Ghislaine Maxwell Refuses Congressional Testimony, Demands Presidential Clemency
In a dramatic development before the US House Oversight Committee, Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, invoked her constitutional right against self-incrimination and refused to answer any questions from lawmakers. The 64-year-old former British socialite, currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking, stated through her legal counsel that she would only provide testimony if granted clemency by former President Donald Trump.
Fifth Amendment Invocation and Clemency Demand
During the virtual deposition conducted from the Texas prison where she is incarcerated, Maxwell consistently invoked her Fifth Amendment rights, declining to respond to inquiries about her relationship with Epstein and potential co-conspirators. Committee Chairman James Comer expressed significant disappointment, noting that the panel had numerous questions regarding the crimes committed by Maxwell and Epstein.
"As expected, Ghislaine Maxwell took the Fifth and refused to answer any questions," Comer told reporters following the closed-door session. "This is obviously very disappointing. We had many questions to ask about the crimes she and Epstein committed as well as questions about potential co-conspirators."
Maxwell's attorney, David Markus, presented a clear condition for her cooperation, stating in an official declaration: "If this Committee and the American public truly want to hear the unfiltered truth about what happened, there is a straightforward path. Ms Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump."
Legal Context and Political Dimensions
Maxwell remains the only individual convicted in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, who died in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. Her 2021 conviction centered on recruiting and supplying underage girls to Epstein, whose extensive network included powerful business leaders, politicians, celebrities, and academics.
The deposition occurred against the backdrop of the Justice Department's recent release of millions of documents, photographs, and videos related to the Epstein investigation. While federal authorities have indicated no new prosecutions are expected, several prominent political and business figures have faced public scrutiny or resigned following revelations about their connections to Epstein.
Markus made additional controversial statements during the proceedings, asserting that both former President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton—both of whom had documented associations with Epstein—were "innocent of any wrongdoing." He further claimed that "Ms Maxwell alone can explain why, and the public is entitled to that explanation."
Political Reactions and Additional Subpoenas
Democratic lawmaker Suhas Subramanyam, who attended the deposition, characterized Maxwell's demeanor as "very robotic" and noted her complete lack of remorse. "She was not at all remorseful about pleading the Fifth today," Subramanyam observed. "This is all strategy for her to try to get a pardon from President Trump."
The House Oversight Committee has expanded its investigation by summoning former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify about their interactions with Epstein. The Clintons have requested that their depositions be conducted publicly to prevent what they perceive as potential political manipulation by Republican committee members.
Notably, former President Donald Trump—who maintained a close relationship with Epstein during certain periods—has not been called to testify by the Republican-led committee. Trump initially opposed releasing the Epstein files but ultimately signed legislation mandating their disclosure following pressure from lawmakers within his own party.
This legislative action reflected mounting public pressure regarding long-standing suspicions that influential individuals connected to Epstein might have received preferential treatment or protection from legal consequences. The unfolding investigation continues to reveal the complex intersections of power, privilege, and justice in one of the most high-profile criminal cases of recent decades.
