In a move that surprised absolutely no one who has been paying attention to the Epstein saga, the House oversight committee voted unanimously on Tuesday to recommend that the full House hold billionaire financier Leon Black in contempt of Congress. The bipartisan vote was 41-0, proving that when it comes to subpoenas, even Congress can agree on something.

The committee's chair, Representative James Comer, reminded everyone that "subpoenas are not suggestions; they carry the force of law and require full compliance." He added that Black's testimony is crucial because he "maintained a close personal relationship with Epstein for years during the time when Epstein was engaged in sex trafficking." Comer also noted that the committee had warned Black and his attorneys that noncompliance would lead to contempt proceedings. Apparently, that warning was taken as seriously as a suggestion.

Black, for his part, contends the subpoenas are "invalid" and is suing to block them. His lawsuit argues that the subpoenas would "expose women who value their privacy, who have no known or public connection to Epstein, who bargained for confidentiality and have refused to release it, and who have no ability to protect themselves and their privacy before the Committee." Because nothing says "I have nothing to hide" like a lawsuit to avoid producing documents.

The committee issued the subpoenas in June after Black appeared voluntarily for a transcribed interview. That interview ended abruptly when lawmakers from both parties said Black refused to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements. Comer then issued two subpoenas: one demanding all NDAs to which Black is a party, and another requiring him to appear again. In August, Comer threatened contempt if Black didn't fully cooperate. On Tuesday, Comer noted that Black "only produced one NDA to the committee" and skipped his September 3 deposition.

Black's attorneys, in a statement, called the subpoenas "illegitimate, illegal and a textbook abuse of power designed to bully and destroy legal protections of private citizens." They also asked for a postponement of the markup, describing it as a "complete abomination." They said they sent two letters to Comer and Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee, announcing their intent to file a complaint with the Office of Congressional Conduct, alleging that Comer "engaged in what should be viewed as a violation of the Rules of the House of Representatives relating to the deposition."

The statement from Black's attorney also insisted that "Mr Black has repeatedly said that he feels terrible for Epstein's victims and that he regrets ever doing business with Epstein. He never abused a woman. He never was with an underage woman. He never engaged in sex trafficking. He never paid Epstein for access to women. He was never blackmailed by Epstein. Mr Black had no knowledge of any of Epstein's heinous conduct." That's a lot of nevers, which is exactly the kind of thing you say when you're definitely not guilty.

As reported by the New York Times, Black paid Epstein a total of $170m for what he described as tax and estate planning services from 2013 to 2017. Because nothing says "tax planning" like a $170 million invoice from a convicted sex offender.

Before Black's scheduled deposition earlier this month, more than a dozen survivors of Epstein's abuse urged him to comply with congressional subpoenas. They argued that his use "of NDAs underscores why Congress must scrutinize the agreements in his possession and determine whether they shed light on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and others in Epstein's orbit."

The committee now "moves the report to the full House," though the office of House speaker Mike Johnson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the lower chamber would consider the contempt measure. Earlier this year, the committee also moved to hold former president Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton in contempt for initially refusing to testify about Epstein. The Clintons ultimately testified before the House, proving that even former presidents eventually have to show up.

So, to recap: a billionaire who paid a convicted sex offender $170 million for "tax planning" is now facing contempt charges for refusing to testify about NDAs. And the committee that once went after the Clintons is now going after him. Politics makes strange bedfellows, but apparently not as strange as Epstein's client list.