Why is Ghislaine Maxwell so central to Trump-Epstein conspiracy theories?
The request was an attempt to calm the furore after the DOJ announced in June that it would not release any additional documents from the investigation into the high-profile sex trafficker.
Judges asked lawyers for Maxwell, Epstein and their victims to respond to the court by Tuesday regarding their positions on the release of the documents.
As the deadline arrives and judges consider whether to grant the DOJ's request, we look at who Maxwell is and what the case is about.
Who is Ghislaine Maxwell?
Maxwell, the daughter of the late British media baron, Robert Maxwell, is the only Epstein associate who was convicted in connection with his activities.
A former girlfriend of Epstein who later became his business associate, Maxwell was found guilty in December 2021 of helping Epstein sexually abuse teenage girls. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
What was Maxwell found guilty of?
At her trial, four women testified that Maxwell groomed them as teenagers to participate in sexual acts with Epstein and sometimes participated in the abuse.
She was ultimately found guilty on five of six counts: sex trafficking of minors, conspiracy to entice a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, transporting a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors.
Epstein himself faced federal charges related to sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy.
Why are these records being sought now?
Conspiracy theories have long swirled around Epstein's influence and his death. The wealthy financier, whose high-profile friends included current US President Donald Trump and powerful figures on both the liberal and conservative sides of the political spectrum, was found dead in his jail cell in August 2019 before he could stand trial.
While his death was ruled a suicide, many prominent figures in Trump's MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement have long doubted that narrative, insisting – without firm evidence – that Epstein might have been killed to stop him from revealing the identities of some of his clients.
Some government officials appointed by Trump in his second term, including FBI Director Kash Patel, have previously fanned the flames of those conspiracy theories.
In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi said an Epstein client list was 'sitting on my desk right now to review', adding that she was following a directive from Trump to look at the files.
But in July, Bondi's Justice Department issued a memo concluding that there was no client list and the financier had died by suicide – an apparent turnaround that sparked calls for Bondi's resignation from parts of the MAGA movement.
Trump initially tried to dismiss that response from his support base and then tried to portray the criticism his administration was facing as orchestrated by opposition Democrats to distract from his supposed achievements as president.
But the pressure hasn't let up. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had written a birthday note to Epstein in 2003 with the implication that the two knew each other better than the president has let on.
Trump denied writing the letter and has sued the newspaper and the author of the article. But amid the mounting scrutiny, he also ordered Bondi to seek the release of all grand jury testimony in the Epstein case.
Still, scrutiny over his administration's actions has only grown. Last week, Maxwell was moved to an all-women federal prison camp after a meeting with a senior DOJ official.
Who are the people named in the Epstein case?
In 2024, a court unsealed about 950 pages of documents that included the names of several public figures who had known Epstein well. The presence of their names on the documents does not in itself imply any wrongdoing – although some have faced accusations that they sexually exploited women.
Some of the most prominent figures in the documents include:
Prince Andrew: Johanna Sjoberg, who is one of the many women who have accused Epstein of sexual abuse, said in the documents that the British royal put his hand on her breast in Epstein's Manhattan townhouse in 2001. Virginia Giuffre, another of Epstein's accusers, also alleged that Andrew sexually abused her two decades ago when she was 17, an allegation the prince called baseless. Giuffre's lawsuit against Andrew was settled in 2022.
Alan Dershowitz: An unnamed accuser said Epstein 'required' her to have sexual relations with the Harvard University law professor on multiple occasions when she was a minor.
David Copperfield: Sjoberg testified to meeting the American magician at one of Epstein's houses. She added that she observed him to be a friend of Epstein's.
Bill Clinton: While Sjoberg said she did not meet the former US president, she testified that Epstein said to her: 'Clinton likes them young,' apparently referring to girls. Clinton has repeatedly rejected all allegations that he was involved in anything unlawful and has said he had no interactions with Epstein for several years before the financier's arrest.
Trump: Sjoberg mentioned an incident when she flew with Epstein, Giuffre and a few others on a plane from Palm Beach, Florida, in 2001. When the plane was unable to land in New York due to a storm, they had to land in Atlantic City and went to one of Trump's casinos.
Why does it matter whether these trial transcripts are unsealed?
The documents could show the information that the grand jury had before it while deliberating the case. Bondi's DOJ said in a filing that the transcripts contain nothing that is not already known publicly.
It could help Trump and his team beat back accusations from the president's base that they have anything to hide.
Is Maxwell going to testify to Congress?
The House of Representatives Oversight Committee subpoenaed Maxwell in late July, seeking her deposition on Monday. Maxwell's lawyer has said she is willing to testify before Congress.
But the committee has since said it is willing to postpone Maxwell's deposition while the Supreme Court decides whether to take up her appeal against her 2021 conviction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Public opinion is split as US marks 80th anniversary of Hiroshima bombing
On August 6, 1945, the United States became the first and only country in history to carry out a nuclear attack when it dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. While the death toll of the bombing remains a subject of debate, at least 70,000 people were killed, though other figures are nearly twice as high. Three days later, the US dropped another atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki, killing at least 40,000 people. The stunning toll on Japanese civilians at first seemed to have little impact on public opinion in the US, where pollsters found approval for the bombing reached 85 percent in the days afterwards. To this day, US politicians continue to credit the bombing with saving American lives and ending World War II. But as the US marks the 80th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, perceptions have become increasingly mixed. A Pew Research Center poll last month indicated that Americans are split almost evenly into three categories. Nearly a third of respondents believe the use of the bomb was justified. Another third feels it was not. And the rest are uncertain about deciding either way. 'The trendline is that there is a steady decline in the share of Americans who believe these bombings were justified at the time,' Eileen Yam, the director of science and society research at Pew Research Center, told Al Jazeera in a recent phone call. 'This is something Americans have gotten less and less supportive of as time has gone by.' Tumbling approval rates Doubts about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the advent of nuclear weapons in general, did not take long to set in. 'From the beginning, it was understood that this was something different, a weapon that could destroy entire cities,' said Kai Bird, a US author who has written about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. His Pulitzer Prize-winning book, American Prometheus, served as the basis for director Christopher Nolan's 2023 film, Oppenheimer. Bird pointed out that, even in the immediate aftermath of the bombing, some key politicians and public figures denounced it as a war crime. Early critics included physicist Albert Einstein and former President Herbert Hoover, who was quick to speak out against the civilian bloodshed. 'The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul,' Hoover wrote within days of the bombing. Over time, historians have increasingly cast doubt on the most common justification for the atomic attacks: that they played a decisive role in ending World War II. Some academics point out that other factors likely played a larger role in the Japanese decision to surrender, including the Soviet Union's declaration of war against the island nation on August 8. Others have speculated whether the bombings were meant mostly as a demonstration of strength as the US prepared for its confrontation with the Soviet Union in what would become the Cold War. Accounts from Japanese survivors and media reports also played a role in changing public perceptions. John Hersey's 1946 profile of six victims, for instance, took up an entire edition of The New Yorker magazine. It chronicled, in harrowing detail, everything from the crushing power of the blast to the fever, nausea and death brought on by radiation sickness. By 1990, a Pew poll found that a shrinking majority in the US approved of the atomic bomb's use on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Only 53 percent felt it was merited. Rationalising US use of force But even at the close of the 20th century, the legacy of the attacks remained contentious in the US. For the 50th anniversary of the bombing in 1995, the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC, had planned a special exhibit. But it was cancelled amid public furore over sections of the display that explored the experiences of Japanese civilians and the debate about the use of the atomic bomb. US veterans groups argued that the exhibit undermined their sacrifices, even after it underwent extensive revision. 'The exhibit still says in essence that we were the aggressors and the Japanese were the victims,' William Detweiler, a leader at the American Legion, a veterans group, told The Associated Press at the time. Incensed members of Congress opened an investigation, and the museum's director resigned. The exhibit, meanwhile, never opened to the public. All that remained was a display of the Enola Gay, the aeroplane that dropped the first atomic bomb. Erik Baker, a lecturer on the history of science at Harvard University, says that the debate over the atomic bomb often serves as a stand-in for larger questions about the way the US wields power in the world. 'What's at stake is the role of World War II in legitimising the subsequent history of the American empire, right up to the current day,' he told Al Jazeera. Baker explained that the US narrative about its role in the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan — the main 'Axis Powers' in World War II — has been frequently referenced to assert the righteousness of US interventions around the world. 'If it was justifiable for the US to not just go to war but to do 'whatever was necessary' to defeat the Axis powers, by a similar token, there can't be any objection to the US doing what is necessary to defeat the 'bad guys' today,' he added. A resurgence of nuclear anxiety But as the generations that lived through World War II grow older and pass away, cultural shifts are emerging in how different age groups approach US intervention — and use of force — abroad. The scepticism is especially pronounced among young people, large numbers of whom have expressed dissatisfaction with policies such as US support for Israel's war in Gaza. In an April 2024 poll, the Pew Research Center found a dramatic generational divide among Americans over the question of global engagement. Approximately 74 percent of older respondents, aged 65 and up, expressed a strong belief that the US should play an active role on the world stage. But only 33 percent of younger respondents, aged 18 to 35, felt the same way. Last month's Pew poll on the atomic bomb also found stark differences in age. People over the age of 65 were more than twice as likely to believe that the bombings were justified than people between the ages of 18 and 29. Yam, the Pew researcher, said that age was the 'most pronounced factor' in the results, beating out other characteristics, such as party affiliation and veteran status. The 80th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing also coincides with a period of renewed anxiety about nuclear weapons. US President Donald Trump, for instance, repeatedly warned during his re-election campaign in 2024 that the globe was on the precipice of 'World War III'. 'The threat is nuclear weapons,' Trump told a rally in Chesapeake, Virginia. 'That can happen tomorrow.' 'We're at a place where, for the first time in more than three decades, nuclear weapons are back at the forefront of international politics,' said Ankit Panda, a senior fellow in the nuclear policy programme at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a US-based think tank. Panda says that such concerns are linked to geopolitical tensions between different states, pointing to the recent fighting between India and Pakistan in May as one example. The war in Ukraine, meanwhile, has prompted Russia and the US, the world's two biggest nuclear powers, to exchange nuclear-tinged threats. And in June, the US and Israel carried out attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities with the stated aim of setting back the country's ability to develop nuclear weapons. But as the US marks the 80th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombings, advocates hope the shift in public opinion will encourage world leaders to turn away from nuclear sabre-rattling and work towards the elimination of nuclear weapons. Seth Shelden, the United Nations liaison for the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, explained that countries with nuclear weapons argue that their arsenals discourage acts of aggression. But he said those arguments diminish the 'civilisation-ending' dangers of nuclear warfare. 'As long as the nuclear-armed states prioritise nuclear weapons for their own security, they're going to incentivise others to pursue them as well,' he said. 'The question shouldn't be whether nuclear deterrence can work or whether it ever has worked,' he added. 'It should be whether it will work in perpetuity.'
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What Trump's tariffs mean for Shein and Temu shoppers
Are US tariffs about to end the 'add to cart' era? United States President Donald Trump's move to end the de minimis exemption closes a loophole used by Shein, Temu and others to ship duty-free. With costs likely passed to shoppers, consumers are starting to rethink the real price of ultra-cheap clothing.
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
White House says Apple to invest billions in US manufacturing
Apple will pledge $100bn for manufacturing in the United States that will focus on building more jobs across the country, the White House has said. The investment is expected to be announced on Wednesday. White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett said Apple was likely to make an investment announcement on Wednesday, as he discussed the financial pledges made by companies and countries under US President Donald Trump. 'They're moving here in droves. This is trillions and trillions of dollars of commitments for people to build new factories here. In fact, you're likely to see one today from Apple,' Hassett said in an interview with Fox Business Network. Hassett did not elaborate further. The investment will help move key parts of the Cupertino, California-based tech giant's supply chain to the US, Bloomberg News reported, but details on the specifics were sparse. 'Today's announcement with Apple is another win for our manufacturing industry that will simultaneously help reshore the production of critical components to protect America's economic and national security,' Assistant White House Press Secretary Taylor Rogers said in a statement. The president is slated to make an announcement at 4:30pm in Washington (20:30 GMT), according to the White House, which gave no specifics about the deal with the tech giant. The latest investment Apple said in February that it would spend $500bn in US investments in the next four years, which would include a giant factory in Texas for artificial intelligence servers and the addition of about 20,000 research and development jobs across the country. Apple has many times pledged investments in the US in the last decade. In 2018, during Trump's first term, the company pledged $350bn. In 2021, under former President Joe Biden, Apple announced a $430bn investment. The investment comes after Trump warned that he would hit Apple with a 25 percent tariff if it did not move its manufacturing efforts to the US. Analysts have said such a shift is not realistic. Dan Ives at Wedbush Securities said in a note that it would take at least five to 10 years to shift production to the US, meaning consumers would pay as much as $3,500 for an iPhone. 'We believe the concept of Apple producing iPhones in the US is a fairy tale that is not feasible,' Ives had previously said. Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In April, Apple had announced plans to move to India the assembly of the majority of the phones it sells to the US by the end of next year in an effort to reduce its reliance on China as the trade war between the US and China heats up. But Trump's ire has now shifted to India and he has slapped the country with a 50 percent tariff over imports of Russian oil. It's not clear if the latest developments will impact Apple's India plans. Apple's stock surged on the looming US investment announcement. The company, which is traded under the ticker symbol APPL, is up more than 3.8 percent since the market opened as of 10:15am in New York (14:15 GMT) on Wednesday.
