Ghislaine Maxwell's immunity request denied by House Oversight Committee
The former accomplice and girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein was hit with a subpoena last week to testify before Congress – from prison – amid a probe from lawmakers seeking to uncover more information about the disgraced financier's sex crimes. The subpoenaed deposition was scheduled for August 11.
On Tuesday, Maxwell's attorneys sent a letter to Chairman Comer indicating she would invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and stay silent in front of Congress, unless the immunity request was agreed upon. In Maxwell's immunity request, her attorney's offer clemency as a possible solution as well, indicating Maxwell "would be willing—and eager—to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress" if it were granted to her.
"The Oversight Committee will respond to Ms. Maxwell's attorney soon, but it will not consider granting congressional immunity for her testimony," a spokesperson told Fox News Digital after receiving the letter.
In their letter to Comer, Maxwell's attorneys said their client's testimony could pose both legal and security risks for their client. Maxwell's legal team also requested questions their client would be asked in advance of her testimony in front of Congress, but the Oversight spokesperson did not directly speak to that request.
Another request from Maxwell's attorneys was that the deposition date be delayed until after the Supreme Court rules on Maxwell's latest bid for an appeal. On Monday, Maxwell's attorneys asked the High Court to hear their client's appeal in her 2021 sex trafficking conviction, arguing the federal government "has an obligation to honor" a 2007 non-prosecution agreement that they believe should shield her from criminal charges.
"Ms. Maxwell should never have been charged in the first place. In 2008, the United States government promised, in writing, that she would not be prosecuted," Maxwell's attorneys wrote in their correspondence to Comer, adding she did not receive a fair trial when convicted in the Southern District of New York for sex trafficking in 2021. "[The government] broke that promise only after Mr. Epstein died in 2019—at which point Ms. Maxwell became a convenient scapegoat."
According to the attorneys, during Maxwell's case in the Southern District of New York prosecutors "wrongfully convinced the trial judge to unfairly limit Ms. Maxwell from presenting her defense, and at least one juror lied about a material fact during voir dire in order to serve on the jury."
Fox News Digital reached out to Maxwell's attorney, David Oscar Markus, for comment, but did not immediately receive a response.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's How Much Retirees Would Save If Social Security Taxes Actually Get Eliminated
President Trump has often declared that seniors should not pay taxes on Social Security benefits. While it may just seem like another former campaign promise, the White House moved forward with some big tax policy changes. Getting rid of Social Security taxes sounds great for those who depend on these benefits, but how would this work in the big picture? Good To Know: Up Next: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) added fuel to the speculation. However, even a wage-based blessing for retirees on fixed incomes — one of the country's biggest and most reliable voting groups — can come with implications. So how much would seniors benefit if Trump were to actually succeed in eliminating tax on Social Security benefits? Let's find out. How Trump's Bill Impacts Social Security After the approval by a Republican-led Congress, Trump signed a bill that includes a tax deduction for seniors but NOT the elimination of taxes on Social Security benefits. Instead of eliminating the tax, the bill introduced a temporary $6,000 tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and older. It will only be effective from 2026 through 2028, though, and has income-based eligibility limits. The bill is also an umbrella under which many components of Trump's overall tax plan can be found, such as the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act, as well as requiring retirees who exceed income thresholds to pay federal income tax on up to 85% of their Social Security benefits. However, it turns out that what appears to be a proposal to help the most vulnerable populations with their tax returns would actually benefit wealthy retirees the most. And, the cost in lost revenue could threaten the program's future and lead to reduced benefits for all. Find Out: It's also good to note that eliminating income tax on Social Security benefits could increase the federal deficit by up to $1.6 trillion over 10 years. If Trump's promise to end taxes on Social Security is passed altogether (again, to be clear, the OBBBA does not eliminate Social Security taxes), households earning between $32,000 and $60,000 annually would get an average tax cut of about $90. That means that less than 1% of the lowest-earning households (those making about $33,000 or less annually) would get a tax cut, 28% of middle-income households would get a tax cut, and roughly 20% of households earning more than $5 million a year would get a tax cut. According to the Tax Policy Center, 'The biggest winners would be those in the top 0.1% of income, who make nearly $5 million or more. They'd get an average tax cut of nearly $2,500 in 2025.' How Social Security Benefits Are Taxed About 68 million Americans collect Social Security benefits. As of 2025, the average monthly Social Security retirement benefit was estimated at around $1,999. Most recipients owe nothing to the IRS. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), 'About 40% of people who get Social Security must pay federal income taxes on their benefits.' Kiplinger pointed out that the IRS taxes not just retirement benefits, but all payments pulled from the program's trusts, including disability and survivor benefits, although Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments are exempt. Additionally, some states tax Social Security income too, but the president does not have the power to alter that. The federal government taxes or doesn't tax benefits based on the recipient's combined income, which includes their monthly Social Security checks. For single filers: Those earning between $25,000 and $34,000 in combined income can be taxed on up to 50% of their benefits. Those earning more than $34,000 can be taxed on up to 85% of their benefits. For couples filing jointly: Those earning between $32,000 and $44,000 can be taxed on up to 50% of their benefits. Those earning more than $44,000 can be taxed on up to 85% of their benefits. Final Take To GO: This Could Hurt More Than Help The bottom line is that the majority of recipients wouldn't get a tax break, and for most who would, the savings would be negligible. If Social Security taxes are eliminated, it's not likely you would see much of a difference in your tax return or your budget overall if you're a lower to average income earner. In other words, 60% of recipients who the IRS doesn't tax keep their entire payments because they don't have enough income to qualify for taxation. For them, Trump's plan wouldn't leave them with a single extra dollar. The rich, however, would reap the lion's share of the gains (as per usual, some might say). This is because Trump's plan to repeal Social Security taxes would lead to about 20% of the households earning more than $5 million a year getting a tax cut. While every dollar counts, $90 in savings pales in comparison to the projected cost of $1.6 trillion in lost revenue over the next decade, which would drive Social Security and Medicare hospital insurance into insolvency faster, resulting in sharply reduced benefits for tens of millions of recipients. Andrew Lisa contributed to the reporting for this article. More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 3 Reasons Retired Boomers Shouldn't Give Their Kids a Living Inheritance (And 2 Reasons They Should) Mark Cuban Says Trump's Executive Order To Lower Medication Costs Has a 'Real Shot' -- Here's Why This article originally appeared on Here's How Much Retirees Would Save If Social Security Taxes Actually Get Eliminated
Wall Street Journal
12 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Trump Sees Emergencies Everywhere. Judges Are Considering Whether to Rein Him In.
WASHINGTON—Across the U.S. landscape, Donald Trump sees one emergency after another, and that is posing a host of challenges for the federal courts. Since beginning his second term, Trump has declared in dozens of presidential documents that the U.S. faces emergencies requiring him to take extraordinary actions that circumvent normal government processes. That gambit offers him a path of unilateral action instead of the uncertain route of enacting legislation through Congress.
Fox News
12 minutes ago
- Fox News
Marjorie Taylor Greene rules out 2026 bid for top Georgia political post: 'We all know I would win'
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., declared in a Tuesday post on X that she will not pursue the Peach State's governorship in 2026 — but she left the door wide open to potentially run for the job at some point in the future. But while the congresswoman ruled out a 2026 gubernatorial bid, she asserted that if she ran, she would win. "I am humbled and grateful by the massive statewide support that I have to run for Governor, and if I wanted to run we all know I would win. It's not even debatable. And only because of that massive statewide support is why I ever considered it in the first place," Greene wrote in a portion of her lengthy post. "And one day, I might just run without the blessing from the good 'ole boys club or the out of state consulting leaches or even without the blessing of my favorite President. One day, I might just run purely out of the blessing of the wonderful people of Georgia, my family and friends, but it won't be in 2026," she noted. Greene, who has served in the U.S. House of Representatives since early 2021, announced earlier this year that she would not be running for the U.S. Senate in 2026. The GOP could potentially win back one of the state's U.S. Senate seats next year as incumbent Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff seeks re-election. "So no, Jon Ossoff isn't the real problem. He's just a vote. A pawn. No different than the Uniparty Republicans who skip key votes to attend fundraisers and let our agenda fail," Greene explained on X in May. "Someone once said, 'The Senate is where good ideas go to die.' They were right. That's why I'm not running." GOP Reps. Buddy Carter and Mike Collins have both mounted Georgia U.S. Senate bids.
