-cold operators whose legal maneuvering is the stuff of legend. It was always unlikely either principal would give much up in their congressional depositions this week. There may have been exchanges which helpfully got one or the other on the record about a particular matter. But their hostile approach to the inquiry and the lack of resulting news suggest the Clintons revealed no smoking-gun evidence.

Instead, the biggest news to emerge during the 48 hours of Clinton-mania is that Democrats appear to have the votes to depose Donald Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick next. South Carolina Republican Nancy Mace is already indicating she would support that, and she could well be followed by GOP colleagues. After all, Lutnick’s involvement with Epstein was becoming too obvious to ignore.

The depositions won’t stop there. If Democrats retake Congress in a blue wave like in 2018, the President and First Lady will likely find themselves at the end of an Epstein-related subpoena. And this week, on primetime television, CNN anchor Lawrence O’Donnell planted the idea of questioning Melania. The Trumps, of course, are no strangers to partisan lawfare, or even to Epstein probes as political football. But, as we’ve witnessed for a decade now, questions about Epstein don’t often result in answers, and instead tend to increase the size of the broader mystery.

Legal disclosure through the constitutional process is important. But we should prepare ourselves for the consequences of this story. As scalps are claimed in both parties, and the same elites who once downplayed the scandal treat it as an electoral plaything, we will dig deeper down the rabbit hole. As with the JFK assassination, we should now expect to spend decades assembling pieces of a puzzle without knowing how many there are or what the final picture looks like.

Disclosures will trickle through in the coming months, and the enigma will allow bad actors to make false accusations. If we ever get close to a full understanding, it will be long after most of the major players are gone. This is how the world of intelligence is designed to work, with slow-walking and shadows of truth. Partisan politics is simply no match.

---

Emily Jashinsky is UnHerd‘s Washington correspondent.

emilyjashinsky

---