Khaberni - Ghislaine Maxwell, the billionaire’s partner accused of committing sexual crimes Jeffrey Epstein– refused to answer questions posed to her by the Oversight and Investigations Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives during a brief closed session yesterday, Monday.
Maxwell was scheduled to be interrogated via video link from the federal prison camp in Texas, where she is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking.
Maxwell's lawyers demanded criminal immunity in exchange for her testimony, and her lawyer assured the Republican committee chairman James Comer that she "will respond to the questions if she gets a presidential pardon from President Donald Trump," which the parliamentary committee refused.
Comer said "As expected, Maxwell invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to answer any questions," describing the incident as "very disappointing."
Comer had announced -on January 21st last January- that this hearing session would be held after it had been postponed for months. However, Maxwell's lawyers considered -in an official letter addressed to the committee- that the session "is merely a political spectacle," warning that it would be a waste of taxpayers' money.
In context, Maxwell’s lawyers -who appealed the sentencing decision issued against her in 2022- warned in a letter to Comer that she would exercise her right not to incriminate herself, which the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees.
While Maxwell faces new scrutiny, where lawmakers are investigating how Epstein was able to commit his crimes over the years or concerning his accomplices, she seeks to overturn her conviction claiming that she was wrongfully convicted.
Interrogating Clintons
In turn, the parliamentary committee -by the end of last month- summoned both former U.S. President Bill Clinton and his wife former Secretary of State Hillary, to hear their separate testimonies regarding their associations with Epstein.
After Comer threatened to charge them with "contempt of Congress," both agreed to appear for questioning later this month. However, they requested last week that the hearings be held publicly, stating they "want to avoid Republicans exploiting their statements."
Comer clarified that Maxwell’s lawyer informed the committee that she does not possess any information that shows presidents Trump or Clinton are guilty in any way.
Meanwhile, Todd Blanch -who is Trump's former personal lawyer- made an unusual move at the end of last July, as he moved to Florida where Maxwell was serving her sentence, to interrogate her for a day and a half.
Shortly thereafter, Maxwell was transferred to a less secure prison in Texas, which caused outrage among the victims and their families.
In the text of this interview published by the Department of Justice in August, Maxwell says she does not believe that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in prison, but she refused to speculate on who might be responsible for her former partner’s death, as she confirmed that he did not keep a "client list" and was not aware of any blackmail involving prominent figures.
Increasing Repercussions
Some Americans and characters from the radical right believe that Epstein was murdered to prevent him from potentially implicating individuals associated with his network in sexually exploiting minors.
Although both former Democratic President Clinton and current Republican President Trump had relationships with Epstein, they affirm they had severed them long before his suicide inside his New York prison in 2019, and that they were unaware of his sexual crimes.
The session involving Maxwell comes amid repercussions stemming from the U.S. Department of Justice's publication of a massive amount of documents related to Epstein's case on January 30th last, which have caused embarrassment to many individuals in the United States and worldwide, where a number of Democrats planned yesterday, Monday, to review unredacted copies of these files in compliance with a law passed by Congress last year.
Todd Blanch -now the second man in the department- clarified that these "pages, which number more than 3 million," do not contain any new elements that could lead to further prosecutions.
Although merely mentioning someone’s name in the file does not necessarily mean they committed any offense, many prominent figures fear what their previous relations with Epstein could bring to light.
