It has been 9,133 days since William Jefferson Clinton was president.
In that time, the World Trade Center has fallen. The first mass-produced product with WiFi, Apple’s iBook, was less than two years old at the time. Broadband internet was rare outside of college campuses. Real smartphones were years away. Barack Obama was an Illinois state senator who had, just four years prior, transitioned from being a “community organizer.”
George W. Bush was replacing Clinton, thanks in part to third-party candidates who took away votes from Democratic nominee Al Gore. One of them wasn’t businessman Donald Trump, who had considered a Reform Party run but decided against it. Liberals and conservatives alike, of course, thought that the possibility itself was silly, and thank heavens it didn’t have to be entertained anymore.
(“A ludicrous figure,” wrote the now-late polemicist Christopher Hitchens, still then a staunch member of the left, of Trump’s abortive run. “[B]ut at least he’s worked out how to cover 90 percent of his skull with 30 percent of his hair.”)
In other words, ol’ Slick Willie hasn’t been president for a very long time. And it’s been that way for a while. In fact, when the disgraced financier and serial sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — whose “Lolita Express” jet Clinton used on a philanthropic tour of Africa and Asia after his presidency — became the late disgraced financier and serial sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, it had been 6,776 days since Clinton had held office.
California Democratic Rep. Dave Min, on Wednesday — the 9,132nd day since Clinton was president — said he wasn’t voting for advancing a contempt of Congress measure against Bill Clinton for not answering a House Oversight Committee subpoena related to what he knew about Epstein. His reasoning?
“What we’re proposing here is a very serious matter: bringing criminal charges against a former president of the United States,” Min said.
It has been, and will remain for the foreseeable future, zero days since a former president of the United States who had criminal charges levied against him was and is president. And hit with more spurious charges, at that!
So, for those of you who missed it, the House Oversight Committee voted to advance contempt of Congress resolutions for Bill and Hillary Clinton by 34-9 and 28-15 votes, respectively, according to Fox News. The Clintons were subpoenaed to testify before the committee earlier this month, but blew it off and called the actions “invalid and legally unenforceable.”
The Clintons instead gave a counter-offer, a New York interview with House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, if there was no official transcript. Comer, not wrongly, called the offer “insulting.”
“The committee does not take this action lightly. Subpoenas are not mere suggestions,” Comer said. “[Subpoenas] carry the force of law and require compliance. Former President Clinton and Secretary Clinton were legally required to appear for depositions before this committee.”
Min believed that the power of subpoena must have been worth something, because while he wasn’t among the Democrats who joined the Republicans in voting for advancing the contempt measure for Bill Clinton, he merely voted “present” — a polite Congressional term for a vote meaning “chicken.”
But before he decided to bail on his ethical obligations, he left us this gem of a defense of not advancing the measure:
“And again, while I think that the Clintons should be here, what we’re proposing here is a very serious matter: bringing criminal charges against a former president of the United States,” he said.
“And I listened to you very carefully, Chair Comer, for the last hour. I heard you describe them as delaying, dragging their feet, negotiating for five months. But I never once heard you say that they just outright refused to comply with the subpoena. Dragging your feet is not the same as noncompliance. It’s not the same as contempt.”
CA Dem Rep Dave Min defends the Clintons during contempt hearing; says that “bringing criminal charges against a former president” would be a very serious matter.
Right, Congressman. Doing something like that would be unheard of and totally crazy. pic.twitter.com/NLpNS6PCPV
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) January 21, 2026
Let’s forget the fact that this is not the dragging of feet. A non-disclosure agreement with a dim, chatty porn star is not a campaign finance violation, especially if it’s passed the statute of limitations. Challenging a dubious vote count process in Georgia is not a RICO violation.
Guess what we just spent four years charging a former president with? And he hadn’t been out of office for even a thousand days before these pseudo-investigations began. You want to know why? Because he could be a candidate again!
But a former president commits arrant and flagrant contempt of Congress by ignoring a subpoena after having spent the better part of 10,000 days not only out of the presidency, but ineligible for it. Dave Min thinks this is bad precedent … as his entire party would gladly indict President Trump for the kidnappings and murders of Jimmy Hoffa, Judge Crater, and the Lindbergh kid if sitting presidents were somehow allowed to be charged with crimes.
Nine-thousand, one-hundred and thirty-three days, Rep. Min, since Clinton was president. Zero since Trump has been. Read the room, or at least read Wikipedia — another thing, by the way, that didn’t exist when Bill Clinton last strode the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. as anything but a guest. Give us a break.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
