This is how Democrats say Oversight Republicans are trying to quash the Epstein investigation

Members of both parties have for months been hijacking House Oversight Committee business to call votes on subpoenas for high-profile figures in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation — and Democrats say chair James Comer has quietly instituted a new strategy to contain the practice.

The Kentucky Republican’s workaround, they allege, is to hold “roundtables” on various issues within the panel’s jurisdiction rather than hearings. Roundtables are more informal and don’t permit members to offer motions to subpoena witnesses during unrelated committee business, as is allowed during hearings.

Over the past year, some GOP members have joined with Democrats to take advantage of the panel’s subpoena rules. In July, they voted on a surprise motion to release the full Epstein files when top congressional Republicans were dragging their feet. Lawmakers also compelled now-former Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify and were prepared to haul in Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, too, before he said he would appear before the committee voluntarily.

This trend is outlined in a new memo prepared by Oversight Democratic staff, obtained by POLITICO, which claims that by moving to roundtables, Republicans “are avoiding the only forum where Democrats can force votes, demand documents, and hold the majority accountable.”

“We've heard from committee members, both Republicans and Democrats, that they are frustrated,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee, said in an interview Monday. “We have important investigative work, and they want to do this right as we are in the middle of this single, largest government cover-up in the modern history of the Congress. And they want to neuter the Oversight Committee. Give me a break.”

A spokesperson for Oversight Republicans, when reached for comment, did not address a question about whether the uptick in roundtables was intended to prevent subpoena votes. The spokesperson said the panel “continues to hold many hearings” and will host a markup on fraud prevention legislation next week.

“Roundtables provide opportunities to have more substantive and direct conversations with ordinary Americans about issues facing communities across the U.S.,” the spokesperson said.

But the members’ subpoena free-for-all over the past nine months has undoubtedly created a complicated political dynamic for Comer. He has become the de facto leader of the congressional Epstein probe, forcing him to balance calls for transparency with the political fallout of Trump’s onetime relationship with the late, convicted sex offender.

Republicans have noticed the connection between the spike in subpoenas and the subsequent increase in roundtables in lieu of hearings.

Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.), during a March subcommittee roundtable on mental health issues, at one point said, “It’s no secret why we are not doing a formal hearing today. We’d like this hearing to be solely focused on the issue before you, and there is some concern that — both parties are guilty of this — that they make motions in the middle of the hearing and try to bring up unrelated topics.”

Republicans have also gone on subpoena sprees of their own, most notably by forcing the February depositions of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) suggested she wasn’t happy about the new status quo.

While stopping short of criticizing roundtables directly, she said in an interview, “I am a fan of committees that like to do the motions to subpoena.”

The last full-committee hearing convened by House Oversight was in March, on fraud in Minnesota. At that hearing, Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina forced a vote to subpoena Bondi for her handling of the federal Epstein investigation. Five Republicans joined all Democrats present in voting for the subpoena motion, and Bondi’s recent ouster isn’t quelling calls for her to appear before the panel under oath.

Since that time, first lady Melania Trump delivered a public statement denying she was ever victimized by Epstein and urging Congress to hold hearings with true victims — an entreaty that could resonate with Mace and others who are bought into the subpoena exercise, though Comer has indicated he plans on having such hearings.

In the meantime, Oversight subcommittees have held five roundtables this year alone on topics such as artificial intelligence and the Internal Revenue Service. The full committee is scheduled to convene a sixth roundtable Tuesday morning addressing “lawfare against American agriculture.”

That’s compared to the two subcommittee roundtables listed for all of 2025; Comer hosted no full committee roundtables since becoming chair in 2023, the panel’s website shows.

Several Oversight Republicans said in interviews they appreciate the opportunity to examine policy areas without the partisan mudslinging and subpoena distractions that Oversight has become known for this term.

"When you're really trying to get to the bottom of something, it's a much more conducive way of doing it," said Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).

Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) argued during a recent committee hearing on the misuse of federal funds in Minnesota that the subpoena-happy approach taken by his colleagues is undermining the seriousness of the panel’s work.

“Listen to your Uncle Clay, America — you don’t just normally start out with a subpoena introduced as a vote by a member,” Higgins said. “I object to this process that is false and not reflective of the serious investigative work that the Oversight committee performs day in and day out.”

“Very well said,” Comer replied.