Rep. Jasmine Crockett Exposes the Hypocrisy Behind Congress’ Epstein Subpoena Fight

 

Rep. Jasmine Crockett Exposes the Hypocrisy Behind Congress’ Epstein Subpoena Fight

Rep. Jasmine Crockett

495K subscribers

29,064 views Jan 21, 2026 #JasmineCrockett #Congress #Epstein

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett breaks down what real subpoena compliance actually looks like and why selective enforcement is tearing Congress apart. Drawing on her legal background, she calls out the hypocrisy of lawmakers demanding accountability while ignoring subpoenas in their own ranks. From the Epstein documents to January 6, Crockett makes the case for one standard of justice, not two. Equal accountability. Real oversight. No political games. This is about whether Congress still believes in checks and balances—or only when it’s convenient. #JasmineCrockett #Congress #Epstein #Oversight #Subpoena #RuleOfLaw #Accountability #HouseJudiciary #PoliticalHypocrisy #Democracy

Transcript

0:00

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Um, I have

0:03

sat here listening and I am quite

0:06

perplexed. It does take me back to my

0:09

legal days. Um, and so when I think

0:12

about a subpoena, one of the things that

0:15

we normally look at when we are trying

0:17

to determine whether or not contempt is

0:20

going to be ushered into the

0:22

conversation is whether or not there's

0:23

been substantial compliance.

0:26

And what it means to actually look like

0:28

you have substantially complied. it

0:32

means that you're taking reasonable

0:33

steps to follow a court order that

0:36

you're acting in good faith and

0:38

typically that serves as a defense. So

0:41

if we are still crafting the parameters

0:44

of said subpoena, for instance, my

0:48

colleague um Mr. Walkenshaw just asked

0:51

whether or not this would be limited to

0:53

the Epstein

0:55

um subject matter. For me, if they

0:59

responded at all, then there is some

1:01

sort of compliance, which they did. They

1:05

didn't just throw the bird. They didn't

1:07

just say, "Forget it." But more

1:10

importantly, I just want to point out

1:12

that we are living in an age of

1:14

hypocrisy because my other colleague

1:17

just pointed out that Mr. Perry sits

1:21

here and somehow sits in judgment of

1:23

others. Frankly, that is what people are

1:27

kind of getting annoyed by is the

1:28

hypocrisy because Mr. Perry still has an

1:31

outstanding subpoena that was never

1:33

complied with. In addition to that, he

1:35

talked about we need to care for the

1:37

victims. Somebody correct me if I'm

1:39

wrong, and I will yield my time, but I

1:42

don't believe that Mr. Perry ever signed

1:44

off on the discharge petition in the

1:46

first place. So, I don't know if he is

1:48

just doing what he believes is

1:50

politically expedient. But I will tell

1:52

you this, I refuse to be a puppet

1:55

because Democrats tend to be of

1:58

goodwill. We always want to do the right

2:01

thing. We are always trying to follow

2:03

the rules and follow the law.

2:04

Unfortunately, we are living with an

2:07

administration that does not care. We

2:10

just want some type of parody. So for

2:12

instance, we all want to hear from

2:15

President Clinton. If for some reason

2:17

you said we will give you say Pam Bondi

2:22

and then we've got President Clinton

2:24

with it or say maybe President Trump and

2:28

President Clinton, two presidents

2:30

because we know that both presidents

2:31

actually had a relationship with Jeffrey

2:34

Epstein. But what looks political and

2:36

looks like one can get away with

2:38

everything, especially since that's what

2:40

the Supreme Court has stated. That's why

2:43

it looks like it's just gamesmanship.

2:45

You only care about following the rules

2:47

so long as you can invoke those rules on

2:50

what is typically perceived as your

2:52

political enemies. This is why we are

2:55

falling apart in this country. We are

2:57

supposed to be about checks and

2:59

balances. It should not matter whether

3:01

or not you're associated with the

3:02

Democratic Party, the Republican party,

3:04

independent, or whomever, whether you're

3:06

rich, whether you're poor, whether

3:08

you're middle class, whether you're

3:09

black, immigrant, or whatever. But it

3:11

seems like we only have a political

3:13

agenda in this committee. And that's why

3:16

everything goes off the rails. You only

3:19

love law enforcement when they're going

3:20

after black, brown, immigrants, that

3:23

kind of folk, right? But on January 6,

3:26

you didn't care about law enforcement

3:28

because they still don't have their

3:29

plaques up. We continue to do the right

3:32

thing and say yes, apply the rules

3:34

equally across the board and then y'all

3:36

play in our faces and you only apply it

3:39

to one side. I am asking for one

3:42

commitment and then I will yield to the

3:44

ranking member. Mr. Chair, will you

3:46

commit to me as the chair of probably

3:49

the most important committee in this

3:52

Congress, especially in this moment

3:54

where people are concerned about the

3:56

level of corruption that exists within

3:58

this committee? Will you promise me that

4:03

you are good for doing whatever is right

4:06

and following the evidence no matter who

4:09

is on the other side of that evidence?

4:13

Yes. And that is why I subpoenaed the

4:16

estate and

4:18

we had no idea what was Nobody knew.

4:20

Nobody knew what was in the estate

4:22

documents. And I without hesitation

4:24

subpoenaed the estate. We've subpoenaed

4:26

the Department of Justice

4:26

and that's where we got the birthday

4:28

letter. We we we subpoena the state.

4:31

Hold on. Subpoena, right? Okay. We got

4:33

the birthday letter, but we can't just

4:34

get the evidence and then not follow up

4:36

on the evidence that we actually get. I

4:38

will relinquish the rest of my time to

4:40

the chair.