Comer Throws Alan Dershowitz’s ‘Nothing To Hide’ Boast Back At Him With Subpoena Threat

For months, Alan Dershowitz could not stop barking into his computer’s Zoom camera to anyone willing to listen how badly he wanted to testify about Jeffrey Epstein. Under oath! Videotaped! Open to the public! Over the course of multiple press interviews, he announced that he was “happy to testify,” that he “remember[ed] everything,” and that he had, above all, “nothing to hide.” In a June appearance with Greta Van Susteren, he expressed how “thrilled” he would be to testify after the host explained that she’d just texted House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer about setting up a date for the professor. And he went ahead and scheduled that interview for this past Monday.

Days before his scheduled testimony, he told the Committee he wouldn’t be showing up. He gave no reason.

Comer is, for lack of a better term, pissed about this. In a letter fired off yesterday, the Chair meticulously recounts some of the many, many times Dershowitz claimed he would gladly tell the world everything he knew as soon as he had a platform to testify. As Comer writes:

Of course, the Committee’s request followed several statements by you to the press in which you expressed your desire to testify “about everything” in a “videotaped, under oath and open to the public” interview. In response to the Committee’s request, you stated publicly that you were “happy to appear.” The Committee understood these repeated declarations as your willingness to testify before the Committee in a transcribed interview.

I’m reading “understood these repeated declarations as your willingness to testify” in the same voice Bob Newhart used in his classic Driving Instructor routine when he lets out a terrified yelp before explaining, “Well, that was partially my fault, you see, because you were in the left hand lane and you were signaling left, and I just more or less assumed you were going to turn left.” But like the novice driver from that routine, Dershowitz expressing a willingness to testify and then scheduling testimony was not, as it turned out, indicative of his future plans.

Scheduling conflicts happen… but usually the canceling party tries to at least make up an excuse:

Your counsel failed to provide a reason for your refusal to testify. When Committee staff followed up with your counsel via email on July 15 and 17, 2026, your counsel again failed to provide an explanation for your refusal to attend your transcribed interview. This is unacceptable.

After citing Dershowitz’s June 10 NewsNation appearance where the professor declared he had “nothing to hide,” Comer writes, “Nonetheless, you now seemingly wish to hide from this Committee’s investigation.”

While Dershowitz had not explained himself to Comer or Oversight staff, he did tell ABC News on Friday that “Dershowitz said his lawyers ‘instructed him that he is not permitted to testify at this time.’” ABC put that in quotation marks so… Dershowitz referred to himself in the third person? I guess? In any event, there’s no further explanation out there at this time.

It’s also unclear how this vague prohibition arose at the last minute. Over the months of appearances and the process of scheduling the actual interview, a Harvard law professor and his team of lawyers couldn’t identify a problem until a couple days before the appearance? A month ago, Dershowitz volunteered that he “will personally not invoke privilege.” So what’s the deal?

Last week, I floated that Dershowitz might have decided he’d rather not appear voluntarily and preferred Comer issue a subpoena. It would be a flimsy excuse, since Dershowitz had every opportunity to contact Comer beforehand and ask for a formal subpoena as opposed to ghosting on his scheduled deposition.

Well, if that’s his concern: GOOD NEWS!

Accordingly, we reiterate our request that you testify at an in-person, videotaped transcribed interview on September 2, 2026. If you fail to adhere to this request, the Committee will explore all available tools at its disposal, including the use of the compulsory process.

Comer is not shy about subpoenas. He’s already subpoenaed Pam Bondi and both Clintons in this investigation.

In an all-timer of “be careful what you wish for.” Or “FAFO.”

Earlier: Remember When Alan Dershowitz Begged To Testify About Epstein? Well, Now He’s Not Showing Up

The post Comer Throws Alan Dershowitz’s ‘Nothing To Hide’ Boast Back At Him With Subpoena Threat appeared first on Above the Law.