WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton agreed late Monday to testify in a House investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but the Republican leading the probe said an agreement had not yet been finalized.

Rep. James Comer, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, continued to press for criminal contempt of Congress charges against both Clintons Monday evening for defying a congressional subpoena when attorneys for the Clintons emailed staff for the Oversight panel, saying the pair would accept Comer’s demands and “will appear for depositions on mutually agreeable dates.”

The attorneys requested that Comer, a Kentucky Republican, agree not to move forward with the contempt proceedings. Comer, however, said he was not immediately dropping the charges, which would carry the threat of a substantial fine and even incarceration if passed by the House and successfully prosecuted by the Department of Justice.

“We don’t have anything in writing,” Comer told reporters, adding that he was open to accepting the Clintons’ offer but “it depends on what they say.”

The last-minute negotiating came as Republican leaders were advancing the contempt resolution through the House Rules Committee — a final hurdle before it headed to the House floor for a vote. It was potentially a grave moment for Congress, the first time it could hold a former president in contempt and advance the threat of prison time.

As Comer and the Clintons negotiated over the terms of the depositions, the House Rules Committee postponed advancing the contempt of Congress resolutions.

Comer earlier Monday rejected an offer from attorneys for the Clintons to have Bill Clinton conduct a transcribed interview and Hillary Clinton submit a sworn declaration. He insisted that both Clintons sit for sworn depositions before the committee in order to fulfill the panel’s subpoenas.

A letter from the committee to attorneys for the Clintons indicated that they had offered for Bill Clinton to conduct a 4-hour transcribed interview on “matters related to the investigations and prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein” and for Hillary Clinton to submit a sworn declaration.

“The Clintons do not get to dictate the terms of lawful subpoenas,” Comer said.

The former president and secretary of state had resisted the subpoenas for months after the Oversight panel issued subpoenas for their testimony in August as it opened an investigation into Epstein and his associates. Their attorneys had tried to argue against the validity of the subpoena.

However, as Comer threatened to begin contempt of Congress proceedings, the Clintons started negotiating towards a compromise. The Republican-controlled Oversight committee advanced criminal contempt of Congress charges last month. Nine of the committee’s 21 Democrats joined Republicans in support of the charges against Bill Clinton as they argued for full transparency in the Epstein investigation. Three Democrats also supported advancing the charges against Hillary Clinton.

Republicans push Bill Clinton’s involvement

Bill Clinton’s relationship with Epstein has reemerged as a focal point for Republicans amid the push for a reckoning over Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 in a New York jail cell as he faced sex trafficking charges.

Clinton, like a bevy of other high-powered men, had a well-documented relationship with Epstein in the late 1990s and early 2000s. He has not been accused of wrongdoing in his interactions with the late financier.

The Clintons have remained highly critical of Comer’s decision, saying he was bringing politics into the investigation while failing to hold the Trump administration accountable for delays in producing the Department of Justice’s case files on Epstein.

“They negotiated in good faith. You did not,” a spokesperson for the Clintons, Angel Ureña, said in response to Comer’s threats on Monday. “They told you under oath what they know, but you don’t care.”

Still, the prospect of a vote raised the potential for Congress to use one of its most severe punishments against a former president for the first time. Historically, Congress has given deference to former presidents. None has ever been forced to testify before lawmakers, although a few have voluntarily done so.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said earlier Monday that his caucus would have a discussion on the contempt resolutions later in the week but remained noncommittal on whipping votes against them.

Jeffries said he was a “hard no” on contempt and accused Comer of focusing on political retribution rather than investigating the delayed release of case files. Democrats also say the Justice Department has not yet released all the material it has on the late financier.

“They don’t want a serious interview, they want a charade,” Jeffries said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A top Justice Department official played down the possibility of additional criminal charges arising from the Jeffrey Epstein files, saying Sunday that the existence of “horrible photographs” and troubling email correspondence does not “allow us necessarily to prosecute somebody.”

Department officials said over the summer that a review of Epstein-related records did not establish a basis for new criminal investigations, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said that position remains unchanged even as a massive document dump since Friday has focused fresh attention on Epstein’s links to powerful individuals around the world and revived questions about what, if any, knowledge the wealthy financier’s associates had about his crimes.

“There’s a lot of correspondence. There’s a lot of emails. There’s a lot of photographs. There’s a lot of horrible photographs that appear to be taken by Mr. Epstein or people around him,” Blanche said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “But that doesn’t allow us necessarily to prosecute somebody.”

He said victims of Epstein’s sex abuse “want to be made whole,” but that “doesn’t mean we can just create evidence or that we can just kind of come up with a case that isn’t there.”

President Donald Trump’s Justice Department said Friday that it would be releasing more than 3 million pages of documents and more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images under a law intended to reveal most of the material it collected during long-running investigations into Epstein.

The fallout from the release of the files has been swift.

In the United Kingdom, Lord Peter Mandelson announced his resignation from the governing Labour Party on Sunday following further revelations about his relationship with Epstein. He said he was stepping aside to avoid causing “further embarrassment,” even as he denied allegations he had received payments from Epstein two decades ago.

A top official in Slovakia, meanwhile, left his position after photos and emails revealed he had met with Epstein in the years after Epstein was released from jail. And British Prime Minister Keir Starmer suggested that longtime Epstein friend Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, should tell U.S. investigators whatever he knows about Epstein’s activities.

The revelations continue

The files posted to the department’s website included documents involving Epstein’s friendship with Mountbatten-Windsor, along with Epstein’s email correspondence with onetime Trump adviser Steve Bannon, New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch and other prominent contacts with people in political, business and philanthropic circles, such as billionaires Bill Gates and Elon Musk.

The Epstein saga has long fueled public fascination in part because of his past friendships with Trump and former President Bill Clinton. Both men have said they had no knowledge Epstein was abusing underage girls.

Among the records was a spreadsheet created last August that summarized calls made to the FBI’s National Threat Operation Center or to a hotline set up by prosecutors from people claiming to have some knowledge of wrongdoing by Trump. That document included a range of uncorroborated stories involving different celebrities, and somewhat fantastical scenarios, occasionally with notations indicating what follow-up, if any, was done by agents.

Blanche said Sunday that there were a “ton of people” named in the files besides Trump and that the FBI had fielded “hundreds of calls” about prominent individuals where the allegations were “quickly determined to not be credible.”

Some of Epstein’s personal email correspondence contained candid discussions with others about his penchant for paying women for sex, even after he served jail time for soliciting an underage prostitute. Epstein killed himself in a New York jail in August 2019, a month after being indicted on federal sex trafficking charges.

In one 2013 email, a person whose name was blacked out wrote to Epstein about his choice “to surround yourself with these young women in a capacity that bleeds — perhaps, somewhat arbitrarily — from the professional into the personal and back.”

“Though these women are young, they are not too young to know that they are making a very particular choice in taking on this role with you,” the person wrote. “Especially in the aftermath of your trial which, after all, was public and could be — indeed was — interpreted as a powerful man taking advantage of powerless young women, instead of the other way around.”

In a 2009 email, not long after Epstein had finished serving jail time for his Florida sex crime, another woman, whose name was redacted, excoriated him for breaking a promise that they would spend time alone together and try to conceive a baby.

“I find myself having to question every agreement we have made (no prostitutes staying in the house, in our bed, movies, naps, two weeks Alone, baby…),” She wrote. “Your last minute suggestion to spend THIS weekend with prostitutes is just too much for me to handle. I can’t live like this anymore.”

‘This review is over’

Blanche said in a separate appearance on ABC’s “This Week” that though there are a “small number of documents” the Justice Department was waiting for a judge’s approval before it can release, when it comes to the department’s own scouring of documents, “this review is over.”

“We reviewed over six million pieces of paper, thousands of videos, tens of thousands of images,” Blanche said.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that he believed the Justice Department was complying with the law requiring disclosure of the files.

But Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., a co-sponsor of the law, said he did not believe the department had fully complied. He said survivors were upset some of their names had inadvertently come out without redactions.

Blanche said each time the department has learned a victim’s name was not properly redacted, it has moved quickly to fix the problem and that those mistakes account for a tiny fraction of the overall materials.