Alan Dershowitz is dodging a congressional interview on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein after publicly volunteering to testify, exposing a two-tiered system where the elite lawyer class stonewalls accountability while tech executives get hauled in for running a business.
House Oversight Chairman James Comer is now threatening "compulsory action" to force Dershowitz to sit for a September 2 interview, after the Harvard lawyer's counsel refused to provide any explanation for his sudden refusal to appear. While Comer fights to drag answers out of the Epstein orbit, another House committee is eagerly preparing to grill TikTok's U.S. security chief over a legally brokered corporate restructuring.
Dershowitz, who served as Epstein's defense lawyer during the infamously lenient 2008 plea deal for soliciting a minor, sang a very different tune in June. "I’m very proud of my role in representing Epstein... I will personally not invoke privilege. I have nothing to hide," Dershowitz told NewsNation, according to Fox News. But when his July 20 voluntary transcribed interview rolled around, his lawyers told the committee he "cannot now testify" without citing a single legal reason.
Comer wrote that Dershowitz's stonewalling is "unacceptable," warning that the committee will use its compulsory process if he skips the new September deadline. Other high-profile figures tied to Epstein, including Bill Gates and former Obama White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, have already sat for voluntary interviews.
Yet while Congress drags its feet on forcing Dershowitz's hand, the House Select Committee on China is wasting no time summoning TikTok U.S. chief security officer Will Farrell for a September 15 hearing, Reuters reported. Farrell will answer questions about the app's ownership split from its Chinese parent, ByteDance—a deal brokered by President Donald Trump involving Oracle, Silver Lake, and Abu Dhabi-based MGX to comply with a 2024 U.S. law.
The contrast is stark. A Beltway lawyer who helped a sex trafficker get a sweetheart deal hides behind vague legal prohibitions, and Congress sends strongly worded letters. A tech company follows U.S. law to restructure its ownership, and Congress demands a public hearing. The powerful protect the powerful, and the unapproved tech company gets the scrutiny.
Dershowitz says he has nothing to hide, yet he is hiding behind his lawyers. The question is whether Comer will actually use his subpoena power to force him out of the shadows, or if the swamp will close ranks once again.
