To former prosecutors, DOJ interview with Ghislaine Maxwell looked unorthodox
"She's somebody who has been sentenced by a court to 20 years in prison, and she is likely also desperate to get out from under that sentence," said Elizabeth Oyer, a former Justice Department pardon attorney and federal public defender. "It's hard to really believe that the Justice Department would rely on anything that she might have to say."
Oyer suggested that Maxwell was speaking with Blanche "in the hope that she might be able to cut a deal that will benefit her, and that raises fundamental questions about the credibility of any information she could possibly provide."
Maxwell's defense lawyer, David Markus, said after the meeting that she answered everything asked of her "and she didn't hold anything back."
Asked whether Maxwell is seeking a pardon, Markus said, "We haven't spoken to the president or anybody about a pardon just yet," adding, "We hope he exercises that power in the right and just way."
"It's unprecedented for the deputy attorney general to be directly involved in interviewing someone who's been convicted of a crime and may be interested in cooperating to get leniency," one former senior Justice Department official told CBS News on the condition he not be identified. "It strikes me simply as an effort to address a political concern, which is not what the Justice Department does."
Blanche is a senior Justice Department official who previously served as a personal attorney to President Trump. He is also a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York. He announced his decision to travel to Florida to meet with Maxwell after days of public attention swirled around the administration's mixed messaging about the possible release of files on Jeffrey Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 as he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 for her role in the trafficking ring.
Several aspects of the Blanche decision appear to break with longstanding Justice Department practices. Among the most concerning, former officials said, is having Blanche conduct the interviews, rather than the line prosecutors who helped win a conviction in the Maxwell case, and who are continuing to combat her efforts to appeal the outcome.
Adding to the complication is that the prosecutor who led the Maxwell case, Maurene Comey, was fired by the Trump administration a week ago.
One former prosecutor said a key reason for having a line prosecutor handle such an interview is their comprehensive knowledge of both Maxwell and the facts of the case against her. Otherwise, this attorney said, it could be very hard to determine whether Maxwell is being truthful — especially since there were already past questions about her willingness to be fully candid about the misconduct that led to her arrest, and Epstein's.
"The best way to determine that is to ask questions you already know the answers to," the former prosecutor said. "Todd Blanche is in no position to assess the truth if he doesn't know all the facts."
Because Blanche's meetings were occurring behind closed doors, it is unclear if he was accompanied by other Justice Department officials or FBI agents.
The Justice Department has not responded to a request for comment.
Experts told CBS News that meetings of this nature almost always include an FBI agent who can memorialize the discussion in formal interview notes that could later have evidentiary value, if needed.
"If Blanche was meeting with Maxwell alone, that's obscene malpractice," another former federal prosecutor, who had decades of experience, told CBS News. "He can't testify and become a witness, nor can he write a report of their meeting."
Prosecutors are not permitted to write up interview reports and are not sworn law enforcement officers with training to document an interview of this kind.
"It would be a mess," the former official said. "The first rule of a meeting with a witness is to have an agent present."
As another former prosecutor put it: "This is not typical."
"It's not the most effective way" to work if the goal is to gather additional evidence or identify potential targets for future prosecution, this person said.
Mr. Trump has never been accused of misconduct in connection with Epstein's criminal activity, and he has consistently said he cut ties with Epstein before Epstein's first arrest in 2006 for his conduct with underage girls.
Mr. Trump has sought to push past the crush of attention on the topic, even referring to it as "the Jeffrey Epstein hoax."
Blanche explained his decision to meet with Maxwell by saying he would "pursue justice wherever the facts may lead."
"If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say," Blanche said.
Like Oyer, many former federal prosecutors saw the meeting as a political move intended to dampen growing mistrust about the decision not to make public the files connected with Epstein's case. Multiple former prosecutors spoke with CBS News about the matter, but asked not to be identified because they feared retribution against them or their current employers.
Johnson says Jeffrey Epstein files controversy is not a hoax
Idaho murders documents released after Bryan Kohberger is sentenced to life in prison
How Canine Companions service dogs help with tasks; Chase from "Paw Patrol" joins CBS News
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House presses Fed for ‘dramatically lower' rates as meeting looms
The White House on Sunday demanded 'dramatically lower' interest rates as it raised pressure on US Federal Reserve chair Jay Powell for a Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fact check: Trump calls to prosecute Beyoncé based on a nonexistent $11 million payment
President Donald Trump over the weekend called for the prosecution of music superstar Beyoncé – based on something that did not actually happen. Trump claimed in a social media post that Beyoncé broke the law by supposedly getting paid $11 million for her endorsement of Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris during an October 2024 event in Houston. But there is simply no basis for Trump's claim that Beyoncé received an $11 million payment related to the Harris campaign, let alone for the endorsement in particular. Federal campaign spending records show a $165,000 payment from the Harris campaign to Beyoncé's production company, which the campaign listed as a 'campaign event production' expense. A Harris campaign spokesperson told Deadline last year that they didn't pay celebrity endorsers, but were required by law to cover the costs connected to their appearances. Regardless of the merits of this particular $165,000 expenditure, it's far from an $11 million one. Nobody has ever produced any evidence for the claim of an eight-figure endorsement payment to Beyoncé since the claim that it was '$10 million' began spreading last year among Trump supporters on social media. Fact-check websites and PolitiFact looked into the '$10 million' claim during the campaign and did not find any basis for it. The White House did not immediately respond to a CNN request late Saturday for any evidence of Trump's $11 million figure. When Trump previously invoked the baseless figure, during an interview in February, he described his source in the vaguest of terms: 'Somebody just showed me something. They gave her $11 million.' A Harris spokesperson referred CNN on Saturday to a November social media post by Beyoncé's mother Tina Knowles, who called the claim of a $10 million payment a 'lie' and noted it was taken down by Instagram as 'False Information.' 'When In Fact: Beyonce did not receive a penny for speaking at a Presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harrris's (sic) Rally in Houston,' Knowles wrote. A spokesperson for Beyoncé told PolitiFact in November that the claim about a $10 million payment is 'beyond ridiculous.' What Trump wrote Sunday Trump revived the false claim in a social media post published after midnight early Sunday morning in Scotland, where he is visiting. He wrote that he is looking at 'the fact' that Democrats 'admit to paying, probably illegally, Eleven Million Dollars to singer Beyoncé for an ENDORSEMENT.' Democratic officials actually reject the claim of an $11 million payment. The White House did not immediately respond to CNN's request for any evidence of a Democratic admission of such a payment. Trump went on to criticize other payments from the Harris campaign to organizations connected to prominent endorsers. He asserted without evidence that these payments were inaccurately described in spending records. And he wrongly asserted that it is 'TOTALLY ILLEGAL' to pay for political endorsements, though no federal law forbids endorsement payments. Trump concluded: 'Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted! Thank you for your attention to this matter.' Trump has repeatedly called for the prosecution of political opponents. His Saturday post about Harris and celebrity endorsements was an escalation from a post in May, when he said he would call for a 'major investigation' on the subject but did not explicitly mention prosecutions.

Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says he would ‘like' to strike a trade deal with the EU
US President Donald Trump said on Sunday he would 'like' to strike a trade deal with the EU, adding there was a '50-50 chance'.Trump said Sign in to access your portfolio