Ghislaine Maxwell seeks immunity or clemency for testimony to Congress: What to know
Convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell wants immunity and an advance look at the questions if Congress expects her to publicly testify about her ex-boyfriend, Jeffrey Epstein. She also wants a pardon.
Maxwell's defense lawyer, David Markus, laid out his client's conditions in a July 29 letter to Rep. James Comer, R-Kentucky, who issued a subpoena for Maxwell's testimony last week. Comer, who heads the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has said he wants to hear from Maxwell as he looks at how the federal government enforces sex-trafficking laws and what happened in the cases against her and Epstein.
Epstein died in jail in 2019 while awaiting a federal sex-trafficking trial. He was previously convicted in 2008 of two Florida prostitution offenses, in what many consider a sweetheart plea deal.
The disgraced financier was sentenced to just 18 months behind bars, despite facing serious allegations of sex crimes involving minors. About a decade later, New York federal prosecutors brought a sex-trafficking indictment against him.
Last week, Maxwell spoke with Justice Department officials over the course of two days as the Trump administration seeks to quell public outrage over its early July announcement that it didn't find evidence in its Epstein-related files to justify investigating anyone else, and that it won't be releasing the files.
Here's the latest on what Maxwell wants if she's going to talk to Congress:
Maxwell demands immunity for testimony
Maxwell will only speak publicly to Congress if she is first granted full immunity for her testimony, according to Markus's letter. He said the immunity will shield her from getting into more criminal trouble for coming forward.
"Ms. Maxwell cannot risk further criminal exposure in a politically charged environment without formal immunity," according to the letter.
That arrangement would be similar to the reported conditions of Maxwell's interview with the Justice Department. It granted her a limited form of immunity in exchange for her participation, according to ABC News and NBC News.
Testifying from outside prison?
Maxwell also insisted that she won't talk to Congress from behind bars, even though Comer arranged for her to be deposed at a federal prison in Tallahassee, Florida.
A prison setting wouldn't be conducive to getting "truthful and complete testimony" from Maxwell, according to Markus' letter.
"The potential for leaks from such a setting creates real security risks and undermines the integrity of the process," Markus added.
An advance look at questions?
Congress should also give Maxwell its questions in advance, Markus insisted. That arrangement, he said, is "essential" for allowing her to meaningfully prepare, and will also let her find documents to corroborate her testimony.
Markus suggested the arrangement is especially important because she has been incarcerated for several years, rendering surprise questions unproductive.
"Years after the original events and well beyond the criminal trial, this process cannot become a game of cat-and-mouse," Markus wrote in the letter.
Waiting for Supreme Court to address appeal
Maxwell currently has an appeal pending at the U.S. Supreme Court. According to Markus' letter, she wants to wait to talk to Congress until after the high court resolves that appeal, and also until after a separate court appeal she is planning has run its course.
"Proceeding before those matters are resolved would unfairly prejudice her if she is successful," Markus wrote.
Maxwell is arguing in her Supreme Court appeal that Epstein's 2008 plea deal should have shielded her from being charged.
The agreement included a provision protecting potential co-conspirators from criminal charges. However, the government says the prosecution against Maxwell in the Southern District of New York was permitted because the deal only applied to prosecutions in the Southern District of Florida.
The Supreme Court hasn't yet decided whether to hear Maxwell's appeal.
If that doesn't work? Maxwell would also accept a pardon
If those conditions don't work, Markus said there's an "alternative" Maxwell would be happy with: If President Donald Trump grants Maxwell clemency, "she would be willing — and eager — to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress in Washington, D.C."
The president has the power to fully pardon Maxwell as well as to commute her 20-year prison sentence. Trump noted that power during questioning by reporters on July 28 in Scotland, but added it would be 'inappropriate' to discuss it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
India accuses EU, US of double standard over Russian trade
NEW DELHI (Reuters) -India has sharply criticised the United States and the European Union, saying it is being unfairly singled out by them over its Russian oil purchases when they both trade extensively with Moscow despite the war in Ukraine. India's criticism followed a renewed threat by U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday to raise tariffs on goods from India over its Russian oil purchases, deepening the trade rift between the two countries. In a rare show of unity, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the main opposition Congress on Tuesday condemned Trump's repeated criticism of New Delhi. India's Foreign Ministry said in a statement issued late on Monday that "it is revealing that the very nations criticising India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia". "It is unjustified to single out India," the ministry said. It said the EU conducted 67.5 billion euros ($78.02 billion) in trade with Russia in 2024, including record imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) reaching 16.5 million metric tons. The United States, the statement said, continues to import Russian uranium hexafluoride for use in its nuclear power industry, palladium, fertilisers and chemicals. It did not give a source for the export information. The U.S. embassy and the EU's delegation in New Delhi did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Both the United States and EU have sharply scaled back their trade ties with Russia since it launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. In 2021, Russia was the EU's fifth-largest trading partner, with goods exchange worth 258 billion euros, according to the EU executive European Commission. SUDDEN RIFT The sudden rift between India and the U.S. has been deepening since July 31, when Trump announced a 25% tariff on Indian goods being shipped to the U.S. and for the first time threatened unspecified penalties for buying Russian oil. India is one of the biggest buyers of crude from Russia, importing about 1.75 million barrels per day from January to June this year, up 1% from a year ago. Indian refiner Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil which is majority owned by Russian entities including oil major Rosneft, was subjected to European Union sanctions targeting Russia's oil and energy industry in July. India has said it does not support "unilateral sanctions" by the EU. Trade experts say Trump's tariff could badly hurt India's economy. Ajay Srivastava of the New Delhi-based Global Trade Research Initiative said he expected Indian goods exports to the U.S. to fall 30% in the current fiscal year ending March 31, to $60.6 billion from $86.5 billion in the 2025 fiscal year. India's equity benchmarks fell after Trump's renewed threat of harsh tariffs on goods from India. Manish Tewari, a member of parliament and Congress leader, said Trump's "disparaging remarks hurt the dignity and self-respect of Indians". "The time has come to call out this constant bullying and hectoring," he added. BJP Vice President Baijayant Jay Panda quoted Henry Kissinger - the most powerful U.S. diplomat of the Cold War era - in a post on X: "To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal."
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Poor People Are America's Swing Voters
In January, while the world waited to see what a second Donald Trump Presidency would look like, photos from the Inauguration offered a snapshot of what was to come. Some of the wealthiest people in the world joined politicians in the Capitol rotunda to mark the beginning of the Trump regime while everyone else was locked out in the cold. Six months later, Congress passed one of the largest transfers of wealth from low-income people to the rich in history. As lawmakers go home for their August recess, the record is clear: the White House and Congress are working hand-in-hand to serve the interests of elites at the expense of everyday Americans. On the one hand, this is the worst of times: power is concentrated in the hands of people who pray at the opening of Congress, then act to prey on the people they swore an oath to serve. But a close look at voter demographics and the failure of both Democrats and Republicans to engage poor voters in recent decades suggests that a small percentage of poor voters who understand that they are losing their health insurance, nutrition assistance, and rural hospitals because of their political leadership have the potential to upend American politics. Over the past four decades, as inequality has grown exponentially for all Americans, the number of poor and low-income white people—66 million in 2018—has swelled higher than any other demographic. This is one reason low-income, majority white communities became susceptible to the 'populist' appeal of the MAGA movement. If white people are hurting, the divide-and-conquer myths suggests, it must be because Black people or immigrants are taking from them. By leaning into an aggressive investment in extreme ICE raids, Trump's regime has bet the farm on this myth. But the reality of American politics is that, despite these appeals, most poor people don't vote against their own interests. While Trump improved in 2024 among low-income voters who cast a ballot in the election, new data from Lake Research Associates makes clear that the real change was in the number of poor and low-income people who decided not to vote in the race between Trump and Harris. More than 19 million 'Biden Skippers' who helped elect President Joe Biden in 2020 didn't show up in 2024. When asked why, nearly a third said their number one reason for not voting was that they didn't feel like the Democrats' message spoke to their economic situation. When asked, these 'Biden skippers' were not disinterested in politics. Far from it, nearly half say they check the news more than once a day and the majority favor Democrats in a generic match-up. What they want is a candidate who speaks to them, commits to fight for them, and presents an economic agenda that they know would make a difference in their lives. Poor people are not driving the extremism in American politics, nor are they the true base for Trump, whose major policy achievement has been to cut government programs that serve everyday people so he can give tax breaks to corporations and wealthy Americans. Poor and low-income Americans are, in fact, the largest swing vote in the country. We need a movement to engage poor people who haven't voted because they've never imagined the system could work for them. As they begin to feel the impact of the cuts from Trump's big ugly budget bill, poor and low-income people must organize to demand candidates who will represent them. Movements that bring poor people together across lines of race and region can build on America's history of moral fusion movements to strengthen democracy for all of us. In our book White Poverty, we wrote about how the 2018 midterms saw a roughly 10% increase in voter participation over the previous midterms—a larger four-year-increase than Obama's record-breaking turnout in 2008. Many factors contributed to this surge in participation, but a raw number increase in low-income voters made a significant contribution to the 'blue wave' that returned control of the U.S. House to Democrats in 2018 and put a check on Trump's use of the White House to reward elite interests and undermine policies that lift poor people in 2020. A movement can change how candidates talk and what agenda they promise to pursue when elected. Democrats need a new wave of leadership that not only articulates a vision for how government can serve everyday people, but also demonstrates that they are committed to use executive action, change courts, and use power when they are in office to win policies that lift from the bottom so everyone can rise. If a moral fusion movement, led by poor and low-income people, can rise up in America today, we have the numbers to change the political conversation. This is why we have organized Moral Mondays across the South to go to the districts that will be hurt first and worst by cuts to healthcare and organize people who will be directly impacted to speak directly to their representatives with clergy and moral leaders by their side. A movement led by these people, linking arms across racial lines and joining hands with progressive allies, could not only decide the Presidential elections, but many Congressional and other statewide races as well. Poor and low-income people make up a third of the U.S. electorate—more than 40% of the electorate in the swing states that will decide the 2026 midterms. It's time for poor people of every race to reject the myths that have been used to divide us and come together to demand an economy that works for all of us. Such a movement isn't only good news for the poor. It's the best hope for American democracy. Adapted from White Poverty: How Exposing Myths About Race and Class Can Reconstruct American Democracy, by William J. Barber with Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove (Liveright), out in paperback August 5, 2025.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Cory Booker Is Misdiagnosing Democrats' Problem
Senator Cory Booker wants Democrats on Capitol Hill to fight harder against President Donald Trump. And accomplish what, exactly? During a fiery tirade on the Senate floor, the New Jersey Democrat last week accused his own party of being 'complicit' in Trump's ongoing series of constitutionally questionable power grabs — including withholding congressionally mandated funding; gutting federal agencies created via congressional statute; and using the government to intimidate private industry and universities.
