Epstein grand jury transcript release a distraction, not a revelation, former prosecutors say
Article content
Attorney Sarah Krissoff, an assistant U.S. attorney in Manhattan from 2008 to 2021, called the request in the prosecutions of Epstein and imprisoned British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell 'a distraction.'
Article content
Article content
Article content
'The president is trying to present himself as if he's doing something here and it really is nothing,' Krissoff told The Associated Press in a weekend interview.
Article content
Article content
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche made the request Friday, asking judges to unseal transcripts from grand jury proceedings that resulted in indictments against Epstein and Maxwell, saying, 'transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration.'
Article content
The request came as the administration sought to contain the firestorm that followed its announcement that it would not be releasing additional files from the Epstein probe despite previously promising that it would.
Article content
Epstein killed himself at age 66 in his federal jail cell in August 2019, a month after his arrest on sex trafficking charges, while Maxwell, 63, is serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed after her December 2021 sex trafficking conviction for luring girls to be sexually abused by Epstein.
Article content
Article content
Article content
Krissoff and Joshua Naftalis, a Manhattan federal prosecutor for 11 years before entering private practice in 2023, said grand jury presentations are purposely brief.
Article content
Article content
Naftalis said Southern District prosecutors present just enough to a grand jury to get an indictment but 'it's not going to be everything the FBI and investigators have figured out about Maxwell and Epstein.'
Article content
'People want the entire file from however long. That's just not what this is,' he said, estimating that the transcripts, at most, probably amount to a few hundred pages.
Article content
'It's not going to be much,' Krissoff said, estimating the length at as little as 60 pages, 'because the Southern District of New York's practice is to put as little information as possible into the grand jury.'
Article content
'They basically spoon-feed the indictment to the grand jury. That's what we're going to see,' she said. 'I just think it's not going to be that interesting. … I don't think it's going to be anything new.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Financial crime loopholes in U.S. stablecoin law offer a cautionary tale for Canada
Hoopla over America's new stablecoin law is fuelling fears that Canada is missing out on the latest cryptocurrency boom. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act, or the Genius Act, was signed into law by President Donald Trump last week, creating a regulatory framework for stablecoins pegged to the U.S. dollar. (Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies that have values tied to another form of currency or financial asset to maintain steady prices.) A related bill, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, advanced to the U.S. Senate. The Clarity Act for short, it proposes to divvy up regulatory oversight for virtual assets between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The crypto irony: Trump's new laws for stablecoins will only reinforce U.S. dollar dominance At first blush, the U.S. government's 'crypto week' was a resounding success because those two pieces of legislation are helping digital assets go mainstream south of the border. But anti-corruption groups, including Transparency International U.S., are warning the Genius Act and the Clarity Act include loopholes for money laundering and sanctions evasion, a forewarning for other countries, including Canada, as they vie for leadership in the US$5.7-billion global digital asset economy. 'To other countries, I would encourage lawmakers to actually take a risk-based approach and take into consideration that we have a global economy,' said Gary Kalman, executive director of Transparency International U.S., in an interview on Thursday. As Mr. Kalman points out, crypto is not a typical brick-and-mortar business and it carries a higher risk for illicit finance. That's because it is relatively easy to set up offshore crypto-issuing companies that sell into other countries without having a physical presence in those jurisdictions, he said. 'That is the type of risk analysis we would urge other countries to consider when moving forward with legislation,' he added. Transparency International U.S., the Free Russia Foundation, the Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition and the Hudson Institute's Kleptocracy Initiative offer a sobering analysis of America's signature stablecoin legislation. 'The risks are real and urgent. Iran, North Korea and Russia have turned to cryptocurrency and stablecoins to bypass international sanctions and move illicit funds,' the anti-corruption groups state in a joint letter to top U.S. congressional leaders, including the Speaker of the House of Representatives Mike Johnson. 'If the U.S. does not close the loopholes that can be exploited by these actors, the financial architecture advanced in GENIUS and CLARITY will further accelerate the growth of opaque and lawless financial networks.' Specifically, the groups outlined four key problems with the two pieces of legislation. The first involves the Genius Act's differential treatment of stablecoin issuers registered in the United States versus those based in foreign or offshore jurisdictions. Under the law, foreign stablecoin issuers, such as Tether, the world's largest stablecoin, are able to participate in U.S. markets via decentralized exchanges and peer-to-peer transfers even if they don't register, the groups say. The U.S. Treasury, meanwhile, has the latitude to provide exemptions to foreign issuers, allowing them to participate in centralized exchanges after the expiration of a three-year grace period. As a result, foreign issuers will not receive proper regulatory oversight. A second problem involves the Genius Act's failure to impose anti-money-laundering (AML) and anti-terrorist-financing obligations on secondary-market participants, including digital asset exchanges, custodians and brokers. 'The result is a bill that affirms the status quo while ignoring how kleptocrats, terrorists and other criminal actors access and move digital assets,' states the letter. 'Further, GENIUS weakens compliance by stating that issuers must follow AML rules, only 'as applicable' – a vague and unenforceable standard.' A third weakness involves glaring gaps in sanctions enforcement. Notably, the Genius Act does not apply to anonymizing technologies, such as mixers, and other intermediaries that obscure funding sources, the groups say. The Clarity Act, meanwhile, overlooks sanctions evasion entirely even though digital assets have become a favoured tool of criminals to sidestep economic restrictions. Lastly, exemptions for decentralized services and platforms under the Genius Act, coupled with the Clarity Act's failure to require ownership disclosures from all market participants, will frustrate enforcement of those laws, according to the groups. We won't let Americans buy our biggest bank. Why let them buy our biggest crypto firm? Canada, meanwhile, is facing mounting calls to create its own comprehensive national strategy for crypto, including stablecoins. 'Stablecoins are reshaping global finance, but Canada is still on the sidelines,' states a new report by Western University's Ivey Business School. 'While other countries use them to strengthen payments and attract investment, Canada lacks a homegrown alternative tied to its currency.' The report rightly urges Canada to create a 'unified regulatory framework' for digital assets, noting oversight is currently split among regulators including the Canada Revenue Agency, the Canadian Securities Administrators, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada and provincial agencies. Creating a national regulatory framework should indeed be a priority because businesses need a consistent set of rules. But in doing so, the federal government must draw lessons from America's legislative missteps on financial crime. Canada is already being marketed abroad as a secrecy jurisdiction that can be readily exploited by kleptocrats, money launderers, sanctions evaders and other crooks. In the rush to catch up on crypto, Ottawa cannot afford to replicate Washington's mistakes.
National Post
3 hours ago
- National Post
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. Article content While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Article content Article content Article content Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Article content Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Article content Article content Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Article content The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Article content The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. Article content Article content The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. Article content George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses.
CTV News
3 hours ago
- CTV News
U.S. says tariff deadline of Aug 1 is firm, no extensions
U.S. President Donald Trump listens to members of the media after he arrived at Prestwick Airport in Ayrshire, Scotland, Friday, July 25, 2025.(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin) WASHINGTON — The U.S. deadline of August 1 for imposing tariffs on its trading partners is firm and there will be no extensions, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday. 'So no extensions, no more grace periods. August 1, the tariffs are set. They'll go into place. Customs will start collecting the money, and off we go,' Lutnick told 'Fox News Sunday.' After the levies kick in, U.S. President Donald Trump -- who was negotiating Sunday in Scotland with European Union officials -- is still willing to keep talking, Lutnick said. Of the Europeans, Lutnick said, 'You know they're hoping they make a deal, and it's up to President Trump, who's the leader of this negotiating table. We set the table.' So far five countries have struck deals with the Trump administration ahead of the Friday deadline as it tries to overhaul the global system of largely free trade by slapping tariffs on countries that the United States deems as engaging in unfair practices. These five are Britain, Vietnam, Indonesia the Philippines, and Japan. The levies they accepted are often higher than the new base rate of 10 percent that the United States has applied to most countries since April. But they are far below the levels the Trump administration threatened to impose if no deal were reached. AFP
