Trump says he's 'allowed' to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell and he never went to Epstein's island
Trump made the remarks, which appear to be some of his most extensive to date on Maxwell, during questioning by reporters on July 28 at his Trump Turnberry golf club in Scotland while meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
A reporter asked Trump whether he would 'ever consider' a pardon for Maxwell, who met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche for two days last week to answer questions about Epstein. Critics have said the meetings with Blanche, Trump's former personal defense lawyer, were part of a White House effort to quell the backlash over the administration's handling of thousands of Epstein-related files in its possession.
'Well, I'm allowed to give her a pardon, but nobody's approached me with it. Nobody's asked me about it,' Trump said. 'It's in the news about that, that aspect of it, but right now, it would be inappropriate to talk about it.'
Trump on July 28 also hit back at a question about whether his attorney general, Pam Bondi, has told him his name is mentioned in the federal government's Epstein files, as the Wall Street Journal reported last week.
'I haven't been overly interested in it,' Trump said. 'It's a hoax that's been built up way beyond proportion.'
Trump then suggested without evidence that former President Joe Biden, then-Vice President Kamala Harris, FBI Director James Comey and Attorney General Merrick Garland could have put fake and incriminating material about him into the files.
'I can say this. Those files were run by the worst scum on Earth. They were run by Comey, they were run by Garland, they were run by Biden and all of the people that actually ran the government, including the autopen' during the Biden administration, Trump said. 'Those files were run for four years by those people. If they had anything (on Trump), I assume they would have released it.'
The president dismissed another Wall Street Journal report that said he drew a picture of a nude woman decades ago as part of a lewd birthday letter for Epstein when they were close friends. It was part of a book compiled by Maxwell that included contributions from other high-profile people including former President Bill Clinton, the Journal reported.
'In one of my very good moments, I turned it down'
Trump in Scotland also categorically denied that he'd ever been to Epstein's Caribbean island where sex trafficking of young girls allegedly occurred.
'I never had the privilege of going to his island, and I did turn it down, but a lot of people in Palm Beach were invited to his island," Trump said. 'In one of my very good moments, I turned it down. I didn't want to go to his island.'
Trump also offered an explanation for why he broke off his friendship with Epstein after the two were close friends for many years.
'I wouldn't talk to Jeffrey Epstein because he did something that was inappropriate. … He stole people that worked for me. I said, 'Don't ever do that again.' He did it again, and I threw him out of the place,' Trump said, in reference to his Mar-a-Lago club and residence.
'Persona non grata,' Trump added.
'We haven't spoken to the president,' Maxwell's lawyer says
Trump's comments three days after Maxwell's lawyer said July 25 that he is hoping Trump pardons the former British socialite for sex trafficking crimes she was convicted of in connection with the disgraced financier, who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on related charges.
David Markus spoke to reporters after his client's second day of interviews with Blanche in Tallahassee, Florida, near where Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence for trafficking a minor to Epstein for sexual abuse.
Asked about Trump's comments earlier in the day about a potential pardon, Markus told reporters, "We haven't spoken to the president or anybody about a pardon just yet.'
But, Markus said, 'The president this morning said he had the power to do so. We hope he exercises that power in the right and just way."
When Trump was asked last week if he had already considered pardoning Maxwell, he said no.
"I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about," Trump told reporters. "I certainly can't talk about pardons now."
Maxwell's meetings with Blanche, the No. 2 official in the Justice Department, came amid calls from the public and a bipartisan group of lawmakers for DOJ to release more information it has in its possession about Epstein's clients.
The public outcry was prompted by announcements by the Justice Department and FBI earlier this month that they won't be releasing their Epstein-related files, despite promising to do so.
Pressure has mounted since then for the administration to reconsider, including from members of Trump's own base who were bitterly disappointed by the announcement.
That was especially the case after the Wall Street Journal report that Bondi notified Trump in May that his name had appeared 'multiple times' in the files. The president sued the newspaper for defamation for reporting that he wrote the birthday message for Epstein.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democrats use obscure law to seek release of Epstein files
Democrats moved Wednesday to force Donald Trump to release files from the investigation into notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, invoking an obscure law to keep up the pressure on an issue that has roiled the US president's administration. The White House has been facing increasingly intense demands to be more transparent about the disgraced financier, who died in federal prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. The president raised further questions about his past relationship with Epstein on Tuesday when he told reporters he fell out with his former friend after the disgraced financier "stole" employees from the spa at his Mar-a-Lago resort. The Justice Department angered Trump supporters earlier this month when it said Epstein had died by suicide and had no "client list" -- rebuffing conspiracy theories about the supposed complicity of high-profile Democrats that leading figures in Trump's MAGA movement had been pushing for years. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the Democrats on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee wrote to the Justice Department asking for the materials under a section of federal law known as the "rule of five." The measure -- introduced a century ago but rarely used -- requires government departments to provide relevant information if any five members of the Senate's chief watchdog panel request it. It is not clear if it could be enforced in court but even if the effort fails it keeps the spotlight on an issue that has upended Trump's summer, dividing Republicans and leading to the early closure of the House of Representatives. Trump has urged his supporters to drop demands for the Epstein files, but Democrats in Congress -- with limited Republican support -- have been seeking a floor vote to force their release. House Oversight Committee Democrats, backed by some Republicans, approved a subpoena last week for the Justice Department to hand over the documents, although the demand has yet to be sent. Lawmakers have also been seeking testimony from Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving 20 years in prison for her role in his crimes. Maxwell's lawyer has said she would speak to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee if granted immunity for her testimony. "The Oversight Committee will respond to Ms. Maxwell's attorney soon, but it will not consider granting congressional immunity for her testimony," a spokesman for the panel said. Democrats have also sought to attach votes on the Epstein files to unrelated bills multiple times, prompting Speaker Mike Johnson to send lawmakers home for the summer a day early last week rather than risk them succeeding. "Donald Trump promised he would release the Epstein files while he was on the campaign trail. He made that promise, and he has yet to do it," Schumer said in a speech Tuesday on the Senate floor. ft/dw
UPI
5 minutes ago
- UPI
The Jeffrey Epstein saga: a new national security threat?
U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey Berman speaks during a news conference about the arrest of American financier Jeffrey Epstein in New York on July 8, 2019, on sex trafficking charges, File photo by Jason Szenes July 30 (UPI) -- The sordid saga of the long dead and convicted predator Jeffrey Epstein not only poses a threat to Donald Trump's presidency, but it also conceivably threatens the credibility of the U.S. political system. Yet, an even more sinister and potentially dangerous threat lurks for the United States and its friends. The two threats are linked, ironically, by Epstein's ghost. Trump's MAGA base is furious that the promised Epstein files have not been released. What's worse is that that Attorney General Pam Bondi apparently informed Trump his name was in the file -- high-test fuel for that blaze. And, now, possibly to deflect attention, Trump and his director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, have accused former President Barack Obama of treason by interfering in the 2016 election with Russian help. In a nation as politically divided as America, any spark could ignite a political firestorm. Beijing, Moscow and others with malicious intent are intensely watching this saga. One conclusion must be that even greater opportunities exist today to interfere in United States and Western politics, not just exploiting this debacle. More importantly, creating new crises that manipulate and fracture political and social cohesion is a formidable danger. The U.K.'s Brexit is an example of manipulation. In the effort to withdraw from the European Union -- the Leave campaign -- former Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his key adviser, Dominic Cummings determined that 1 million or so Britons lacked party affiliation. Then, using social media, this group was targeted with Leave propaganda generated by Cummings. That swung the vote to leave. Cummings was not alone. Substantial evidence exists that Moscow helped influence Brexit and the Leave campaign to weaken the Atlantic Alliance. And Moscow also interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections. Consider the infamous Steele Dossier. Among the allegations, the dossier accused Trump of lewd sexual behavior in Moscow. Suspend reality and imagine Vladimir Putin intervened to help elect Hillary Clinton as president in 2016. Following Cummings' lead, Russian trolls would have filled the Internet with deep-fake photos and invented stories exaggerating or inventing Trump's misconduct. One wonders who might have been elected 45th president. China and Moscow have significant interests in manipulating and fracturing American and Western cohesion. Putin is focused on winning in Ukraine, minimizing sanctions, and in the process, weakening Western solidarity. China is keen on reducing American economic and political influence, as well as annexing Taiwan. It would be negligent to not assume China and Russia are identifying critical weaknesses and potential future fracture points in the United States and elsewhere. In that event where might they focus? National political systems, given the Epstein debacle and national infrastructures, are the two most obvious candidates. Regarding the United States, the Constitution and its system of government based on checks and balances and a division of power among three co-equal branches are the best targets. A super-majority of Americans is highly distrustful and disdainful of government. Exploiting this distrust would not be difficult using the ubiquity of social media and the propensity of Americans to embrace conspiracy theories. Epstein and the Steele Dossier are two examples of how possible future fractures can be invented to sow political, social and economic disruption. The difference is that these effects could be even more destructive. Regarding infrastructure, Israeli and Ukrainian infiltration of two societies with seeming control of their borders and people to launch surprise attacks deep into Iran and Russia underscores how potentially vulnerable military bases and installations are to drones. And even more susceptible to drone attacks are electric generation and power grids, which could cause nationwide disruption. Kinetic attacks on military and civilian infrastructure are fraught with risk. But perceived threats are not. The strategy would be to use a variant of Orson Welles' provocation of massive public and psychological panic in his radio broadcast of War of the Worlds in 1938. Consider future Wellesian scenarios on steroids that threaten catastrophic events or apply fake news reports of spreading epidemics or environmental, financial and other disasters to induce fear and disruption. Concocting new and credible conspiracy theories would be part of this disruptive strategy. None of this is new. The USSR used the Comintern, Cominform and KGB to misinform, disinform, disrupt and provoke. The United States and the U.K. employed similar techniques principally against the Nazis in World War II. However, today is different because social and other media can turn these activities into political weapons of mass disruption. The United States will survive Epstein. Against determined adversaries who intend to create and exploit new political fractures, are the United States and the West ready? That answer is sadly no. Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Best Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
USA Today
5 minutes ago
- USA Today
Texas redistricting: Republicans propose new map, Democrats try to counter
WASHINGTON − An ongoing effort by Republicans to redraw Texas' congressional map ahead of the 2026 midterm elections continues to agitate Democrats across the country, as they search for ways to block or counter an initiative sought by President Donald Trump. The White House has urged Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and state Republicans to advance on a rare mid-decade redistricting, with the hope that shifting boundaries could help the party pick up as many as five seats in next year's race for control of the U.S. House. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, and the GOP are hoping the boost can help them hang onto their razor-thin lower chamber majority during the final two years of Trump's second term and amid the 2028 race for the White House. Texas Democrats balked when Abbott agreed to add redistricting to their to-do list for a 30-day special session that began July 21 in Austin. Now, liberal lawmakers are crying foul with blue state governors threatening tit-for-tat responses and Texas Democrats weighing their own limited protest options as the GOP seeks to make major changes to the critical voter boundary lines that make up the nation's second largest congressional delegation. Here's the latest to know on the controversial redistricting effort happening in the Lone Star State. What could a new map look like? Texas Republicans released their proposed new map on July 30. Ahead of the official release, Punchbowl News first reported that the anticipated redraw would shift district boundaries around Dallas, Houston, Austin and the Rio Grande Valley. There would still be 38 total seats in the Texas delegation under the new maps - leaving it second only to California's 52 seats. But five Texas seats would be redrawn in a bid that Republican envision giving their candidates a leg up with more GOP voters. Democrats who at risk of losing their spot in Congress include Reps. Henry Cuellar, Vicente Gonzalez and Marc Veasey, according to Punchbowl. Democrats charge partisan law violation The rare push to redraw the boundary lines has led Democratic senators to accuse Trump administration officials of breaking a decades-old law limiting executive branch employees from engaging in partisan activities − such as advocating for a state's redistricting in order to benefit their political party. In a letter to the Office of Special Counsel, California Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, along with Rhode Island's Sheldon Whitehouse and Illinois' Dick Durbin, called for an investigation into members of Trump's White House and Justice Department, accusing them of breaking the Hatch Act. "The purpose of this redistricting push is to defeat Democratic Members of Congress and elect Republicans to affect the balance of political party power in the 120th Congress," the senators wrote. "While such goals are appropriate for a political party organization, they are not appropriate for executive branch officials," they added, "especially at the Department of Justice which must take greater steps to ensure it acts with impartiality." The Hatch Act does not apply to the president or vice president. Hakeem Jeffries took a trip to Texas House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, made a trip to Texas July 30, the same day Republicans released their proposed map. While there, Politico reported that Jeffries planned to meet with Rep. Al Green, a Houston lawmaker whose district could be caught in the crosshairs of a major map shake up. "We understand that this is all hands on deck for us in the Democratic Party," Green told Politico. Jeffries has been vocal in his opposition to the redistricting plans, saying in a July 15 press conference, "Texas Republicans are likely going to continue to act like political punks and bend the knee to Donald Trump's extreme agenda." Later, he told CNN, regarding Democrats' response: "Let me just simply say the maps in New York are not as fair as they could be." Redistricting arms race could ensue Jeffries is not the only blue state lawmaker proposing an equal and opposite reaction to Texas. Democrats coast-to-coast have promised a full-scale counterattack, should the Lone Star State move forward with redistricting. "We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people," Rep. Suzan DelBene, a Democrat from Washington and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told reporters at a meeting July 23. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has suggested a redistricting in his state to offset Republican actions. (But unlike in Texas where legislators decide district lines, Newsom does face a major obstacle in the form of a bipartisan redistricting commission, which oversees California's maps.) The response from Democrats has enticed other Republican-controlled states to potentially jump in too. Missouri Republicans are pondering a plan to give their party a geographical leg up, and legislatures in other states such as Florida and New Hampshire have the ability to reevaluate maps like Texas. Texas Democrats eye leaving the state Back in Texas, Democrats have a limited number of options to counter a GOP-controlled state House and Senate. Their primary tool is a controversial and seldom used move to flee the state and break the quorum necessary to proceed in the legislative session. State Democrats last used the measure in 2021 to protest new voting restrictions. After that episode, in which representatives halted operations for 38 days, Republicans approved a $500 a day fine for breaking quorum. The monetary punishment could be enough to give Democrats pause about leaving the state this time. However, the Texas Tribune reported deep-pocked Democratic donors are ready to assist and enable a potential walkout.
